Multistakeholder environmental governance in action: REDD+ discourse coalitions in Tanzania

Abstract

ABSTRACT. Balancing interests to achieve legitimate and effective policies is a primary and pressing challenge in countries' efforts to prepare their national reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+) strategies. Using Tanzania as a country case, we investigated the most polarizing policy discourses and assessed the influence of competing discourse coalitions on the drafting of the national REDD+ strategy. We combined discourse and social network analysis to identify discourse coalitions and assess their influence. The findings indicate that the national REDD+ strategy largely reflects the positions of the discourse coalition that is controlled by powerful state actors who support central control of REDD+ financial mechanisms. The competing coalition, led by civil society organizations, has limited influence on the national strategy, despite discursive congruence and concerted political action. The findings further indicate that discursive practices and institutional rules codetermine policy outcomes.

Framing national REDD+ benefits, monitoring, governance and finance: A comparative analysis of seven countries

“…By referring to a specific element of a storyline, policy actors can signal their position and evoke a storyline or discourse as a whole. We expect prominent storylines to be upheld by key policy actors, while official policy documents, such as R-PPs, can serve as an indication for the institutionalization of prominent storylines (Hajer, 1995;Sharp and Richardson, 2001;Rantala and Di Gregorio, 2014).…”

“…The prime focus of REDD+ accounting activities, funding and REDD+ compensation at the national government level, as well as empirical evidence of REDD+ policy processes, has led a number of scholars to assert that REDD+ can lead to a "centralization" of forest governance, and in some cases reverse the long-standing trend of decentralization of forest governance. This could disempower actors operating at the sub-national level, including local communities (Toni, 2011, p. 67;Phelps et al, 2010;Sandbrook et al, 2010;Vijge and Gupta, 2014;Angelsen et al, 2009;Rantala and Di Gregorio, 2014;Buizer et al, 2014). We assess views among policy actors on whether REDD+ accounting and payments should go through the national government.…”

Stakeholder Participation in REDD+ Readiness Activities for Three Collaborative Projects in Lao PDR

“…Decentralization can also create ownership and the right for the local community to participate in future REDD+ activities, although many decentralization attempts have not improved the ability of the local community to manage a project [60]. Further, it could also help re-balance decision-making power among stakeholders [61], especially CGOV, LGOV and local communities.…”

The role of forests in climate change mitigation : a discursive-institutional analysis of REDD+ MRV

“…In both countries, the revision of the aims of forest monitoring and development of new strategies to implement MRV was advocated and supported by authoritative governmental and non-governmental agencies. In Tanzania, all the key policy actors agreed on the need to establish the NCMC (Rantala and Di Gregorio, 2014). Despite initial disagreements on where the NCMC should be hosted, a host institution was not only selected in a consensual manner, but interviews also show that its establishment was advocated and supported by authoritative actors such as the Fourth, DI emphasizes the (political) popularity and encompassing nature of discourse as a critical factor for institutionalization.…”

“…However, it also shows that the extent of institutionalization varies across countries, with Indonesia experiencing 'deep' institutionalization, Similarly, in Tanzania, most of the REDD+ pilot projects incorporated MRV in their activities (Indufor, 2013a). Additionally, the NGOs implementing these pilots were well represented in 86 | P a g e national MRV policy discussions (Rantala, 2012) and introduced their ideas of how MRV should be conducted and how the different constituencies they represent could be engaged in the process (see Rantala and Di Gregorio, 2014;REDD Pilot Projects, 2011). In Peru, by contrast, although MRV has been a key REDD+ policy issue, national-level discussions on REDD+ in general (Piu and Menton, 2014a) and MRV in particular began only recently.…”