How Are Local People Driving and Affected by Forest Cover Change? Opportunities for Local Participation in REDD+ Measurement, Reporting and Verification

Abstract

Deforestation and forest degradation are complex and dynamic processes that vary from place to place. They are driven by multiple causes. Local communities are, to some extent, driving and also affected by some of these processes. Can their knowledge aid and add to place-specific assessment and monitoring of Deforestation and forest Degradation (DD) drivers? Our research was conducted in seven villages across three provinces of Indonesia (Papua, West Kalimantan and Central Java). Household surveys and focus group discussions were used to investigate how local community knowledge of DD drivers contributes to place-specific assessment and monitoring of DD drivers. We analyzed the link between drivers and local livelihoods to see how attempts to address deforestation and forest degradation might affect local communities and how this link might influence their participation in climate change mitigation measures such as Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) and Measuring, Reporting and Verifying (MRV) activities. We found that local knowledge is fundamental to capturing the variety of drivers particularly in countries like Indonesia where forest and socio-economic conditions are diverse. Better understanding of drivers and their importance for local livelihoods will not only contribute to a more locally appropriate design of REDD+ and monitoring systems but will also foster local participation.

Socio-economic factors influencing land-use and land-cover changes in the miombo woodlands of the Copperbelt province in Zambia

“…We interviewed household heads or the next of kin in each household. If we did not find any eligible person or in an event that the household refused to participate, another randomly selected household was used to replace that household (see Bong et al, 2016). The sampling unit was a household while the unit of observation was the head of the house or next of kin.…”

Fuzzy difference and data primitives: a transparent approach for supporting different definitions of forest in the context of REDD+

“…Second, REDD+ forest mapping activities are being used to impose a specific view of the landscape, often at the expense of communities who live and work in forested areas (e.g. Bong et al, 2016). These communities, although key stakeholders, are frequently excluded and marginalized from the REDD+ mapping process, receiving little or none of the financial rewards, and often suffering from opportunistic land reforms arising on the back of REDD+.…”

“…However, some communities in likely REDD+ countries do not hold a concept of forest at all (Niclas Burenhult, personal communication, 2016) and where they do this has a nuanced and spiritual meaning. Specifically, although the people of Jahai in the in the Malay Peninsula live in forests, they have no concept of forest (Burenhult, 2009). Instead it is their home and the nearest terms they have for forest-like things describe leaves and trees as well as canopy floor, covered area and exposed area.…”

The feasibility of local participation in Measuring, Reporting and Verification (PMRV) for REDD+

“…Risks for local livelihoods (e.g. important economic activities being forbidden because of their environmental impact, see Bong et al [ 20 ]*) also need recognition.…”

“…those directly involved in the PMRV activities or having customary rights to the land where activities are conducted. Bong et al [ 20 ] suggest benefit sharing is judged on how much local livelihood activities are impacted by REDD+ with those suffering greater costs receiving greater compensation. Benefit sharing arrangements should take into account the potential conflicts that may arise when different user groups within a village lay claim to land, resources and forest-based livelihoods.…”