IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v73y2016icp140-152.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

REDD+ research: Reviewing the literature, limitations and ways forward

Author

Listed:
  • Mbatu, Richard S

Abstract

This study analyzes articles of various research design methods such as case studies, survey studies, descriptive studies, exploratory studies, and historical studies, to determine research trends on reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+). The study investigates how REDD+ research has evolved over a nine-year period, from 2007 when the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Conference of the Parties (COP13) agreed to adopt an international REDD mechanism, until 2015. The study found that even though there has been a significant increase in REDD+ research since 2007, there are variations in country and regional studies as well as significant gaps in the REDD+ literature. However, there is optimism that promising forthcoming research in the post-Paris Agreement era will cover the existing gaps in REDD+ literature.

Suggested Citation

  • Mbatu, Richard S, 2016. "REDD+ research: Reviewing the literature, limitations and ways forward," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 140-152.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:73:y:2016:i:c:p:140-152
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2016.09.010
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934116302921
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2016.09.010?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. 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.
    2. George A Dyer & Robin Matthews & Patrick Meyfroidt, 2012. "Is There an Ideal REDD+ Program? An Analysis of Policy Trade-Offs at the Local Level," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(12), pages 1-12, December.
    3. Pistorius, Till & Schaich, Harald & Winkel, Georg & Plieninger, Tobias & Bieling, Claudia & Konold, Werner & Volz, Karl-Reinhard, 2012. "Lessons for REDDplus: A comparative analysis of the German discourse on forest functions and the global ecosystem services debate," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 4-12.
    4. Rocío Hiraldo & Thomas Tanner, 2011. "Forest Voices: Competing Narratives over REDD+," IDS Bulletin, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 42(3), pages 42-51, May.
    5. Noponen, Martin R.A. & Haggar, Jeremy P. & Edwards-Jones, Gareth & Healey, John R., 2013. "Intensification of coffee systems can increase the effectiveness of REDD mechanisms," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 1-9.
    6. Sunderland, Terry & Achdiawan, Ramadhani & Angelsen, Arild & Babigumira, Ronnie & Ickowitz, Amy & Paumgarten, Fiona & Reyes-García, Victoria & Shively, Gerald, 2014. "Challenging Perceptions about Men, Women, and Forest Product Use: A Global Comparative Study," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 64(S1), pages 56-66.
    7. Bottazzi, Patrick & Cattaneo, Andrea & Rocha, David Crespo & Rist, Stephan, 2013. "Assessing sustainable forest management under REDD+: A community-based labour perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 94-103.
    8. Kevin W. Boyack & Richard Klavans, 2010. "Co-citation analysis, bibliographic coupling, and direct citation: Which citation approach represents the research front most accurately?," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(12), pages 2389-2404, December.
    9. Henry, Matieu & Maniatis, Danae & Gitz, Vincent & Huberman, David & Valentini, Riccardo, 2011. "Implementation of REDD+ in sub-Saharan Africa: state of knowledge, challenges and opportunities," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(4), pages 381-404, August.
    10. Cerbu, Gillian A. & Sonwa, Denis J. & Pokorny, Benno, 2013. "Opportunities for and capacity barriers to the implementation of REDD+ projects with smallholder farmers: Case study of Awae and Akok, Centre and South Regions, Cameroon," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 60-70.
    11. Jonah Busch, 2013. "Supplementing REDD+ with Biodiversity Payments: The Paradox of Paying for Multiple Ecosystem Services - Working Paper 347," Working Papers 347, Center for Global Development.
    12. M. M. Kessler, 1963. "Bibliographic coupling between scientific papers," American Documentation, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(1), pages 10-25, January.
    13. Arhin, Albert Abraham, 2014. "Safeguards and Dangerguards: A Framework for Unpacking the Black Box of Safeguards for REDD+," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 24-31.
