Next Article in Journal
Does Trust Matter? Analyzing the Impact of Trust on the Perceived Risk and Acceptance of Nuclear Power Energy
Next Article in Special Issue
Links between Climate Change Mitigation, Adaptation and Development in Land Policy and Ecosystem Restoration Projects: Lessons from South Africa
Previous Article in Journal
Study on the Delimitation of the Urban Development Boundary in a Special Economic Zone: A Case Study of the Central Urban Area of Doumen in Zhuhai, China
Previous Article in Special Issue
Discourses across Scales on Forest Landscape Restoration
Open AccessArticle

Multiple Wins, Multiple Organizations—How to Manage Institutional Interaction in Financing Forest Landscape Restoration (FLR)

Department of Political Science, University of Freiburg, 79085 Freiburg, Germany
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2018, 10(3), 757; https://doi.org/10.3390/su10030757
Received: 2 January 2018 / Revised: 22 February 2018 / Accepted: 8 March 2018 / Published: 9 March 2018
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Climate Change Adaptation, Mitigation and Development)
By restoring forest ecosystems and fostering resilient and sustainable land use practices, Forest Landscape Restoration (FLR) contributes to climate change mitigation, adaptation and sustainable development as well as the protection of biological diversity and combating desertification. This integrative approach provides the opportunity for multiple wins, but it necessitates the management of complex institutional interactions arising from the involvement of multiple international organizations. Focusing on the pivotal aspect of financing, this article surveys the landscape of public international institutions supporting FLR and analyzes the effectiveness of existing mechanisms of inter-institutional coordination and harmonization. Methodologically, our research is based on a document analysis, complemented by participant observation of the two Bonn Climate Change Conferences in May and November 2017 as well as the Global Landscapes Forum in December 2017. We find that financial institutions have established fairly effective rules for the management of positive and negative externalities through the introduction of co-benefits and safeguards. The fact that each institution has their own safeguards provisions, however, leads to significant transaction costs for recipient countries. In the discussion, we thus recommend that institutions should refrain from an unnecessary duplication of standards and focus on best practice. View Full-Text
Keywords: Forest Landscape Restoration; climate change; REDD+; sustainable development; biodiversity; finance; fragmentation; institutional interaction; safeguards; co-benefits Forest Landscape Restoration; climate change; REDD+; sustainable development; biodiversity; finance; fragmentation; institutional interaction; safeguards; co-benefits
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Carrapatoso, A.; Geck, A. Multiple Wins, Multiple Organizations—How to Manage Institutional Interaction in Financing Forest Landscape Restoration (FLR). Sustainability 2018, 10, 757.

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
Back to TopTop