Local Participation in REDD+: Lessons from the Eastern Brazilian Amazon

Abstract

There are concerns that local people will not be genuinely involved in initiatives to Reduce Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+). We analyzed local participation in the design of one REDD+ project in the eastern Brazilian Amazon, and assessed local hopes, worries and recommendations for the project through four community focus groups and interviews with 137 households at the site. Our results showed that only one-third of households interviewed (31%) had enough information about the project to describe it accurately. Of those, the majority (60%) hoped that the project would improve their incomes, followed by improving their agricultural production (33%) and helping protect forests (26%). While increasing household incomes was the dominant hope, people's recommendations revealed that they favored non-monetary forms of compensation over the direct cash payments included in the proponents' package of incentives. Their main recommendation was that the project should help improve their production systems through access to technical assistance, machinery and training, while valuing local production systems (46%). Our study highlights the need for participation that goes beyond passive consultation with local people to develop REDD+ interventions that best reflect local knowledge, land use practices and aspirations.

Let’s not Miss the Forest for the Trees: A reply to Pinto et al. Forests 2017, 8(7), 230

“…Investigating their understandings is likely to be useful in thinking about the heterogeneous constructions of subjects, as well as their motivations, interests, and responses to future PES and REDD+ initiatives. We also note that the information we provide in Table 2 on IPAM's efforts is consistent with other studies on the project [4,5].…”

Motivation Matters: Lessons for REDD+ Participatory Measurement, Reporting and Verification from Three Decades of Child Health Participatory Monitoring in Indonesia

“…Do incentives matter? The existing literature on incentives for REDD+ for the most part lack relevance for PMRV because they consider landholders and forest users rather than potential MRV informants [57–60]. Willingness to engage with REDD+ does not necessarily imply that people have suitability, time, skills and motivation to be involved in monitoring and reporting.…”

Assessing “Results-Based” Payment Determinants in Forest Carbon Emission Reduction Initiatives: Case of Forest Carbon Projects in Cameroon

“…Local willingness to be part of REDD+ projects is required to ensure efficient and effective carbon emission reductions in addition to non-carbon benefits. It is indicated that limited or no involvement of local communities for example in project design and implementation is a big driver of non-permanence and leakage, and a threat to project sustainability (Cromberg, Duchelle & Rocha, 2014). The need to get local people involved in REDD+ design and implementation is explicitly indicated in the Cancun safeguards of the climate change convention and in other REDD+ safeguard standards (Moss & Nussbaum;UNFCCC, 2011).…”

“…as compared to initial project plan. Experience from REDD+ projects in the Brazilian amazon indicates that project sustainability was jeopardized as a result of the absence of long-term community participation in project activities (Cromberg, Duchelle & Rocha, 2014).…”