Framing national REDD+ benefits, monitoring, governance and finance: A comparative analysis of seven countries. Vijge, M. J., Brockhaus, M., Di Gregorio, M., & Muharrom, E. Global Environmental Change, 39:57--68, July, 2016. ![Framing national REDD+ benefits, monitoring, governance and finance: A comparative analysis of seven countries [link]](https://bibbase.org/img/filetypes/link.svg "link")
Paper doi abstract bibtex This article analyzes how and with what possible consequences REDD+ is framed in the national policy arena in Cameroon, Indonesia, Nepal, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Tanzania, and Vietnam. It analyzes the most prominent views and storylines around key REDD+ design features among policy actors and in policy documents. We focus on storylines related to four questions, namely: (1) What should REDD+ achieve: carbon or also non-carbon objectives? (2) Who should monitor REDD+ outcomes: only technical experts or also local communities? (3) At what level should REDD+ be governed: at national or sub-national level? and (4) How should REDD+ be financed: through market- or fund-based sources? The vast majority of policy actors and policy documents frame REDD+ as a mechanism that should also realize non-carbon benefits, yet non-carbon monitoring receives very little attention. In all but one country, policy documents contain plans to involve local communities in the design and/or execution of measuring, reporting and verifying REDD+ outcomes. With regard to the level at which REDD+ should be governed, while most policy documents contain elements of a nested approach to accounting, almost all countries envision a long-term transition to national accounting and benefit distribution. We found strikingly little discussion among policy actors and in policy documents of how to finance REDD+ and acquire results-based payments. In the conclusion we reflect on possible consequences of the prominence of REDD+ storylines in the seven countries, and argue that carbonization and centralization of forest governance are possible outcomes given the limited attention to non-carbon monitoring and the envisioned centralized approaches to REDD+.
@article{vijge_framing_2016,
title = {Framing national {REDD}+ benefits, monitoring, governance and finance: {A} comparative analysis of seven countries},
volume = {39},
issn = {0959-3780},
shorttitle = {Framing national {REDD}+ benefits, monitoring, governance and finance},
url = {http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378016300383},
doi = {10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.04.002},
abstract = {This article analyzes how and with what possible consequences REDD+ is framed in the national policy arena in Cameroon, Indonesia, Nepal, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Tanzania, and Vietnam. It analyzes the most prominent views and storylines around key REDD+ design features among policy actors and in policy documents. We focus on storylines related to four questions, namely: (1) What should REDD+ achieve: carbon or also non-carbon objectives? (2) Who should monitor REDD+ outcomes: only technical experts or also local communities? (3) At what level should REDD+ be governed: at national or sub-national level? and (4) How should REDD+ be financed: through market- or fund-based sources? The vast majority of policy actors and policy documents frame REDD+ as a mechanism that should also realize non-carbon benefits, yet non-carbon monitoring receives very little attention. In all but one country, policy documents contain plans to involve local communities in the design and/or execution of measuring, reporting and verifying REDD+ outcomes. With regard to the level at which REDD+ should be governed, while most policy documents contain elements of a nested approach to accounting, almost all countries envision a long-term transition to national accounting and benefit distribution. We found strikingly little discussion among policy actors and in policy documents of how to finance REDD+ and acquire results-based payments. In the conclusion we reflect on possible consequences of the prominence of REDD+ storylines in the seven countries, and argue that carbonization and centralization of forest governance are possible outcomes given the limited attention to non-carbon monitoring and the envisioned centralized approaches to REDD+.},
urldate = {2016-05-09},
journal = {Global Environmental Change},
author = {Vijge, Marjanneke J. and Brockhaus, Maria and Di Gregorio, Monica and Muharrom, Efrian},
month = jul,
year = {2016},
keywords = {Centralization, Co-benefits, Comparative discourse analysis, Market-based approach, MRV, REDD+},
pages = {57--68},
file = {ScienceDirect Full Text PDF:files/54539/Vijge et al. - 2016 - Framing national REDD+ benefits, monitoring, gover.pdf:application/pdf;ScienceDirect Snapshot:files/54540/S0959378016300383.html:text/html}
}
Downloads: 0
{"_id":"vSA8nEWj4o5D2C4qT","bibbaseid":"vijge-brockhaus-digregorio-muharrom-framingnationalreddbenefitsmonitoringgovernanceandfinanceacomparativeanalysisofsevencountries-2016","downloads":0,"creationDate":"2016-09-09T06:27:35.768Z","title":"Framing national REDD+ benefits, monitoring, governance and finance: A comparative analysis of seven countries","author_short":["Vijge, M. J.","Brockhaus, M.","Di Gregorio, M.","Muharrom, E."],"year":2016,"bibtype":"article","biburl":"https://www.sfu.ca/~howlett/howlett16.bib","bibdata":{"bibtype":"article","type":"article","title":"Framing national REDD+ benefits, monitoring, governance and finance: A comparative analysis of seven countries","volume":"39","issn":"0959-3780","shorttitle":"Framing national REDD+ benefits, monitoring, governance and finance","url":"http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378016300383","doi":"10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.04.002","abstract":"This article analyzes how and with what possible consequences REDD+ is framed in the national policy arena in Cameroon, Indonesia, Nepal, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Tanzania, and