REDD+ and Community Forestry

Viana, Virgílio Maurício; Aquino, Andre Rodrigues De; Pinto, Thais Megid; Lima, Luiza M. T.; Martinet, Anne; Busson, François; Samyn, Jean-Marie

doi:10.1596/27103

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Literature distinguished two principal mechanisms by which REDD+ could benefit from community forestry (e.g. Viana et al. , 2012; Blomley, 2013; Newton et al.…”

Section: Synergies Between Community Forestry and Redd+mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Indeed, this is required in order to provide an incentive for REDD+ participation. However, providing payments through carbon markets is not sufficient to ensure that REDD+ programs work to the benefit of forest-dependent communities (Viana et al. , 2012; Blomley, 2013; Newton et al.…”

Section: Synergies Between Community Forestry and Redd+mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In some cases, however, the lack of capacity of their representatives or the lack of control over funds can lead to situations of inequity or inefficiency in the redistribution of benefits. REDD+ financial resources will be subject to close international scrutiny (Viana et al. , 2012).…”

Section: Synergies Between Community Forestry and Redd+mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Community forestry in Cameroon: opportunity or constraint for REDD+?

Bele¹,

Sonwa²,

Tiani³

2022

FER

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThis study aims to identify opportunities and constraints of community forestry in the context of forest decentralization in Cameroon and what can be capitalized on for sound REDD+ design and implementation.Design/methodology/approachA qualitative approach to data collection was used through content analysis of 1994 forestry law, reports and publications related to decentralized forest management, community forestry and REDD+ in Cameroon. Principles that govern community forest and REDD+ were highlighted and opportunities and constraints of community forestry for REDD+ projects were discussed.FindingsCommunity forestry was developed principally to protect forests in order to support the subsistence and income-generating extractive activities of forest-dependent communities. Community forestry governance arrangements were not designed with the objective of achieving verifiable emissions reductions or carbon stock values. Hence, existing community forestry institutions may not address all the specific demands of REDD+ programs. However, existing community institutions and practices can be strengthened or modified to align better with climate change mitigation goals and to achieve REDD+ objectives in community forestry sites. On the other hand, REDD+ was developed principally to mitigate climate change by reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation principally within developing countries where the livelihoods of forest-dependent people are a central component of all forest management policies. However, despite fundamental differences between community forestry and REDD+, there is substantial synergy between their objectives, and the dual forest conservation and livelihood development focus of both programs means that policies that strengthen and support existing community forestry institutions and sites will advance REDD+ objectives. As such, REDD+ will likely to be more successful if it builds on lessons learned from community forestry.Originality/valueThis paper demonstrates how REDD+ is more likely to succeed if it builds on the lessons learned from community forestry over the past 20-plus years in Cameroon. It also discusses how REDD+ can benefit from community forestry and how some of the many challenges related to community forestry can be directly addressed by the REDD+ mechanism. Further, this paper also argues how the congruence between community forestry and REDD+ can effectively facilitate the direct use of community forestry as a tool to achieve REDD+ goals.

show abstract

“…Literature distinguished two principal mechanisms by which REDD+ could benefit from community forestry (e.g. Viana et al. , 2012; Blomley, 2013; Newton et al.…”

Section: Synergies Between Community Forestry and Redd+mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Synergies Between Community Forestry and Redd+mentioning

confidence: 99%