Special Issue "Forest Governance and REDD: Challenges for Policies and Markets in Latin America"
Quicklinks
A special issue of Forests (ISSN 1999-4907).
Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (15 November 2010)
Special Issue Editors
Guest Editor
Dr. Elena Petkova
CIFOR, Jalan CIFOR, Situ Gede, Bogor Barat 16115, Indonesia
E-Mail: e.petkova@cgiar.org
Interests: governance; accountability; transparency; decision making; development; civil society; corruption; climate change; environment/forests decision-making; government; governance
Associate Editor
Dr. Anne Margaret Larson
Apartado J-148, Managua, Nicaragua
E-Mail: a.larson@cgiar.org
Interests: forest tenure; decentralization; governance; conservation and development; indigenous rights; REDD; community forestry
Associate Editor
Dr. Pablo Pacheco
CIFOR, Jalan CIFOR, Situ Gede, Bogor Barat 16115, Indonesia
E-Mail: p.pacheco@cgiar.org
Interests: trade and investment; tenure reform; forestry governance; orest policy; land-use change; rural development
Special Issue Information
Dear Colleagues,
Forest governance reform, decentralization, mitigation strategies and the growing need for policies facilitating adaptation to climate change define the governance of Latin American forests. Development and market pressures and the ability of governments and societies to respond to these pressures adequately shape forests and the livelihoods of forest-dependent people. Communities are major stakeholders in the policies and practices that affect - by limiting or improving - their ability to use forests for their livelihoods. Specific policies such as tenure reforms, support for community forest management or policies affecting indigenous people influence the livelihoods of forest dependent people and enable or undermine efforts to reduce poverty. They also have implications for communities' relationship with REDD+ proponents and the way REDD+ is designed. These dynamic and interlinked policy processes lay the groundwork for forest management and the development and implementation of REDD+ schemes and generate incentives for land-use decisions that could reduce deforestation rates and benefit forest-based communities. Governments can use new opportunities to preserve forests and curb deforestation rates by promoting innovative social responses, new development actions and livelihood alternatives.
Dr. Elena Petkova
Guest Editor
Submission
Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. Papers will be published continuously (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.
Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are refereed through a peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Forests is an international peer-reviewed Open Access quarterly journal published by MDPI.
Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 300 CHF (Swiss Francs).
English correction and/or formatting fees of 250 CHF (Swiss Francs) will be charged in certain cases for those articles accepted for publication that require extensive additional formatting and/or English corrections.
Keywords
- forest policy
- REDD+
- Latin America
- deforestation
- forest governmence
- forests markets
- logging
- forest management
- forest finance
- land use
Published Papers (15 papers)
|
Received: 27 October 2010; in revised form: 17 November 2010 / Accepted: 17 November 2010 / Published: 6 December 2010
Show/Hide Abstract
| Download PDF Full-text (400 KB)
Abstract: The problems that hamper the financing of sustainable forest management (SFM) are manifold and complex. However, forestry is also facing unprecedented opportunities. The multiple functions and values of forests are increasingly recognized as part of the solution to pressing global issues (e.g., climate change, energy scarcity, poverty, environmental degradation, biodiversity loss and raw material supply). Emerging initiatives to enhance forest carbon stocks and cut greenhouse gas emissions associated with forest clearing (known as REDD+), together with voluntary carbon markets, are offering additional funding options for SFM. Indigenous peoples, local communities and small scale farmers feature as key players in the discourse on implementing such initiatives. Based on the experience of countries developing national forest financing strategies and instruments, we suggest the following points be considered when financing such initiatives, particularly for small scale forestry: (1) Integrate financing of REDD+ and similar initiatives within broader national strategies for SFM financing; (2) Design REDD+ finance mechanisms that are ‘community ready’, i.e., tailored to local realities; (3) Consider existing livelihood strategies as the starting point; (4) Build on existing structures, but be mindful of their strengths and weaknesses; (5) Be strategic with your priority actions; and (6) Promote innovation, knowledge sharing and information exchange.