    14. Klaus Deininger & Harris Selod & Anthony Burns, 2012. "The Land Governance Assessment Framework : Identifying and Monitoring Good Practice in the Land Sector," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 2376.
    15. Kevin W. Boyack & Richard Klavans, 2010. "Co‐citation analysis, bibliographic coupling, and direct citation: Which citation approach represents the research front most accurately?," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(12), pages 2389-2404, December.
    16. Charlotte Nakakaawa & Paul Vedeld & Jens Aune, 2011. "Spatial and temporal land use and carbon stock changes in Uganda: implications for a future REDD strategy," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 25-62, January.
    17. Aquino, André & Guay, Bruno, 2013. "Implementing REDD+ in the Democratic Republic of Congo: An analysis of the emerging national REDD+ governance structure," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 71-79.
    18. Pirard, Romain & Belna, Karine, 2012. "Agriculture and Deforestation: Is REDD+ Rooted In Evidence?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 62-70.
    19. Jonah Busch, 2013. "Supplementing REDD+ with Biodiversity Payments: The Paradox of Paying for Multiple Ecosystem Services," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 89(4), pages 655-675.
    20. Sunderlin, William D. & Larson, Anne M. & Duchelle, Amy E. & Resosudarmo, Ida Aju Pradnja & Huynh, Thu Ba & Awono, Abdon & Dokken, Therese, 2014. "How are REDD+ Proponents Addressing Tenure Problems? Evidence from Brazil, Cameroon, Tanzania, Indonesia, and Vietnam," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 37-52.
    21. Lederer, Markus, 2011. "From CDM to REDD+ -- What do we know for setting up effective and legitimate carbon governance?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 1900-1907, September.
    22. Duchelle, Amy E. & Cromberg, Marina & Gebara, Maria Fernanda & Guerra, Raissa & Melo, Tadeu & Larson, Anne & Cronkleton, Peter & Börner, Jan & Sills, Erin & Wunder, Sven & Bauch, Simone & May, Peter &, 2014. "Linking Forest Tenure Reform, Environmental Compliance, and Incentives: Lessons from REDD+ Initiatives in the Brazilian Amazon," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 53-67.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sheng, Jichuan, 2020. "Private sector participation and incentive coordination of actors in REDD+," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    2. Ehara, Makoto & Samejima, Hiromitsu & Yamanoshita, Makino & Asada, Yoko & Shogaki, Yutaro & Yano, Masato & Hyakumura, Kimihiko, 2019. "REDD+ engagement types preferred by Japanese private firms: The challenges and opportunities in relation to private sector participation," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 1-1.
    3. Yang, Hongqiang & Li, Xi, 2018. "Potential variation in opportunity cost estimates for REDD+ and its causes," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 138-146.
    4. Sanders, Anna J.P. & Ford, Rebecca M. & Keenan, Rodney J. & Larson, Anne M., 2020. "Learning through practice? Learning from the REDD+ demonstration project, Kalimantan Forests and Climate Partnership (KFCP) in Indonesia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    5. Satyal, Poshendra & Corbera, Esteve & Dawson, Neil & Dhungana, Hari & Maskey, Gyanu, 2020. "Justice-related impacts and social differentiation dynamics in Nepal's REDD+ projects," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    6. Yvonne Hargita & Lukas Giessen & Sven Günter, 2020. "Similarities and Differences between International REDD+ and Transnational Deforestation-Free Supply Chain Initiatives—A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-33, January.
    7. Bruno Locatelli & Paulina Aldunce & Abigaïl Fallot & Jean-François Le Coq & Eric Sabourin & Jeimar Tapasco, 2017. "Research on Climate Change Policies and Rural Development in Latin America: Scope and Gaps," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-17, October.
    8. Skutsch, Margaret & Paneque-Gálvez, Jaime & Ghilardi, Adrian & Balderas Torres, Arturo & Morfin-Rios, Jorge & Michel-Fuentes, Jose Maria & Carrillo, Oswaldo & Ross, David, 2017. "Adapting REDD+ policy to sink conditions," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 160-166.
    9. Cadman, Tim & Sarker, Tapan & Muttaqin, Zahrul & Nurfatriani, Fitri & Salminah, Mimi & Maraseni, Tek, 2019. "The role of fiscal instruments in encouraging the private sector and smallholders to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation: Evidence from Indonesia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 1-1.

