Global, National, or Market? Emerging REDD+ Governance Practices in Mozambique and Tanzania

Abstract

This article examines emerging governance practices in the REDD (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) initiative. We examine three different general governance practices (neoliberal, post-national, and government-led practices) that have been applied in the interaction between international organizations and two REDD target countries: Mozambique and Tanzania. In these countries, we find that emerging REDD+ governance practices are a mixture of international organizations' procedural practices and the target country's established governance practices, whereas neoliberal practices are weakly expressed. These findings call into question the simplified assumption of reduced state authority.

Governance Values in the Climate Change Regime: Stakeholder Perceptions of REDD+ Legitimacy at the National Level

“…The orthodox view was that the state was the sole repository of political power [30] (p. 187) [31] (pp. [3][4]. But the view emerged that legitimacy resided within institutions, state or non-state.…”

“…Consequently, in the world of REDD+ (as in other market-based instruments) there are inconsistencies between standards and the values that inform them [26] (pp. [3][4].…”

Practices of development assistance and climate change mitigation in reshaping the Mozambican REDD+ strategy

“…There are certain similarities between polycentric multilevel governance and the second analytical framework, which turns the focus from actors to the practices linking domestic and global policy sectors (Arts et al 2016). In contrast to hierarchical multilevel governance, practice theory does not build on the top-down model, nor does it automatically assume a diminishing role of the state (Palmujoki & Virtanen 2016). But this does not mean that 'levels' have no importance in climate-related governance.…”

“…Rather, organizations, governments, and other actors follow practices (Arts et al 2014;Ayana et al 2017). While strongly established practices can become institutions, they remain socially and historically contingent and thus not inevitable even though continuous and stable (Lederer 2012;Palmujoki & Virtanen 2016).…”

“…Several studies have analysed how the framework of the UNFCCC is reflected in the national implementation of REDD+ with reference to legal frameworks (Chapman et al 2015;Haywood et al 2015), to the complexity of climate governance (van Asselt 2011; Gupta et al 2016) or to the practices of climate change governance (Palmujoki & Virtanen 2016;Turnhout et al 2017). There are few studies concerning national implementation of REDD+ in Mozambique (Quan et al 2017;Naess et al 2015;Palmujoki & Virtanen 2016). This paper studies how the practices of climate change governance have reshaped the national REDD+ policy process in Mozambique, in particular vis-à-vis REDD+ projects and programs in the country.…”