IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v49y2014icp23-33.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Governing the design of national REDD+: An analysis of the power of agency

Author

Listed:
  • Brockhaus, Maria
  • Di Gregorio, Monica
  • Mardiah, Sofi

Abstract

This paper investigates how three aspects of governance systems, namely the policy context, the influence of key agents and their discursive practices, are affecting national-level processes of policy design aimed at REDD+, reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries; and the role of conservation, sustainable management of forests and enhancement of forest carbon stocks in developing countries. We conducted analysis in six REDD+ countries (Brazil, Cameroon, Indonesia, Nepal, Papua New Guinea and Vietnam). The paper combines three methods: policy analysis, media-based discourse analysis and policy network analysis. The paper shows that policies both within and outside the forestry sector that support deforestation and forest degradation create path dependencies and entrenched interests that hamper policy change. In addition, most dominant policy coalitions do not challenge business-as-usual trajectories, reinforcing existing policy and political structures. No minority policy coalitions are directly tackling the root causes of deforestation and forest degradation, that is, the politico-economic conditions driving them. Instead they focus on environmental justice issues, such as calls for increased participation of indigenous people in decision-making. Only in two of the six countries are these transformational change coalitions vocal enough to be heard, yet to exercise their agency effectively and to support more substantial reforms, these coalitions would need the participation of more influential policy actors, particularly state agencies that have the authority to make binding decisions about policy. Furthermore, discourses supporting transformational change would need to be reflected in institutional practices and policy decisions.

Suggested Citation

  • Brockhaus, Maria & Di Gregorio, Monica & Mardiah, Sofi, 2014. "Governing the design of national REDD+: An analysis of the power of agency," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 23-33.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:49:y:2014:i:c:p:23-33
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2013.07.003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934113001482
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2013.07.003?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Halvor Mehlum & Karl Moene & Ragnar Torvik, 2006. "Institutions and the Resource Curse," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 116(508), pages 1-20, January.
    2. Frank Biermann & Philipp Pattberg & Harro van Asselt & Fariborz Zelli, 2009. "The Fragmentation of Global Governance Architectures: A Framework for Analysis," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 9(4), pages 14-40, November.
    3. Harriet Bulkeley, 2000. "Discourse Coalitions and the Australian Climate Change Policy Network," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 18(6), pages 727-748, December.
    4. Ulrik Brandes & Patrick Kenis & Jörg Raab & Volker Schneider & Dorothea Wagner, 1999. "Explorations into the Visualization of Policy Networks," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 11(1), pages 75-106, January.
    5. Heike Schroeder, 2010. "Agency in international climate negotiations: the case of indigenous peoples and avoided deforestation," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 10(4), pages 317-332, December.
    6. Arts, Bas, 2012. "Forests policy analysis and theory use: Overview and trends," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 7-13.
    7. Colin Hay & Daniel Wincott, 1998. "Structure, Agency and Historical Institutionalism," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 46(5), pages 951-957, December.
    8. Karsenty, Alain & Ongolo, Symphorien, 2012. "Can “fragile states” decide to reduce their deforestation? The inappropriate use of the theory of incentives with respect to the REDD mechanism," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 38-45.
    9. Arild Angelsen & Thomas K. Rudel, 2013. "Designing and Implementing Effective REDD + Policies: A Forest Transition Approach," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 7(1), pages 91-113, January.
    10. Brockhaus, Maria & Obidzinski, Krystof & Dermawan, Ahmad & Laumonier, Yves & Luttrell, Cecilia, 2012. "An overview of forest and land allocation policies in Indonesia: Is the current framework sufficient to meet the needs of REDD+?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 30-37.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Caleb Gallemore, 2017. "Transaction costs in the evolution of transnational polycentric governance," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 17(5), pages 639-654, October.
    2. Krott, Max & Bader, Axel & Schusser, Carsten & Devkota, Rosan & Maryudi, Ahmad & Giessen, Lukas & Aurenhammer, Helene, 2014. "Actor-centred power: The driving force in decentralised community based forest governance," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 34-42.
    3. Salahodjaev, Raufhon, 2016. "Intelligence and deforestation: International data," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 20-27.
    4. Frank Biermann & Michele Betsill & Joyeeta Gupta & Norichika Kanie & Louis Lebel & Diana Liverman & Heike Schroeder & Bernd Siebenhüner & Ruben Zondervan, 2010. "Earth system governance: a research framework," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 10(4), pages 277-298, December.
    5. Wolfersberger, Julien & Delacote, Philippe & Garcia, Serge, 2015. "An empirical analysis of forest transition and land-use change in developing countries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 241-251.
    6. Fischer, Richard & Hargita, Yvonne & Günter, Sven, 2016. "Insights from the ground level? A content analysis review of multi-national REDD+ studies since 2010," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 47-58.
    7. Philipp Pattberg & Cille Kaiser & Oscar Widerberg & Johannes Stripple, 2022. "20 Years of global climate change governance research: taking stock and moving forward," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 295-315, June.
    8. Sheng, Jichuan & Hong, Qiu & Han, Xiao, 2019. "Neoliberal conservation in REDD+: The roles of market power and incentive designs," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    9. Hund, Kirsten & Schure, Jolien & van der Goes, Arend, 2017. "Extractive industries in forest landscapes: options for synergy with REDD+ and development of standards in the Democratic Republic of Congo," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 97-108.
    10. Sloan, Sean, 2015. "The development-driven forest transition and its utility for REDD+," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 1-11.
    11. Markus Lederer & Chris Höhne, 2021. "Max Weber in the tropics: How global climate politics facilitates the bureaucratization of forestry in Indonesia," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(1), pages 133-151, January.
    12. Camille Dezécache & Jean-Michel Salles & Bruno Hérault, 2018. "Questioning emissions-based approaches for the definition of REDD+ deforestation baselines in high forest cover/low deforestation countries," Post-Print hal-01952492, HAL.
    13. Ongolo, Symphorien, 2015. "On the banality of forest governance fragmentation: Exploring ‘‘gecko politics’’ as a bureaucratic behaviour in limited statehood," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 12-20.
    14. Jeffrey Frankel, 2014. "Mauritius: African Success Story," NBER Chapters, in: African Successes, Volume IV: Sustainable Growth, pages 295-342, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Scott Gehlbach & Konstantin Sonin & Ekaterina Zhuravskaya, 2010. "Businessman Candidates," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(3), pages 718-736, July.
    16. Guy Michaels, 2011. "The Long Term Consequences of Resource‐Based Specialisation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 121(551), pages 31-57, March.
    17. Blanco, Luisa & Grier, Robin, 2012. "Natural resource dependence and the accumulation of physical and human capital in Latin America," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 281-295.
    18. Brahmbhatt, Milan & Canuto, Otaviano & Vostroknutova, Ekaterina, 2010. "Dealing with Dutch Disease," World Bank - Economic Premise, The World Bank, issue 16, pages 1-7, June.
    19. Reinsberg,Bernhard Wilfried & Michaelowa,Katharina & Knack,Stephen, 2015. "Which donors, which funds ? the choice of multilateral funds by bilateral donors at the World Bank," Policy Research Working Paper Series 7441, The World Bank.
    20. Ernest Aryeetey & Ishmael Ackah, 2018. "The boom, the bust, and the dynamics of oil resource management in Ghana," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2018-89, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:49:y:2014:i:c:p:23-33. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.