    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. Tegegne, Yitagesu T. & Ramcilovic-Suominen, Sabaheta & FOBISSIE, KALAME & Visseren-Hamakers, Ingrid J. & Lindner, Marcus & Kanninen, Markku, 2017. "Synergies among social safeguards in FLEGT and REDD+ in Cameroon," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 1-11.
    2. Guan-Can Yang & Gang Li & Chun-Ya Li & Yun-Hua Zhao & Jing Zhang & Tong Liu & Dar-Zen Chen & Mu-Hsuan Huang, 2015. "Using the comprehensive patent citation network (CPC) to evaluate patent value," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(3), pages 1319-1346, December.
    3. Rey-Long Liu, 2017. "A new bibliographic coupling measure with descriptive capability," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(2), pages 915-935, February.
    4. Yulei Xie & Ling Ji & Beibei Zhang & Gordon Huang, 2018. "Evolution of the Scientific Literature on Input–Output Analysis: A Bibliometric Analysis of 1990–2017," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-17, September.
    5. Perez-Vega, Rodrigo & Hopkinson, Paul & Singhal, Aishwarya & Mariani, Marcello M., 2022. "From CRM to social CRM: A bibliometric review and research agenda for consumer research," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 1-16.
    6. Chris W. Belter, 2013. "A bibliometric analysis of NOAA’s Office of Ocean Exploration and Research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(2), pages 629-644, May.
    7. Ding, Ying, 2011. "Community detection: Topological vs. topical," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(4), pages 498-514.
    8. Yu-Wei Chang & Mu-Hsuan Huang & Chiao-Wen Lin, 2015. "Evolution of research subjects in library and information science based on keyword, bibliographical coupling, and co-citation analyses," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(3), pages 2071-2087, December.
    9. Ahmad, Farhan & Bask, Anu & Laari, Sini & Robinson, Craig V., 2023. "Business management perspectives on the circular economy: Present state and future directions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    10. Ying Huang & Wolfgang Glänzel & Lin Zhang, 2021. "Tracing the development of mapping knowledge domains," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(7), pages 6201-6224, July.
    11. Li, Heyang & Wu, Meijun & Wang, Yougui & Zeng, An, 2022. "Bibliographic coupling networks reveal the advantage of diversification in scientific projects," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(3).
    12. Natália L. Figueiredo & João J. M. Ferreira, 2022. "More than meets the partner: a systematic review and agenda for University–Industry cooperation," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 72(1), pages 231-273, February.
    13. Toshiyuki Hasumi & Mei-Shiu Chiu, 2022. "Online mathematics education as bio-eco-techno process: bibliometric analysis using co-authorship and bibliographic coupling," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(8), pages 4631-4654, August.
    14. Michel Zitt, 2015. "Meso-level retrieval: IR-bibliometrics interplay and hybrid citation-words methods in scientific fields delineation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(3), pages 2223-2245, March.
    15. Diego Kozlowski & Jennifer Dusdal & Jun Pang & Andreas Zilian, 2021. "Semantic and relational spaces in science of science: deep learning models for article vectorisation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(7), pages 5881-5910, July.
    16. Kyebambe, Moses Ntanda & Cheng, Ge & Huang, Yunqing & He, Chunhui & Zhang, Zhenyu, 2017. "Forecasting emerging technologies: A supervised learning approach through patent analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 236-244.
    17. Yiming Xiao & Han Wu & Guohua Wang & Hong Mei, 2021. "Mapping the Worldwide Trends on Energy Poverty Research: A Bibliometric Analysis (1999–2019)," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(4), pages 1-22, February.
    18. Mohammad Fakhar Manesh & Giulia Flamini & Damiano Petrolo & Rocco Palumbo, 2022. "A round of dancing and then one more: embedding intuition in the ballet of entrepreneurial decision making," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 499-528, June.
    19. R. Fileto Maciel & P. Saskia Bayerl & Marta Macedo Kerr Pinheiro, 2019. "Technical research innovations of the US national security system," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 120(2), pages 539-565, August.
    20. Mingchun Cao & Ilan Alon, 2020. "Intellectual Structure of the Belt and Road Initiative Research: A Scientometric Analysis and Suggestions for a Future Research Agenda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-40, August.

    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:73:y:2016:i:c:p:140-152. 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.