|
|
Received: 15 November 2010 / Accepted: 10 December 2010 / Published: 16 December 2010
Show/Hide Abstract
| Download PDF Full-text (37 KB)
Abstract: Forests and their governance have received increased attention in recent years. One factor that has stimulated this renewed interest is the appreciation of deforestation as a significant contributor to greenhouse gas emissions. The emerging REDD+ mechanism (reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation) under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is being designed with the goal of using financial incentives to enhance the role of forests in curbing climate change. [...]
|
|
Received: 18 November 2010; in revised form: 18 December 2010 / Accepted: 18 December 2010 / Published: 27 December 2010
Show/Hide Abstract
| Download PDF Full-text (406 KB) | Download XML Full-text
Abstract: Important transformations are underway in tropical landscapes in Latin America with implications for economic development and climate change. Landscape transformation is driven not only by national policies and markets, but also by global market dynamics associated with an increased role for transnational traders and investors. National and global trends affect a disparate number of social, political and economic interactions taking place at the local level, which ultimately shapes land-use and socio-economic change. This paper reviews five different trajectories of landscape change in tropical Latin America, and discusses their implications for development and conservation: (1) Market-driven growth of agribusiness; (2) expansion and modernization of traditional cattle ranching; (3) slow growth of peasant agriculture; (4) logging in production forest frontiers; and (5) resurgence of agro-extractive economies. Contrasting trade-offs between economic development and forest conservation emerge across these landscapes, calling for nuanced policy responses to manage them in the context of climate change. This discussion sets the background to assess how reduction of emissions from deforestation and forest degradation and enhancing carbon stocks (REDD+) aims should be better aligned with current landscape trajectories and associated actors to better address climate-change mitigation in forest landscapes with effective and equitable outcomes.
|
|
Received: 15 November 2010; in revised form: 27 December 2010 / Accepted: 29 December 2010 / Published: 5 January 2011
Show/Hide Abstract
| Download PDF Full-text (179 KB) | Download XML Full-text
Abstract: Recent discussions on REDD+ (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation, plus conservation, sustainable management of forests and enhancement of forest carbon stocks) have raised optimism about reducing carbon emissions and deforestation in tropical countries. If approved under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), REDD+ mechanisms may generate a substantial influx of financial resources to developing countries. Some authors argue that this money could reverse the ongoing process of decentralization of forest policies that has spread through a large number of developing countries in the past two decades. Central states will be accountable for REDD+ money, and may be compelled to control and keep a significant share of REDD+ funds. Supporters of decentralization argue that centralized implementation of REDD+ will be ineffective and inefficient. In this paper, I examine the relation between subnational governments and REDD+ in Brazil. Data show that some state governments in the Brazilian Amazon have played a key role in creating protected areas (PAs) after 2003, which helped decrease deforestation rates. Governors have different stimuli for creating PAs. Some respond to the needs of their political constituency; others have expectations to boost the forest sector so as to increase fiscal revenues. Governors also have led the discussion on REDD+ in Brazil since 2008. Considering their interests and political power, REDD+ is unlikely to curb decentralization in Brazil.
|
|
Received: 21 October 2010 / Accepted: 4 January 2011 / Published: 18 January 2011
Show/Hide Abstract
| Download PDF Full-text (304 KB) | Download XML Full-text
Abstract: REDD+ is a potentially significant financial mechanism for shifting the incentives from deforestation and land use change to forest conservation and sustainability. Even though REDD+ is not primarily a governance reform, it will affect or be affected by forest governance, it can improve forest governance or be undermined by its failures and, therefore, it depends on good forest governance if it is to be efficient, effective and equitable. This article provides an overview of key issues in forest governance in Latin America and discusses the risk and opportunities for REDD+. Though progress has been made in some areas, there is still much to be done, and REDD+ could reinforce or be undermined by problematic governance tendencies that affect its effectiveness, ability to decrease carbon emissions, and/or its legitimacy. The article recommends priority investments in institutional capacity, inter-institutional negotiation mechanisms, citizen participation and safeguards for forest-based populations.
