IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v127y2023ics0264837723000480.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Jurisdictional approaches to reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in Brazil: Why do states adopt jurisdictional policies?

Author

Listed:
  • Gueiros, Carolina
  • Jodoin, Sébastien
  • McDermott, Constance L

Abstract

Although the role of subnational governments in multi-level climate governance is recognized by scholars and policymakers, we still know little about whether and why some subnational jurisdictions in the Global South decide to engage in decentralized climate action. This article yields new insights on this question by explaining variations in the decision of Brazilian states to establish legal frameworks for jurisdictional REDD+, enabling them to receive transnational climate finance, in the early stages of the emergence of REDD+ in Brazil between 2007 and 2017. We draw on key informant interviews with policy entrepreneurs and actors to understand the roles played by (1) the transnational pathways of influence associated with the regime complex for REDD+ and (2) the strategies adopted by state-level policy entrepreneurs in subnational REDD+ readiness policy processes in Brazil in five case studies (Amazonas, Acre, Mato Grosso, Pará and Amapá). According to respondents, credible market incentives were the key influence for state governors to adopt a jurisdictional framework to channel REDD+ funds, but transnational norms and material assistance played important mediating roles. The perceived credibility of market incentives was influenced by: (1) the presence of policy entrepreneurs at the state level; (2) the timing of strategies employed by policy entrepreneurs; (3) the policy beliefs held by the governor regarding environmental issues; and (4) evidence regarding availability of REDD+ finance for states.

Suggested Citation

  • Gueiros, Carolina & Jodoin, Sébastien & McDermott, Constance L, 2023. "Jurisdictional approaches to reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in Brazil: Why do states adopt jurisdictional policies?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:127:y:2023:i:c:s0264837723000480
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2023.106582
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837723000480
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2023.106582?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. Mahoney, James & Goertz, Gary, 2004. "The Possibility Principle: Choosing Negative Cases in Comparative Research," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 98(4), pages 653-669, November.
    2. Kathryn Harrison, 2013. "Federalism and Climate Policy Innovation: A Critical Reassessment," Canadian Public Policy, University of Toronto Press, vol. 39(s2), pages 95-108, August.
    3. Peter A. Minang & Meine Van Noordwijk, 2014. "The political economy of Readiness for REDD+," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(6), pages 677-684, November.
    4. Rosa da Conceição, Hugo & Börner, Jan & Wunder, Sven, 2015. "Why were upscaled incentive programs for forest conservation adopted? Comparing policy choices in Brazil, Ecuador, and Peru," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 243-252.
    5. Monica Di Gregorio & Maria Brockhaus & Tim Cronin & Efrian Muharrom & Sofi Mardiah & Levania Santoso, 2015. "Deadlock or Transformational Change? Exploring Public Discourse on REDD+ Across Seven Countries," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 15(4), pages 63-84, November.
    6. Dunlop, Tessa & Corbera, Esteve, 2016. "Incentivizing REDD+: How developing countries are laying the groundwork for benefit-sharing," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 44-54.
    7. David J. Gordon, 2015. "An Uneasy Equilibrium: The Coordination of Climate Governance in Federated Systems," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 15(2), pages 121-141, May.
    8. Kunce, Mitch & Shogren, Jason F., 2005. "On interjurisdictional competition and environmental federalism," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 212-224, July.
    9. Neal D. Woods, 2006. "Interstate Competition and Environmental Regulation: A Test of the Race‐to‐the‐Bottom Thesis," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 87(1), pages 174-189, March.
    10. Barry G. Rabe, 2008. "States on Steroids: The Intergovernmental Odyssey of American Climate Policy," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 25(2), pages 105-128, March.
    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. Millimet, Daniel L., 2013. "Environmental Federalism: A Survey of the Empirical Literature," IZA Discussion Papers 7831, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    2. Böhringer, Christoph & Rivers, Nicholas & Yonezawa, Hidemichi, 2016. "Vertical fiscal externalities and the environment," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 51-74.
    3. Mary-Françoise Renard & Hang Xiong, 2012. "Strategic Interactions in Environmental Regulation Enforcement: Evidence from Chinese Provinces," CERDI Working papers halshs-00672449, HAL.
    4. Evan Plous Kresch, 2020. "The Buck Stops Where? Federalism, Uncertainty, and Investment in the Brazilian Water and Sanitation Sector," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 12(3), pages 374-401, August.
    5. Sébastien Jodoin, 2017. "The transnational policy process for REDD+ and domestic policy entrepreneurship in developing countries," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 35(8), pages 1418-1436, December.
    6. Ilana Shpaizman, 2020. "The end–means nexus and policy conversion: evidence from two cases in Israeli immigrant integration policy," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 53(4), pages 713-733, December.
    7. Degirmenci, Tunahan & Yavuz, Hakan, 2024. "Environmental taxes, R&D expenditures and renewable energy consumption in EU countries: Are fiscal instruments effective in the expansion of clean energy?," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 299(C).
    8. Youhyun Lee & Inseok Seo, 2019. "Sustainability of a Policy Instrument: Rethinking the Renewable Portfolio Standard in South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-19, May.
    9. Sailian Xia & Daming You & Zhihua Tang & Bo Yang, 2021. "Analysis of the Spatial Effect of Fiscal Decentralization and Environmental Decentralization on Carbon Emissions under the Pressure of Officials’ Promotion," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-21, March.
    10. Lingyu Lu & Cameron G. Thies, 2010. "Trade Interdependence and the Issues at Stake in the Onset of Militarized Conflict," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 27(4), pages 347-368, September.
    11. Delshad, Ashlie B. & Raymond, Leigh & Sawicki, Vanessa & Wegener, Duane T., 2010. "Public attitudes toward political and technological options for biofuels," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(7), pages 3414-3425, July.
    12. Warziniack, Travis W. & Finnoff, David & Shogren, Jason F., 2013. "Public economics of hitchhiking species and tourism-based risk to ecosystem services," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 277-294.
    13. Neal D. Woods, 2021. "The State of State Environmental Policy Research: A Thirty‐Year Progress Report," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 38(3), pages 347-369, May.
    14. Saatvika Rai, 2020. "Policy Adoption and Policy Intensity: Emergence of Climate Adaptation Planning in U.S. States," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 37(4), pages 444-463, July.
    15. Andrew Curley, 2019. "“Our Winters’ Rights†: Challenging Colonial Water Laws," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 19(3), pages 57-76, August.
    16. Di Ubaldo, Mattia & Gasiorek, Michael, 2022. "Non-trade provisions in trade agreements and FDI," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    17. Jiangfeng Hu & Zhao Wang & Qinghua Huang & Xiaoqin Zhang, 2019. "Environmental Regulation Intensity, Foreign Direct Investment, and Green Technology Spillover—An Empirical Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-15, May.
    18. Sarah Burch & Heike Schroeder & Steve Rayner & Jennifer Wilson, 2013. "Novel Multisector Networks and Entrepreneurship: The Role of Small Businesses in the Multilevel Governance of Climate Change," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 31(5), pages 822-840, October.
    19. van 't Veld, Klaas & Shogren, Jason F., 2012. "Environmental federalism and environmental liability," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 105-119.
    20. Tora Skodvin & Steinar Andresen, 2009. "An agenda for change in U.S. climate policies? Presidential ambitions and congressional powers," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 9(3), pages 263-280, 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:lauspo:v:127:y:2023:i:c:s0264837723000480. 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: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    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.