Implementing REDD+ in view of integrated conservation and development projects: Leveraging empirical lessons

Abstract

There are diverse lessons that subnational projects designed to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+) should learn from integrated conservation and development projects (ICDPs) working in developing country settings. This paper develops and applies a lesson learning framework to identify and analyse lessons that the Kasigau REDD+ project learns from a governmental ICDP (national park) and a nongovernmental ICDP (World Vision) that have been implemented in Taita-Taveta county, Kenya. Fieldwork and document reviews revealed 24 lessons drawn from both positive and negative ICDP experiences. At the design level, the REDD+ project maintained the commonly critiqued top-down intervening approach as used by the ICDPs, by excluding community input into its globally-linked design. At the implementation level, the REDD+ project promoted better community representation in project decisions and benefit sharing when compared to the ICDPs. A landscape approach, democratic institutional choices and pro-poor benefit sharing were the key interventions that enabled the REDD+ project to improve on the ICDP experiences. The usefulness of the ICDP experiences was however weakened by a lack of lesson sharing between projects. The REDD+ project relied mainly on the local community to communicate their ICDP experiences, but this led to partial implementation deficits because it promoted local participation interests over global mitigation goals. Further, community-driven lesson learning appeared to disconnect the project from State institutions. The community had negative perceptions of State involvement but at the same time the State is the legal custodian of most assets (such as land) required for REDD+ implementation. ICDP lessons are therefore necessary for effective REDD+ implementation but can only be useful if the process of adopting lessons is cognisant of relevant stakeholders such as the State.

Exploring Power and Procedural Justice Within Climate Compatible Development Project Design

“…Studies of other CCD interventions report similar design procedures (Sova et al, 2015;Atela et al, 2015). Visible, hidden and invisible forms of power create barriers to procedural justice in CCD design.…”

REDD+ Contribution to Well-Being and Income Is Marginal: The Perspective of Local Stakeholders

“…The reason is that, in practice, REDD+ incorporates a wide range of interventions, including non-conditional livelihood enhancements. Most REDD+ sub-national initiatives are elaborations of a pre-existing integrated conservation and development project (ICDP) at the same site [8] (p. 27), an approach to stopping deforestation widely applied in the 1980s and 1990s [9][10][11]. In ICDP, local stakeholders are provided an alternative livelihood to compensate them for reduced clearing of forests or reliance on forest resources.…”

An assessment of the transformational potential of REDD+ in tackling drivers of deforestation

“…34 Some of the project benefits community members had received were noted to be directly linked to drivers, for example, rice irrigation was provided as a means of intensifying agriculture 35 and tree nurseries were set up to establish agroforestry projects, 36 both to take pressure of the existing forest. This supports other research that indicates that REDD+ projects may have the potential to go beyond previous integrated conservation and development projects (ICDPs) (Atela et al 2015) which faced a range of criticisms such as weak links between conservation and development outcomes (Blom et al, 2010). This notwithstanding, interviewees who were in favour of the project were at pains to emphasise that they did not necessarily engage in activities that provide an alternative to deforestation because of benefits from the REDD+ project, but because of a desire to protect the forest that was disappearing.…”

“…In sum, the economic approach to landscapes is being driven by large agribusiness companies, in collaboration with governments. nested approach to achieving overall emission reductions through NAMAs at the national level (Minang et al 2015). Such efforts often link to the concept of Low Emission Rural Development (LED-R), and the need to decrease all land-based emissions within a particular political jurisdiction, as is emerging under 'jurisdictional' REDD+ (Dewi et al, 2013;Nepstad et al, 2012).…”