ABSTRACT. Benefit-sharing mechanisms are a central design aspect of REDD+ because they help to create the necessary incentives to reduce carbon emissions. However, if stakeholders do not perceive the benefit sharing as fair, the legitimacy of REDD+, and support for the mechanism, will be weakened. In this paper, drawing on data from CIFOR's Global Comparative Study on REDD+, we analyze national policy processes in 6 countries and incipient benefit-sharing arrangements in 21 REDD+ project sites. Through our analysis of current practices and debates, we identify six rationales that have been put forward to justify how benefits should be distributed and to whom. These rationales encompass a range of perspectives. Some hold that benefit sharing should be related to actual carbon emission reductions or to costs incurred in achieving the reduction of emissions; others emphasize the importance of a legal right to benefit, the need to consider aspects such as poverty reduction or the appropriateness of rewarding those with a history of protecting the forest. Each rationale has implications for the design of benefit-sharing mechanisms and the equity of their outcomes. We point out that, given the wide range of rationales and interests at play, the objectives of REDD+ and benefit sharing must be clearly established and the term "benefit" defined before effective benefit-sharing mechanisms can be designed. For stakeholders to support REDD+, the legitimacy of decision-making institutions, consideration of context, and attention to process are critical. Building legitimacy requires attention not only to fair distributional outcomes but also to consensus on relevant institutions' authority to make decisions and to procedural equity.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

In spite of the impressive scale of community forestry in Nepal over the last three decades, and its apparent benefits in terms of improved forest condition, there are concerns that the main economic benefits are not equally distributed and that the community forestry process perpetuates or even reinforces social inequity, economic and environmental injustice. This paper presents the findings of a study investigating the livelihood impact of community forestry in eight community forest user groups in the Churia part of the Terai region. Impacts were found to be very variable within and between user groups and not easily explained by any single factor. A general finding, however, was that, community forestry shifts benefit flows from individual households to the community level. This means that promotion of fair representation and active participation by the poorest is needed to ensure that they gain access to the new community-level decision-making fora and the resources managed at this level.Améliorer les bénéfices dont peuvent profiter les démunis au sein de la foresterie communautaire dans la région Churia du Népal M.R. MAHARJAN, T.R. DHAKAL, SURESH K. THAPA, K. SCHRECKENBERG et C. LUTTRELL Malgré l'envergure impressionnante qu'a prise la foresterie communautaire au Népal au cours des trois dernières décennies, et malgré ses bénéfices apparents en termes d'amélioration de la condition des forêts; il est inquiétant de constater que ses principaux bénéfices économiques ne sont pas distribués équitablement, et que le processus de foresterie de communauté perpétue, voire même renforce les inégalités sociales et l'injustice économique et environnementale. Cet article présente les résultats d'une étude enquête sur l'impact de la foresterie de communauté sur les revenus dans huit groupes d'utilisateurs de la forêt communautaire dans le secteur Churia de la région Terai. Les impacts se trouvèrent être très variables au sein même des groupes et entre eux, et cela, sans pouvoir être expliqués par un facteur unique. Une trouvaille générale fut cependant que la foresterie communautaire détourne les courants de bénéfices des foyers individuels vers le niveau communautaire. Il en résulte la nécessité d'assurer une promotion d'une représentation juste et d'une participation active des plus démunis, afin qu'ils puissent gagner accès aux nouvelles prises de décisions au niveau communautaire, et aux ressources gérées à ce niveau.Maximización de los beneficios para los pobres: experiencias de silvicultura comunitaria en la región del Churia (Nepal) M.R. MAHARJAN, T.R. DHAKAL, SURESH K. THAPA, K. SCHRECKENBERG y C. LUTTRELL A pesar del aumento importante de la gestión forestal comunitaria en Nepal durante los últimos tres décadas, y sus beneficios evidentes en cuanto a mejoras en la condición del bosque, resulta preocupante que los principales beneficios económicos no sean distribuidos de forma equitativa y que el proceso de gestión comunitaria perpetúe o incluso refuerce la injusticia social, económica y ambiental. Este artículo...

No abstract

SUMMARYInternational negotiations for reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation and the enhancement of forest carbon stocks (REDD+) under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) were finally concluded in 2015. However, due to the complex design and implementation processes of REDD+ policies and measures, including benefit sharing at national and subnational levels, several challenges exist for sustainably reducing emissions while simultaneously managing the provision of social and environmental side-objectives. We review the realities of REDD+ implementation in 13 REDD+ candidate countries and the risks related to REDD+ policies and benefit sharing based upon a synthesis of the findings presented in 'country profiles' that were developed between 2009 and 2013 as part of the Center for International Forestry Research's (CIFOR) Global Comparative Study on REDD+. We find that REDD+ policies in all countries studied are at high risk of ineffectiveness, inequity and inefficiency. By classifying these risks and understanding not only their impacts on different stakeholder groups, but also the consequences for achieving specific objectives, countries can identify solutions in order to address these shortcomings in their implementation of REDD+.

Policy instruments for implementing the Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation and the enhancement of forest carbon stocks (REDD+) mechanism operate within an orchestra of policy mixes that affect the forest and other land sectors. How will policymakers choose between the myriad of options for distributing REDD+ benefits, and be able to evaluate its potential effectiveness, efficiency and equity (3Es)? This is a pressing issue given the results‐based aspect of REDD+. We present here a three‐element assessment framework for evaluating the outcomes and performance of REDD+ benefit sharing mechanisms, using the criteria of effectiveness, efficiency and equity: (1) the structures (objective and policies) of a REDD+ benefit sharing mechanism; (2) the broader institutional and policy contexts underlying forest governance; (3) outcomes of REDD+ including emission reductions, ecosystem service provision and poverty alleviation. A strength of the assessment framework is its flexible design to incorporate indicators relevant to different contexts; this helps to generate a shared working understanding of what is to be evaluated in the different REDD+ benefit sharing mechanisms (BSMs) across complex socio‐political contexts. In applying the framework to case studies, the assessment highlights trade‐offs among the 3Es, and the need to better manage access to information, monitoring and evaluation, consideration of local perceptions of equity and inclusive decisionmaking processes. The framework does not aim to simplify complexity, but rather serves to identify actionable ways forward towards a more efficient, effective and equitable implementation and re‐evaluation of REDD+ BSMs as part of reflexive policymaking. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment