UNFCCC and the REDD+ Partnership from a networked governance perspective

Reinecke, Sabine; Pistorius, Till; Pregernig, Michael

doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2012.09.015

Cited by 32 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The relatively participatory character of the UN-REDD Programme, the interactions of the rather informal REDD+ Partnership with the formal UNFCCC process (Reinecke et al, 2014), and the rapid discursive/institutional evolution of REDD+ (Den Besten et al, 2014) contrasts starkly with the lack of participation of some important relevant stakeholders and the unequivocal national ownership of REDD+ for instance in Indonesia (Luttrell et al, 2014), Cameroon (Awono et al, 2014; and Peru (Evans et al, 2014). In Indonesia, in spite of presidential support, and in the absence of an absolute majority of the president's party in parliament, support for reforms required to implement REDD+ is dependent on a coalition of political parties.…”

Section: The Institutionalisation Of Redd+: Progress and Pitfallsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…International organisations involved with REDD+ are adapting to the claim for a voice by civil society and entrepreneurial sectors (e.g. Reinecke et al, 2014).…”

Section: Tensions Between Global Policies and Participationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Reinecke et al, 2014). The REDD+ Partnership (a voluntary and non-legally binding partnership, not to be confused with the UN-REDD Programme) which is subordinate and subsequent to the UNFCCC negotiations, has entered the REDD+ institutional landscape.…”

Section: The Institutionalisation Of Redd+: Progress and Pitfallsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The REDD+ Partnership (a voluntary and non-legally binding partnership, not to be confused with the UN-REDD Programme) which is subordinate and subsequent to the UNFCCC negotiations, has entered the REDD+ institutional landscape. Its interactive relationship with the UNFCCC can be characterised as a simultaneously cooperative and competitive form of governing in networks (Reinecke et al, 2014). …”

Section: The Institutionalisation Of Redd+: Progress and Pitfallsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several contributions examine the translations of specific definitions and delineations of forest-climate problems into policies in different parts of the world, including Peru (Evans et al, 2014), Indonesia (Luttrell et al, 2014), Cameroon (Awono et al, 2014;Somorin et al, 2014), Sweden (Kleinschmit and Sjöstedt, 2014), Canada and the United States (Wellstead et al, 2014), and Australia and the United Kingdom (Buizer and Lawrence, 2014). Others are more general and theoretically oriented reflections (Den Besten et al, 2014;Karsenty et al, 2014;McDermott, 2014;Reinecke et al, 2014) or explore a related policy domain to see how it can be instructive to the REDD+ debate (Melo et al, 2014). The theoretical points of departure of the contributions range from environmental economics, multi-level governance, network theory, political ecology, discourse analysis, and media analysis.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Climate change and deforestation: The evolution of an intersecting policy domain

Buizer

Humphreys

Jong

2014

Environmental Science & Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Forests and climate change are increasingly dealt with as interconnected policy issues. Both the potential synergies and policy conflicts between forest conservation and restoration and climate change mitigation now receive sustained and high level attention from academic, policy analysis and practitioner communities across the globe. Arguably the most pronounced contemporary policy manifestation of this is the debate on Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Developing Countries (or REDD+) by which governments and private investors from developed countries may compensate actors in tropical forest countries for reducing forest loss beneath an agreed baseline. Problems of climate-forest policies implementation and governance, however, can also be found in countries such as Canada, the USA, the UK and Australia. The future of instruments like REDD+ is uncertain with growing critiques on payment and performance-based mechanisms and unresolved issues of governance, government and accountability. This paper, and the special issue it introduces, illustrates that in the REDD+ debate many contentious issues have resurfaced from past debates. These issues include the participation and rights of local communities in forest policy and management; the relationship between internationally agreed payment and performance-based programmes and formal democratic decision-making processes and structures; the complexities of rights to carbon versus tenure rights; and the ways in which -in spite of the high expectations of both developing and developed countries to combat carbon emissions from deforestation and forest degradation through the REDD+ mechanism -effective climate-focused forestry policies are seldom found in most tropical forest-rich countries. REDD+ is now very much the dominant discourse at the forest-climate interface, and one with a primary focus on measurability to communicate carbon mitigation results across various levels. However, this serves to disperse and displace, rather than resolve, policy-making on non-carbon values.

show abstract

Section: The Institutionalisation Of Redd+: Progress and Pitfallsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…International organisations involved with REDD+ are adapting to the claim for a voice by civil society and entrepreneurial sectors (e.g. Reinecke et al, 2014).…”

Section: Tensions Between Global Policies and Participationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Institutionalisation Of Redd+: Progress and Pitfallsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Institutionalisation Of Redd+: Progress and Pitfallsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Climate change and deforestation: The evolution of an intersecting policy domain

Buizer

Humphreys

Jong

2014

Environmental Science & Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Managing fragmentation in global environmental governance: the REDD+ Partnership as bridge organization

Gupta

Pistorius²,

Vijge

2015

Int Environ Agreements

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article analyzes the increasing institutional and organizational complexity and fragmentation surrounding the international financing mechanism REDD? (reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries and related forest activities), now being negotiated within the UNFCCC. We focus, in particular, on critically assessing the prospects of managing such fragmentation. We do so by analyzing whether and how (what we conceptualize here as) a ''bridge organization''-the voluntary, multi-stakeholder REDD? Partnership bringing together state and non-state actors from global to local scales-has aided in managing fragmentation in this realm, through exercising four enabling functions (enhancing transparency, participation, knowledge sharing, and coordination). Our analysis shows that the REDD? Partnership has partially succeeded in furthering such procedural aims, but that this has not resulted in a ''scaling up of REDD? action and finance,'' its overarching substantive aim. In contrast to dominant views of a bridge organization's modus operandi, we conclude, based on our analysis, that its value lies not in overcoming persisting geopolitical conflicts around climate mitigation and providing a ''depoliticized'' context within which to manage fragmentation. Instead, its success lies in permitting dialogue and exchange even in the face of persisting political conflicts over its raison d'être and functions. In making these arguments, the article extends recent debates on the prospects to manage fragmentation in global environmental governance and provides a critical assessment of the role therein for bridge organizations.

show abstract

A historical institutionalist view on merging LULUCF and REDD+ in a post-2020 climate agreement

Pistorius¹,

Reinecke

Carrapatoso

2016

Int Environ Agreements

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

UNFCCC and the REDD+ Partnership from a networked governance perspective

Cited by 32 publications

References 35 publications

Climate change and deforestation: The evolution of an intersecting policy domain

Climate change and deforestation: The evolution of an intersecting policy domain

Managing fragmentation in global environmental governance: the REDD+ Partnership as bridge organization

A historical institutionalist view on merging LULUCF and REDD+ in a post-2020 climate agreement

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About