|
|
Received: 2 November 2010 / Accepted: 23 December 2010 / Published: 27 January 2011
Show/Hide Abstract
| Download PDF Full-text (322 KB) | Download XML Full-text
Abstract: This article examines common barriers to achieving adequate levels of forest resource governance in countries of Latin America. It looks at the deficiencies of the policy and regulatory frameworks affecting forests, the common failure to impose the rule of law, the main factors that constrain the effectiveness of government actions in the forest sector and at the political barriers to introducing reforms for change in governance structures. The elimination of these barriers acquires new importance in the implementation of successful REDD+ programs in the countries of the region.
|
|
Received: 15 November 2010; in revised form: 13 January 2011 / Accepted: 20 January 2011 / Published: 1 February 2011
Show/Hide Abstract
| Download PDF Full-text (241 KB) | Download XML Full-text
Abstract: In this review paper, we assess the economical, governance, and technical conditions that shape forest management in tropical Latin America with particular regard to efforts to reduce forest-based carbon emissions. We provide a framework for discussions about ways to improve forest management that achieve environmental objectives while promoting local and national development and contributing to local livelihoods. We argue that many management practices that lead towards sustainability are only likely to be adopted where there is good governance backed by financial incentives for effective enforcement of management regulations. We propose some policy interventions designed to lower net greenhouse gas emissions by decreasing rates of forest degradation and increasing carbon stock recovery in logged-over or otherwise degraded forests. Implementation of REDD+ could provide critical compensation to forest users for improved management practices in the absence of, or in combination with other economic incentives.
|
|
Received: 11 January 2011 / Accepted: 16 February 2011 / Published: 22 February 2011
Show/Hide Abstract
| Download PDF Full-text (236 KB) | Download XML Full-text
Abstract: Community forestry and related small and medium forest enterprises (SMFEs) can contribute towards the achievement of REDD+ goals, since they can promote sustainable use and conservation of forests and, therefore, a reduction in forest-related carbon emissions. Additionally, they can improve the quality of life of forest-dependant people by generating alternative sources of income and employment. However, SMFEs often face a number of challenges, including non-conducive policy environments, inadequate business skills, and moreover, limited access to financial services. In this paper, we propose to direct a portion of REDD+ readiness efforts towards promoting the generation of an enabling environment for SMFEs that includes: the construction of an adequate Business Environment (BE), the provision of Business Development Services (BDS) and better access to Financial Services (FS). With the application of this framework, SMFEs will be more likely to proliferate and succeed, leading to enhanced community resilience and empowerment, in addition to increasing the likelihood of forest carbon stock permanence and the long term achievement of REDD+ goals. Opportunities and challenges of applying this approach in Latin America are discussed.
|
|
Received: 14 November 2010; in revised form: 8 February 2011 / Accepted: 17 February 2011 / Published: 1 March 2011
Show/Hide Abstract
| Download PDF Full-text (357 KB) | Download XML Full-text
Abstract: Land tenure and carbon rights constitute critical issues to take into account in achieving emission reductions, ensuring transparent benefit sharing and determining non-permanence (or non-compliance) liabilities in the context of REDD+ strategies and projects. This is so because tenure systems influence who becomes involved in efforts to avoid deforestation and improve forest management, and that land tenure, carbon rights and liabilities may be linked or divorced with implications for rural development. This paper explores these issues by looking at tenure regimes and carbon rights issues in Mexico, Brazil and Costa Rica. It is effectively shown that complex bundles of rights over forest resources have distinct implications for REDD+ design and implementation, and that REDD+ strategies in selected countries have to date failed in procedurally addressing land-use conflicts and carbon rights entitlements and liabilities.
