IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v83y2017icp1-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What does it take to institute REDD+? An analysis of the Kilosa REDD+ pilot, Tanzania

Author

Listed:
  • Vatn, Arild
  • Kajembe, George
  • Mosi, Elvis
  • Nantongo, Maria
  • Silayo, Dos Santos

Abstract

Reduced emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+) has been seen as an important element in future climate policies. This paper analyzes the establishment of a REDD+ pilot project in Kilosa district, Tanzania. It documents changes in organizations and institutions for land management undertaken to enable villagers to produce and sell stored carbon. Moreover, it evaluates the legitimacy both of the process of introducing REDD+ and the outcomes in the form of new governance structures. We find that establishing tradable carbon is demanding. In fact, no carbon has yet been sold. We observe that while the Kilosa REDD+ pilot managed to engage local communities to a rather unusual extent, the case also showed that introducing REDD+ ‘on the ground’ faces several challenges regarding legitimacy.

Suggested Citation

  • Vatn, Arild & Kajembe, George & Mosi, Elvis & Nantongo, Maria & Silayo, Dos Santos, 2017. "What does it take to institute REDD+? An analysis of the Kilosa REDD+ pilot, Tanzania," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 1-9.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:83:y:2017:i:c:p:1-9
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2017.05.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934116304609
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2017.05.004?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. Muradian, Roldan & Corbera, Esteve & Pascual, Unai & Kosoy, Nicolás & May, Peter H., 2010. "Reconciling theory and practice: An alternative conceptual framework for understanding payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1202-1208, April.
    2. Lund, Jens Friis & Treue, Thorsten, 2008. "Are We Getting There? Evidence of Decentralized Forest Management from the Tanzanian Miombo Woodlands," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 36(12), pages 2780-2800, December.
    3. Hiedanpää, Juha & Bromley, Daniel W., 2014. "Payments for ecosystem services: durable habits, dubious nudges, and doubtful efficacy," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(2), pages 175-195, June.
    4. Lund, Jens Friis, 2015. "Paradoxes of participation: The logic of professionalization in participatory forestry," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 1-6.
    5. 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.
    6. Lund, Jens Friis & Sungusia, Eliezeri & Mabele, Mathew Bukhi & Scheba, Andreas, 2017. "Promising Change, Delivering Continuity: REDD+ as Conservation Fad," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 124-139.
    7. Scheba, Andreas & Mustalahti, Irmeli, 2015. "Rethinking ‘expert’ knowledge in community forest management in Tanzania," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 7-18.
    8. Pretty, Jules N., 1995. "Participatory learning for sustainable agriculture," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 23(8), pages 1247-1263, August.
    9. Naughton-Treves, Lisa & Wendland, Kelly, 2014. "Land Tenure and Tropical Forest Carbon Management," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 1-6.
    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. Vatn, Arild, 2023. "The credibility thesis – A commentary from an original institutionalist position," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    2. Kaiser, Josef & Krueger, Tobias & Haase, Dagmar, 2023. "Global patterns of collective payments for ecosystem services and their degrees of commodification," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 209(C).
    3. Nantongo, Mary & Vatn, Arild & Vedeld, Paul, 2019. "All that glitters is not gold; Power and participation in processes and structures of implementing REDD+ in Kondoa, Tanzania," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 44-54.
    4. Jack Baynes & Geoff P. Lovell & John Herbohn, 2021. "Psychological outcomes of REDD + projects: evidence from country case studies," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 26(4), pages 1-27, April.
    5. Corbera, Esteve & Martin, Adrian & Springate-Baginski, Oliver & Villaseñor, Adrián, 2020. "Sowing the seeds of sustainable rural livelihoods? An assessment of Participatory Forest Management through REDD+ in Tanzania," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    6. Massarella, Kate & Sallu, Susannah M. & Ensor, Jonathan E. & Marchant, Rob, 2018. "REDD+, hype, hope and disappointment: The dynamics of expectations in conservation and development pilot projects," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 375-385.
    7. Nantongo, Mary & Vatn, Arild & Soka, Geofrey, 2024. "REDD+: The perfect marriage between conservation and development? A comparative study of the impacts of REDD+ on livelihoods and deforestation in Tanzania," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    8. Nantongo, Mary & Vatn, Arild, 2019. "Estimating Transaction Costs of REDD+," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 1-11.

