‘This is my garden’: justice claims and struggles over forests in Vietnam’s REDD+

Abstract

This paper explores dynamics of conflict over forests in Vietnam, as the country lays the groundwork for Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+). Drawing on a case study in Lam Dong province and applying an environmental justice lens, we examine how various social actors assert claims over forests and how these claims invoke different notions of justice, authority and identity. Our analysis highlights that the development and implementation of the project has generated renewed competing claims and conflicts over forests among social actors. Underlying these conflicts there are incompatible notions of justice and associated rights, which lead different actors to accord legitimacy variously to the global norms brought about by REDD+, the customary resource practices of indigenous people, or to the state's laws. We show that the negotiations over forests in REDD+ reflect the influence of the specific historical and politicaleconomic settings in which REDD+ activities take place, including pre-existing conflicts over forests and power relations underpinning forest management. From a policy perspective, our research suggests that any attempts to introduce simplified and uniform regulations for forest governance in REDD+ should be avoided, since local institutions and conceptions of justice will significantly influence what is regarded as legitimate policy and can thus be endorsed as inspiration for sustainable forest governance. Key policy insights. REDD+ in Vietnam has spurred contestations over who is legitimately entitled to govern and manage forests. . Claims and conflicts over forests can be explained by incompatible and distinct notions of justice, authority and identity. . Contestations over justice pose radical challenges to any global and national efforts that attempt to implement simplified rules and ideas for forest based-climate change mitigation. . Attention to justice, especially to compatibility and differences in ideas about justice, is crucial for sustainable forest governance. ARTICLE HISTORY

Environmental justice and REDD+ safeguards in Laos: Lessons from an authoritarian political regime

“…Scholars report similar challenges in REDD? processes across Southeast Asia (Nathan and Pasgaard 2017;Satyal et al 2018;Hoang et al 2019;Milne, et al 2019) and in other REDD? countries (Š piric et al 2016;Saeed et al 2018).…”

“…With its focus on sovereign authority, REDD? could also drive the recentralization of state control (e.g., Phelps et al 2010), which could be a matter of particular concern in authoritarian states (e.g., Pham et al 2014;Hoang et al 2019).…”

“…(e.g., Nathan and Pasgaard 2017;Suiseeya 2017;Dawson et al 2018;Satyal et al 2018). For example, Hoang et al (2019) and Nathan and Pasgaard (2017) examine how Vietnamese and Cambodian authorities have selectively employed the international 'politics' of climate justice to de-legitimize and curtail swidden agriculture in upland frontiers rather than address large-scale commercial agriculture as a driver of forest loss in lowland areas. In addition, there are observations on how REDD?…”

“…In addition, there are observations on how REDD? processes in Ethiopia, Nepal, and Vietnam have been used in ways that centralize state control over forest resources (Hoang et al 2019;Brown and MacLellan 2020;Satyal et al 2018). In partial response to these critiques, various authors have argued that REDD?…”

Addressing power imbalances in biosequestration governance

“…It is important to take into account historical and other contextual inequities in biosequestration initiatives (Hoang et al, 2019). Similar to many other environmental challenges, both the impacts of deforestation and climate change and the impacts of response measures to address deforestation and climate change have a strong equity dimension, with marginalized groups like women and Indigenous Peoples being affected disproportionally (Gupta et al, 2020).…”