Next Article in Journal / Special Issue
Towards a Role-Oriented Governance Approach: Insights from Eight Forest Climate Initiatives
Previous Article in Journal
Relationship between Forest Color Characteristics and Scenic Beauty: Case Study Analyzing Pictures of Mountainous Forests at Sloped Positions in Jiuzhai Valley, China
Previous Article in Special Issue
Revitalizing REDD+ Policy Processes in Vietnam: The Roles of State and Non-State Actors
Open AccessArticle

Co-Operation or Co-Optation? NGOs’ Roles in Norway’s International Climate and Forest Initiative

1
CICERO Center for International Climate Research, P.O. Box 1129 Blindern, 0318 Oslo, Norway
2
Centre for Development and Environment, University of Oslo, P.O. Box 1116 Blindern, 0317 Oslo, Norway
3
Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences, Postbox 400, 2418 Elverum, Norway
4
Department of Production Engineering, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Av. Antônio Carlos, 6627 Pampulha, Belo Horizonte, Brazil
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Academic Editor: Timothy A. Martin
Forests 2017, 8(3), 64; https://doi.org/10.3390/f8030064
Received: 31 October 2016 / Revised: 19 January 2017 / Accepted: 22 February 2017 / Published: 28 February 2017
(This article belongs to the Special Issue REDD+ Crossroads Post Paris: Politics, Lessons and Interplays)
This paper investigates non-governmental organisation (NGO) involvement in policy processes related to Norway’s International Climate and Forest Initiative (NICFI) comparing four countries: Norway, Brazil, Indonesia, and Tanzania. Based on documents and interviews, NGO involvement is mapped using a conceptual framework to categorise and compare different roles and modes of engagement. NGOs have co-operated with government in policy design and implementation, albeit to varying degrees, in all four countries, but expressed relatively little public criticism. Funding seems to have an influence on NGOs’ choices regarding whether, what, when, and how to criticise. However, limited public criticism does not necessarily mean that the NGOs are co-opted. They are reflexive regarding their possible operating space, and act strategically and pragmatically to pursue their goals in an entrepreneurial manner. The interests of NGOs and NICFI are to a large extent congruent. Instead of publicly criticising a global initiative that they largely support, and thus put the initiative as a whole at risk, NGOs may use other, more informal, channels to voice points of disagreement. While NGOs do indeed run the risk of being co-opted, their opportunity to resist this fate is probably greater in this instance than is usually the case because NICFI are so reliant on their services. View Full-Text
Keywords: REDD+; NGOs; policymaking; co-operation; co-optation; policy entrepreneurship REDD+; NGOs; policymaking; co-operation; co-optation; policy entrepreneurship
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Hermansen, E.A.T.; McNeill, D.; Kasa, S.; Rajão, R. Co-Operation or Co-Optation? NGOs’ Roles in Norway’s International Climate and Forest Initiative. Forests 2017, 8, 64.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Search more from Scilit
 
Search
Back to TopTop