|
|
Received: 20 December 2010; in revised form: 5 February 2011 / Accepted: 18 February 2011 / Published: 2 March 2011
Show/Hide Abstract
| Download PDF Full-text (338 KB) | Download XML Full-text
Abstract: Combining responsible forest management (RFM) experiences with literature reviews and stakeholder discussions allows an assessment of the potential role of RFM in reduced emissions from deforestation and forest degradation and conservation, sustainable forest management and enhancement of carbon stocks (REDD+). RFM contributes to greater carbon storage and biodiversity in forest biomass in comparison to conventional logging and deforestation. Using an adjusted von Thünen model to explain land user behavior in relation to different variables, considering a general forest transition curve and looking at a potential relation between governance and deforestation rates, the authors conclude that reduction of deforestation and forest degradation can only be achieved by a combined approach of increasing forest rent relative to other land uses and reducing transaction costs for forest management and conservation. More than providing an additional income for a privileged few, REDD+ will need to address the barriers that have been identified in RFM over the past 30 years of investment in forest management and conservation. Most of these are of an institutional nature, but also culture and social organization as well as locally specific development trends play a significant role in increasing the potential for application of RFM and REDD+.
|
|
Received: 20 January 2011; in revised form: 21 February 2011 / Accepted: 2 March 2011 / Published: 11 March 2011
Show/Hide Abstract
| Download PDF Full-text (321 KB) | Download XML Full-text
Abstract: An important proportion of Latin America’s forests are located in indigenous territories, and indigenous peoples are the beneficiaries of about 85% of the area for which local rights to land and forest have been recognized in Latin America since the 1980s. Nevertheless, many of these areas, whether or not rights have been recognized, are subject to threats from colonists, illegal loggers, mining and oil interests and others, whose practices endanger not only the forests but also indigenous people’s territory as a whole. In this context, REDD could constitute a new threat or intensify others, particularly in places where indigenous tenure rights have not been recognized, but REDD could also offer new opportunities. This article describes the limitations of thinking only in terms of communities, rather than territories, and examines the extent to which REDD has been conceived considering the characteristics of this new territorial configuration. It also identifies the challenges that REDD may face with this new ‘stakeholder’, such as numerous specific characteristics of territories, given their heterogeneity, in the context of past experiences regarding ‘forest options’. This paper analyses the situation in already-titled indigenous territories in particular, and also discusses problems facing territories in the titling process.
|
|
Received: 16 February 2011; in revised form: 1 March 2011 / Accepted: 7 March 2011 / Published: 18 March 2011
Show/Hide Abstract
| Download PDF Full-text (281 KB) | Download XML Full-text
Abstract: Climate change can be addressed by mitigation (reducing the sources or enhancing the sinks of greenhouse gases) and adaptation (reducing the impacts of climate change). Mitigation and adaptation present two fundamentally dissimilar approaches whose differences are now well documented. Forest ecosystems play an important role in both adaptation and mitigation and there is a need to explore the linkages between these two options in order to understand their trade-offs and synergies. In forests, potential trade-offs can be observed between global ecosystem services, such as the carbon sequestration relevant for mitigation, and the local ecosystem services that are relevant for adaptation. In addition, mitigation projects can facilitate or hinder the adaptation of local people to climate change, whereas adaptation projects can affect ecosystems and their potential to sequester carbon. Linkages between adaptation and mitigation can also be observed in policies, but few climate change or forest policies have addressed these linkages in the forestry sector. This paper presents examples of linkages between adaptation and mitigation in Latin American forests. Through case studies, we investigate the approaches and reasons for integrating adaptation into mitigation projects or mitigation into adaptation projects. We also analyze the opportunities for mainstreaming adaptation–mitigation linkages into forest or climate change policies.
