Key points Local governments, indigenous organizations, producer groups and government agriculture offices are noticeably absent from broad regional REDD+ discussions about benefit sharing.The legitimacy of project-level benefit-sharing arrangements may be compromised if existing locally recognized institutions and actors are not integrated into both the design and implementation of benefit-sharing schemes.Non-monetary benefits are currently more important than direct cash payments in existing benefit-sharing arrangements in Peru, especially because of the absence or delay of carbon payments.
Who makes land use decisions, how are decisions made, and who influences whom, how and why? This working paper is part of a series based on research studying multilevel decision-making institutions and processes. The series is aimed at providing insight into why efforts to keep forests standing, such as initiatives like Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+), are still so far from altering development trajectories. It underlines the importance of understanding the politics of multilevel governance in forest, land and climate policy and practice, and identifies potential ways forward.
This book explores the theoretical issues, empirical evidence, and normative debates elicited by the concept of multi-level governance (MLG). The concept is a useful descriptor of decision-making processes that involve the simultaneous mobilization of public authorities at different jurisdictional levels as well as that of non-governmental organizations and social movements. It has become increasingly relevant with the weakening of territorial state power and effectiveness and the increase in international interdependencies which serve to undermine conventional governmental processes. This book moves towards the construction of a theory of multi-level governance by defining the analytical contours of this concept, identifying the processes that can uniquely be denoted by it, and discussing the normative issues that are raised by its diffusion, particularly in the European Union. It is divided into three parts, each meeting a specific challenge - theoretical, empirical, normative. It focuses on three analytical dimensions: multi-level governance as political mobilization (politics), as authoritative decision-making (policy), and as state restructuring (polity). Three policy areas are investigated in vindicating the usefulness of MLG as a theoretical and empirical concept - cohesion, environment, higher education - with particular reference to two member-states: the UK and Germany. Finally, both the input and output legitimacy of multi-level governance decisions and arrangements and its contribution to EU democracy are discussed. As a loosely-coupled policy-making arrangement, MLG is sufficiently structured to secure coordination among public and private actors at different jurisdictional levels, yet sufficiently flexible to avoid "joint decision traps". This balance is obtained at the cost of increasingly blurred boundaries between public and private actors and a change in the established hierarchies between territorial jurisdictions.
Key messages for the ASEAN Social Forestry Network REDD+ and social forestry programs have both benefits and costs. Understanding who is bearing the costs of these policies and programs, and ensuring fair compensation, will be important to achieving effective and equitable outcomes. Equity depends on the context and perceptions of the affected stakeholders. Including considerations of equity in the design of REDD+ and social forestry policies can positively influence the policies’ outcomes and sustainability. REDD+ and social forestry requires an inclusive process. Purposeful multistakeholder participation throughout the decision-making process can increase the credibility and legitimacy of a program and enhance its chances of successful outcomes
Who makes land use decisions, how are decisions made, and who influences whom, how and why? This working paper is part of a series based on research studying multilevel decision-making institutions and processes. The series is aimed at providing insight into why efforts to keep forests standing, such as initiatives like Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+), are still so far from altering development trajectories. It underlines the importance of understanding the politics of multilevel governance in forest, land and climate policy and practice, and identifies potential ways forward.
This Framing Literature Review for In-depth Field Research draws on the knowledge produced from 30+ years of experience in participatory processes. It informs the Center for International Forestry Research’s (CIFOR) research of multi-stakeholder forums (M
Key points In the absence of robust national or subnational policies for benefit sharing, land-use change initiatives in Indonesia have developed their own approaches to distributing benefits. At the local level, support and capacity building are needed to strengthen intermediary institutions in order to improve governance and increase legitimacy when deciding how to share benefits.Nonmonetary benefits such as land tenure, capacity building, infrastructure and access to natural resources have been especially important. However, in some cases there are nonmonetary burdens associated with intended benefits.The legitimacy of benefit-sharing arrangements is determined more by the actors involved than the type of land-use change associated with them. Conservation initiatives, REDD+ projects and oil palm initiatives all exhibited both high and low levels of legitimacy in their benefit-sharing arrangements.The legitimacy of benefit-sharing arrangements can be compromised by the lack of broad consultation with local actors including customary authorities, lack of community control over access to land snd limited livelihoods options for communities.
This edited collection assesses governance in forestry programmes and projects, including REDD+ governance. It examines political representation, participation and decentralisation in forest governance, providing insight as to how forest governance arrangements can be responsive to the socio-economic interests of local people and communities who live adjacent to and depend on forests. Global Forest Governance and Climate Change argues that inclusive complementary representation of local communities is required for strong participatory processes and democratic decentralisation of forest governance. Responsiveness to local people’s socio-economic interests in forestry initiatives require paying attention to not just the hosting of participatory meetings and activities, but also to the full cast of appointed, self-authorized, and elected representative agents that stand, speak, and act for local people. This book will be of interest to students and academics across the fields of climate change governance, forestry, development studies, and political economy. It will also be a useful resource for policy makers and practitioners responsible for forestry and climate change initiatives.
Since the days of Montesquieu and Jefferson, political decentralization has been seen as a force for better government and economic performance. It is thought to bring government 'closer to the people', nurture civic virtue, protect liberty, exploit local information, stimulate policy innovation, and alleviate ethnic tensions. Inspired by such arguments, and generously funded by the major development agencies, countries across the globe have been racing to devolve power to local governments. This book re-examines the arguments that underlie the modern faith in decentralization. Using logical analysis and formal modeling, and appealing to numerous examples, it shows that most are based on vague intuitions or partial views that do not withstand scrutiny. A review of empirical studies of decentralization finds these as inconclusive and mutually contradictory as the theories they set out to test.
