Discourse and Practice of REDD+ in Ghana and the Expansion of State Power

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Authors traced global discourses and narratives throughout  REDD+  official documents and compare them to the implementation on the ground to determine the extent that  REDD+  meets its stated objectives in the  Ghanaian context. 
Discourse analysis of official REDD+ documents and land policies combined with qualitative interviews and focus groups to determine the linkages between discourse and practice of REDD+ and the impacts of these gaps. 
As a result, state power expands into rural areas, allowing for greater control over land and forests at the expense of local communities.  

Author Response

Please see attachment to make several improvements to the draft and correct references.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

General comments

I reviewed the manuscript entitled “Discourse and practice of REDD+ in Ghana and the expansion of State Power”. The manuscript has traced global discourses and narratives throughout REDD+ official documents and compared them to the implementation on the ground in the context of Ghana. At the same time, it has attempted to define the instrumental effects of REDD+ and argued that there is gap in discourse and practice with expanded state power in forested rural landscape weakening the local control. The manuscript is written well and comprehensive but has struggled to make it simpler and readable to the readers. I have some minor comments and recommend considering for publication upon addressing those issues.

1. In overall, the manuscript is quite comprehensive. However, paper seems quite ambitious in terms of discourse analysis but is unable to format the paper in a way that it is sequential and analytical and making it reader friendly. The terms including “ Governmentality”, Depoliticization and Civic Environmentalism needs explanation so that reader can understand the terms easily.
2. Manuscript is more descriptive, and text burdened. Consider graphical presentation where possible.
3. Conclusion needs more focus on the Ghanian context.

Author Response

Thank you for your comments. I found them very helpful to review and revise the manuscript again. Here are a few changes that I made.

1. I have included more definitions earlier in the paper and changed some of the organization. I also deleted one section that was not necessary to make my point and it has a better flow.
2. I deleted much of the descriptive elements and cut over 1,000 words to make my argument more clear. I tried to make a flow chart, but I found that it oversimplified my argument.
3. Conclusion draws from Ghana case study to make larger claims about neoliberal environmental interventions, but references Ghana throughout.
4. References have been fixed to fit Journal of Sustainability style.