Adapting Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) to Local Contexts in REDD+: Lessons from Three Experiments in Vietnam

Thuy Pham,Tan Nguyen,Tien Nguyen,Ole Mertz,Moira Moeliono,Hien Vu,Jean-Christophe Castella,Guillaume Lestrelin,Dung Le

doi:10.3390/f6072405

Abstract

Free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC) is a means of ensuring that people’s rights are respected when reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation, and enhancing forest carbon stocks (REDD+) projects are established in developing countries. This paper examines how FPIC has been applied in three projects in Vietnam and highlights two key lessons learnt. First, as human rights and democracy are seen as politically sensitive issues in Vietnam, FPIC is likely to be more accepted by the government if it is built upon the national legal framework on citizen rights. Applying FPIC in this context can ensure that both government and citizen’s interests are achieved within the permitted political space. Second, FPIC activities should be seen as a learning process and designed based on local needs and preferences, with accountability of facilitators, two-way and multiple communication strategies, flexibility, and collective action in mind.

Highlights

Human rights and rights-based approaches have increasingly influenced international climate change debates and decision-making [1,2] and have been applied to the still negotiated international mechanism aiming at reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation and enhancing forest carbon stocks (REDD+) in developing countries
Vietnam is one of the first countries to pilot FPIC, as part of the UN-REDD Program [25], but FPIC is neither mentioned in the National REDD+ Program
Though representatives of the central government asserted that citizens can exert their right to reject REDD+, the government can override their decision and impose a program if it is seen as crucial for national development

Summary

Introduction

Human rights and rights-based approaches have increasingly influenced international climate change debates and decision-making [1,2] and have been applied to the still negotiated international mechanism aiming at reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation and enhancing forest carbon stocks (REDD+) in developing countries. It is thereby assumed that providing secure rights and control over the resources to local communities might lead to more effective implementation [3]. Some see REDD+ as another attempt to take away control over resources and could lead to recentralization of forest governance, exclusion of local people from decision-making, and displacement from forest land held by indigenous groups who are denied access to traditional use of natural resources [4,5,6]. Article 15 of the Convention on Biological Diversity states: “Access to genetic resources shall be subject to prior informed consent of the Contracting Party providing such resources, unless otherwise determined by that Party”. No relocation shall take place without the free, prior, and informed consent of the indigenous peoples concerned and after agreement on just and fair compensation and, where possible, with the option of return

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion