REDD+ in Theory and Practice: How Lessons From Local Projects Can Inform Jurisdictional Approaches

Abstract

for PES are met. Implementers of jurisidictional approaches may also want to avoid conceptualizing their new model too narrowly and prescriptively, as was arguably the case with the conceptualization of REDD+ as a multitier PES scheme.

Evaluating the Impact of REDD+ Interventions on Household Forest Revenue in Peru

“…Although the UNFCCC ultimately agreed on REDD+ implementation at the national scale, the international call for "demonstration activities" in 2007 led to the emergence of hundreds of local REDD+ projects across the tropics, largely implemented by non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and private companies (Sills et al, 2014). About half of those projects have been third party certified (e.g., by the Climate, Community and Biodiversity Alliance or Plan Vivo), which requires adherence to social and environmental safeguards and is a necessary step for carbon trading in international voluntary markets (Wunder et al, 2020). However, because of the international political climate, relatively few of the projects have sold carbon credits, especially in the first few years after their launch (Wunder et al, 2020).…”

“…About half of those projects have been third party certified (e.g., by the Climate, Community and Biodiversity Alliance or Plan Vivo), which requires adherence to social and environmental safeguards and is a necessary step for carbon trading in international voluntary markets (Wunder et al, 2020). However, because of the international political climate, relatively few of the projects have sold carbon credits, especially in the first few years after their launch (Wunder et al, 2020). This presents a challenge for project implementation, including making good on promises of benefit sharing with local people.…”

Global Comparative Study on REDD+ story of change: Supporting district-level jurisdictional approaches in Indonesia

“…Subnational jurisdictions like provinces and districts are recognized as key for implementing a jurisdictional approach, since they both possess some legal authority and are close to communities making land-use decisions (Stickler et al 2018a). Taking actions at subnational level can also help to emphasize how important forests and local-level governance are when it comes to global climate change mitigation , Wunder et al 2020. Today, jurisdictional approaches build on over a decade of Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) implementation experience, as well as private-sector experience of acting upon sustainability commitments (Seymour et al 2020); both having the aim of addressing multiple interconnected objectives across scales and sectors while promoting equitable stakeholder involvement.…”

Landscape governance : from analysing challenges to capacitating stakeholders

“…A 'jurisdictional' approach -as suggested by some environmental scholars -would therefore not help them solve their problems. A jurisdictional approach may be the easiest way to overcome scale mismatches, by adjusting informal landscape governance arrangements to jurisdictional boundaries, formality and rule of law (Feldman, 2016;The Earth Innovation Institute, 2018;Wunder et al, 2020). But applied to landscape governance, it would not solve scale mismatches but would aggravate them, as it ignores the spatial and temporal scales along which landscapes have evolved, and disconnects inhabitants from their livelihoods, and stakeholders from their stakes.…”