    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. Nantongo, Mary & Vatn, Arild & Vedeld, Paul, 2019. "All that glitters is not gold; Power and participation in processes and structures of implementing REDD+ in Kondoa, Tanzania," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 44-54.
    2. Eliezeri Sungusia & Jens Friis Lund & Christian Pilegaard Hansen & Numan Amanzi & Yonika M. Ngaga & Gimbage Mbeyale & Thorsten Treue & Henrik Meilby, 2020. "Rethinking Participatory Forest Management in Tanzania," IFRO Working Paper 2020/02, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.
    3. Kalonga, Severin Kusonyola & Kulindwa, Kassim Athumani, 2017. "Does forest certification enhance livelihood conditions? Empirical evidence from forest management in Kilwa District, Tanzania," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 49-61.
    4. Nicole Gross-Camp & Iokine Rodriguez & Adrian Martin & Mirna Inturias & Glory Massao, 2019. "The Type of Land We Want: Exploring the Limits of Community Forestry in Tanzania and Bolivia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-16, March.
    5. Koch, Susanne, 2017. "International influence on forest governance in Tanzania: Analysing the role of aid experts in the REDD+ process," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 181-190.
    6. Lund, Jens Friis & Sungusia, Eliezeri & Mabele, Mathew Bukhi & Scheba, Andreas, 2017. "Promising Change, Delivering Continuity: REDD+ as Conservation Fad," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 124-139.
    7. Sunderlin, William D. & de Sassi, Claudio & Sills, Erin O. & Duchelle, Amy E. & Larson, Anne M. & Resosudarmo, Ida Aju Pradnja & Awono, Abdon & Kweka, Demetrius Leo & Huynh, Thu Ba, 2018. "Creating an appropriate tenure foundation for REDD+: The record to date and prospects for the future," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 376-392.
    8. To, Phuc & Dressler, Wolfram, 2019. "Rethinking ‘Success’: The politics of payment for forest ecosystem services in Vietnam," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 582-593.
    9. Handberg, Øyvind Nystad, 2018. "No sense of ownership in weak participation: a forest conservation experiment in Tanzania," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 23(4), pages 434-451, August.
    10. Hinojosa Flores, Isaías Daniel & Skutsch, Margaret & Mustalahti, Irmeli, 2016. "Impacts of Finnish cooperation in the Mexican policy making process: From the community forest management to the liberalization of forest services," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 229-238.
    11. Calfucura, Enrique, 2018. "Governance, Land and Distribution: A Discussion on the Political Economy of Community-Based Conservation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 18-26.
    12. Ickowitz, Amy & Sills, Erin & de Sassi, Claudio, 2017. "Estimating Smallholder Opportunity Costs of REDD+: A Pantropical Analysis from Households to Carbon and Back," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 15-26.
    13. McLain, Rebecca & Lawry, Steven & Guariguata, Manuel R. & Reed, James, 2021. "Toward a tenure-responsive approach to forest landscape restoration: A proposed tenure diagnostic for assessing restoration opportunities," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    14. Frey, Gregory E. & Charnley, Susan & Makala, Jasper, 2021. "Economic viability of community-based forest management for certified timber production in southeastern Tanzania," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    15. Magessa, Kajenje & Wynne-Jones, Sophie & Hockley, Neal, 2020. "Does Tanzanian participatory forest management policy achieve its governance objectives?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    16. Wim Carton & Adeniyi Asiyanbi & Silke Beck & Holly J. Buck & Jens F. Lund, 2020. "Negative emissions and the long history of carbon removal," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(6), November.
    17. Piffer Salles, Guilherme & Paiva Salinas, Delhi Teresa & Paulino, Sônia Regina, 2017. "How Funding Source Influences the Form of REDD+ Initiatives: The Case of Market Versus Public Funds in Brazil," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 91-101.
    18. Mutune, Jane Mutheu & Lund, Jens Friis, 2016. "Unpacking the impacts of ‘participatory’ forestry policies: Evidence from Kenya," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 45-52.
    19. Andreas Scheba, 2018. "Market-Based Conservation for Better Livelihoods? The Promises and Fallacies of REDD+ in Tanzania," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-18, October.
    20. Broegaard, Rikke Brandt & Vongvisouk, Thoumthone & Mertz, Ole, 2017. "Contradictory Land Use Plans and Policies in Laos: Tenure Security and the Threat of Exclusion," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 170-183.

    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:83:y:2017:i:c:p:1-9. 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.