Special Issue "The Performance of REDD+: From Global Governance to Local Practices"
Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (31 December 2018).
A printed edition of this Special Issue is available here.
Interests: forest governance, politics of governance, global-local nexus
Interests: global value chains, NTFPs, impact assessment
Interests: forest governance, political economy of deforestation, transformational change, policy networks
REDD+ represents countries’ efforts to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation, and foster conservation, sustainable management of forests, and enhancement of forest carbon stocks. The basic idea is that more carbon will be sequestrated and stocked in tropical forests by improving their conservation, management and sustainable use, thus contributing to mitigating climate change. Developing countries concerned, and relevant stakeholders, will be financially compensated for these endeavors, either through public funds or through private carbon markets.
REDD+ has been discussed as a mitigation option at UNFCCC from the early 2000s onwards, however, as “Avoided Deforestation” (AD) at first, then subsequently as RED, REDD and REDD+ at later stages, thus expanding the concept to ever more aspects of forest conservation, management and use. Whereas it was ‘just’ an innovative proposal tabled by Costa Rica and PNG in 2005, it finalized its “institutional journey” as a legally-binding Article in the Paris Agreement from 2015.
In the meantime, various international bodies and developed countries had started REDD+ programs and funds (World Bank, UNDP, UNEP, Norway), while various developing countries entered into so-called “readiness activities”, to prepare for full participation in REDD+. Currently, hundreds of REDD+ projects are being implemented around the world. Yet, many observers, stakeholders and scholars are critical. Carbon markets have not developed as envisioned in 2005, the efficiency and effectiveness of REDD+ for climate change mitigation has been questioned and many REDD+ projects have been built on previous initiatives of forest protection, re-/afforestation, and community forestry, now relabeled as REDD+. Some would even claim: “REDD+ is dead”. Others are more optimistic and believe that the mechanism will improve its performance in the future, when climate change will become more pressing and carbon markets will perform better under such conditions. Additionally, various technical issues related to the efficiency and effectiveness of REDD+ might be solved by then.
Whatever be the case, there is an urgent need for assessing the performance of REDD+, while taking into account its various levels (from the global to the local) and its various dimensions (e.g. results based payments, MRV, co-benefits, community engagement). The notion of REDD+ performance also raises various questions, for example: Does the Paris Agreement and its current elaborations offer suitable guidelines and incentives for (cost) effective REDD+ initiatives? To what extent do international carbon markets perform well, and how could they be reformed as to better serve the needs of developing countries and its REDD+ stakeholders? And what about the many REDD+ projects on the ground? How do they work? To what extent do these live up to the promises of forest conservation, local development, inclusiveness of stakeholders, etc.? What syntheses and trade-offs can be distinguished? And how do the performances at various levels (global-national-local, and vice versa) relate, strengthen or weaken each other?
This Special Issue invites submissions assessing the performance of REDD+. ‘Performance’ can however mean various things: 1. Economic (cost)effectiveness of policy measures; 2. Multi-criteria achievements (efficacy, legality, legitimacy, democracy, etc.); 3. Output, outcome and/or impact of policies; 4. The way success and failure are staged or ‘performed’ by stakeholders; and 5. The ‘performativity’ of REDD+, or how its conception enable or constrain certain ways of managing forests on the ground, and (dis)incentivizes certain kinds of behavior. We welcome all such contributions, which will probably imply a Special Issue with various approaches, methods and theories. But we aim for such a variety, to assess REDD+ from various angles, for example single and multi-case studies, large-N inventories and ethnographies, impact assessment and evaluation studies, both qualitative and quantitative, as well as various theories from economics, political sciences, public administration, development studies, anthropology and geography. Also, multi-level analyses (global-local, or local-global) are particularly invited.
Prof. Dr. Bas Arts
Dr. Verina Ingram
Prof. Dr. Maria Brockhaus
Manuscript Submission Information
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. All papers will be peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short 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 thoroughly refereed through a single-blind 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 monthly 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 1800 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.
- Forest carbon stocks
- Deforestation / forest degradation
- Forest management / policy
- Climate change
- Climate change policy / mitigation
- Multi-level governance
- Project planning / implementation
- Impact assessment
- Performance analysis
- Evaluation studies
- Multi-level analysis