Vietnam. It analyzes the most prominent views and storylines around key REDD+ design features among policy actors and in policy documents. We focus on storylines related to four questions, namely: (1) What should REDD+ achieve: carbon or also non-carbon objectives? (2) Who should monitor REDD+ outcomes: only technical experts or also local communities? (3) At what level should REDD+ be governed: at national or sub-national level? and (4) How should REDD+ be financed: through market- or fund-based sources? The vast majority of policy actors and policy documents frame REDD+ as a mechanism that should also realize non-carbon benefits, yet non-carbon monitoring receives very little attention. In all but one country, policy documents contain plans to involve local communities in the design and/or execution of measuring, reporting and verifying REDD+ outcomes. With regard to the level at which REDD+ should be governed, while most policy documents contain elements of a nested approach to accounting, almost all countries envision a long-term transition to national accounting and benefit distribution. We found strikingly little discussion among policy actors and in policy documents of how to finance REDD+ and acquire results-based payments. In the conclusion we reflect on possible consequences of the prominence of REDD+ storylines in the seven countries, and argue that carbonization and centralization of forest governance are possible outcomes given the limited attention to non-carbon monitoring and the envisioned centralized approaches to REDD+.","urldate":"2016-05-09","journal":"Global Environmental Change","author":[{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Vijge"],"firstnames":["Marjanneke","J."],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Brockhaus"],"firstnames":["Maria"],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Di","Gregorio"],"firstnames":["Monica"],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Muharrom"],"firstnames":["Efrian"],"suffixes":[]}],"month":"July","year":"2016","keywords":"Centralization, Co-benefits, Comparative discourse analysis, Market-based approach, MRV, REDD+","pages":"57--68","file":"ScienceDirect Full Text PDF:files/54539/Vijge et al. - 2016 - Framing national REDD+ benefits, monitoring, gover.pdf:application/pdf;ScienceDirect Snapshot:files/54540/S0959378016300383.html:text/html","bibtex":"@article{vijge_framing_2016,\n\ttitle = {Framing national {REDD}+ benefits, monitoring, governance and finance: {A} comparative analysis of seven countries},\n\tvolume = {39},\n\tissn = {0959-3780},\n\tshorttitle = {Framing national {REDD}+ benefits, monitoring, governance and finance},\n\turl = {http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378016300383},\n\tdoi = {10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.04.002},\n\tabstract = {This article analyzes how and with what possible consequences REDD+ is framed in the national policy arena in Cameroon, Indonesia, Nepal, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Tanzania, and Vietnam. It analyzes the most prominent views and storylines around key REDD+ design features among policy actors and in policy documents. We focus on storylines related to four questions, namely: (1) What should REDD+ achieve: carbon or also non-carbon objectives? (2) Who should monitor REDD+ outcomes: only technical experts or also local communities? (3) At what level should REDD+ be governed: at national or sub-national level? and (4) How should REDD+ be financed: through market- or fund-based sources? The vast majority of policy actors and policy documents frame REDD+ as a mechanism that should also realize non-carbon benefits, yet non-carbon monitoring receives very little attention. In all but one country, policy documents contain plans to involve local communities in the design and/or execution of measuring, reporting and verifying REDD+ outcomes. With regard to the level at which REDD+ should be governed, while most policy documents contain elements of a nested approach to accounting, almost all countries envision a long-term transition to national accounting and benefit distribution. We found strikingly little discussion among policy actors and in policy documents of how to finance REDD+ and acquire results-based payments. In the conclusion we reflect on possible consequences of the prominence of REDD+ storylines in the seven countries, and argue that carbonization and centralization of forest governance are possible outcomes given the limited attention to non-carbon monitoring and the envisioned centralized approaches to REDD+.},\n\turldate = {2016-05-09},\n\tjournal = {Global Environmental Change},\n\tauthor = {Vijge, Marjanneke J. and Brockhaus, Maria and Di Gregorio, Monica and Muharrom, Efrian},\n\tmonth = jul,\n\tyear = {2016},\n\tkeywords = {Centralization, Co-benefits, Comparative discourse analysis, Market-based approach, MRV, REDD+},\n\tpages = {57--68},\n\tfile = {ScienceDirect Full Text PDF:files/54539/Vijge et al. - 2016 - Framing national REDD+ benefits, monitoring, gover.pdf:application/pdf;ScienceDirect Snapshot:files/54540/S0959378016300383.html:text/html}\n}\n\n","author_short":["Vijge, M. J.","Brockhaus, M.","Di Gregorio, M.","Muharrom, E."],"key":"vijge_framing_2016","id":"vijge_framing_2016","bibbaseid":"vijge-brockhaus-digregorio-muharrom-framingnationalreddbenefitsmonitoringgovernanceandfinanceacomparativeanalysisofsevencountries-2016","role":"author","urls":{"Paper":"http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378016300383"},"keyword":["Centralization","Co-benefits","Comparative discourse analysis","Market-based approach","MRV","REDD+"],"downloads":0},"search_terms":["framing","national","redd","benefits","monitoring","governance","finance","comparative","analysis","seven","countries","vijge","brockhaus","di gregorio","muharrom"],"keywords":["centralization","co-benefits","comparative discourse analysis","market-based approach","mrv","redd+"],"authorIDs":[],"dataSources":["Bn7xRaKMY43f7hFwh"]}