|
|
Received: 14 February 2011 / Accepted: 19 March 2011 / Published: 30 March 2011
Show/Hide Abstract
| Download PDF Full-text (344 KB) | Download XML Full-text
Abstract: At their most local, initiatives to reduce emissions from deforestation and degradation (REDD) will depend on rural people to manage forest resources. Although the design of frameworks, mechanisms and arrangements, to implement REDD programs have received significant attention, it is not yet clear how REDD+ will function on the ground or how the participation of local populations will be assured. Community forest management (CFM) could be an option under REDD+ depending on how it is negotiated, largely because of the expectation that CFM could reduce emissions from deforestation and degradation. Examining institutional factors in the emergence of successful CFM systems and local forest enterprises could provide valuable lessons for REDD planners. We examine cases of CFM development in Mexico, Brazil and Bolivia, to assess the role of multi-scaled governance institutions in their development. Comparing and contrasting advanced CFM systems to regions where it is still emerging, we will show how the establishment of a local organizational base for communal resource management is crucial.
|
|
Received: 3 March 2011; in revised form: 12 April 2011 / Accepted: 13 April 2011 / Published: 13 April 2011
Show/Hide Abstract
| Download PDF Full-text (517 KB) | Download XML Full-text
Abstract: One of the main issues regarding the implementation of REDD+ in Latin America has been the growing concern that such projects may infringe upon the rights and negatively affect the livelihoods of forest-dependent communities. Various indigenous and civil society organizations are ardently opposed to the initiative. Such is the case in Ecuador, where indigenous opposition to REDD+ represents a considerable obstacle in the creation of a national strategy since more than 60% of the country’s remaining forest cover is on indigenous land or under indigenous occupation. Thus one of the most critical challenges remaining for Ecuador will be the construction of a strong legal, financial, and institutional framework—one that the greater indigenous community might be willing to accept. Closer examination of this topic however, reveals just how difficult this may become. Lack of information, a recent political split between national authorities and the indigenous sector, and the dissimilar organizational capacity levels of indigenous communities make the feasibility of carrying out REDD+ projects on these lands extremely complex. However, the biggest obstacle may be ideological. Many indigenous groups view REDD+, with its possible emphasis on international markets and neoliberal mechanisms, as a continuation of the type of policies that have impeded their quest for sovereignty and self determination. As such, indigenous people are only willing to consider such projects if they clearly see preconditions in place that would safeguard their cultures, territories, and autonomy.
|
|
Received: 9 February 2011; in revised form: 5 April 2011 / Accepted: 6 April 2011 / Published: 27 April 2011
Show/Hide Abstract
| Download PDF Full-text (598 KB) | Download XML Full-text
Abstract: Our objective was to compare and evaluate the practical applicability to REDD+ of ten forest management, social, environmental and carbon standards that are currently active worldwide: Climate, Community and Biodiversity (CCB), CCB REDD+ Social and Environmental Standards (CCBA REDD+ S&E), CarbonFix Standard (CFS), Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), Global Conservation Standard (GCS), ISO 14064:2006, Plan Vivo Standard, Programme for Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC), SOCIALCARBON Standard and the Voluntary Carbon Standard (VCS). We developed a framework for evaluation of these standards relative to each other using four substantive criteria: (1) poverty alleviation, (2) sustainable management of forests (SMF), (3) biodiversity protection, (4) quantification and assessment of net greenhouse gas (GHG) benefits; and two procedural criteria: (5) monitoring and reporting, and (6) certification procedures. REDD programs require assessment of GHG benefits, monitoring, reporting and certification. Our analysis shows that only the Voluntary Carbon Standard (VCS) treats these three criteria comprehensively. No standard provides comprehensive coverage of the social and other environmental criteria. FSC, PEFC and CarbonFix provide comprehensive assessments of the sustainable forest management criterion. CCBA REDD+ S&E, CCB, and GCS provide comprehensive coverage of the biodiversity and poverty alleviation criteria. Experience in using these standards in pilot projects shows that projects are currently combining several standards as part of their strategy to improve their ability to attract investment, but costs of implementing several certification schemes is a concern. We conclude that voluntary certification provides useful practical experience that should feed into the design of the international REDD+ regime.
|
Last update: 5 October 2012
