Abstract
Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries (REDD+) requires harmonizing different policy sectors and interests that have impacts on forests. However, these elements have not been well-operationalized in environmental policy-making processes of most developing countries. Drawing on five cases—Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao PDR, Papua New Guinea, and Vietnam, this article aims to determine whether emerging governance arrangements help REDD+ development by delivering participatory mechanisms for policy coordination. Building upon literature on environmental governance and stakeholder participation, the article examines national governance structures for REDD+ and identifies who participates where, and what decision-making powers they have. Despite structural differences between the countries, our analysis illustrates that REDD+ potentially encourages a new form of environmental governance promoting a cross-sectoral approach and stakeholder participation. Cohesiveness of the structures within a broader governance system is key to defining the capacity of REDD+ governance. The result also poses a question as to the inclusiveness of the state actors involved in order to tackle the different pressure on forests. Considering structural inequalities, the analysis further suggests a need of policy support for those who are affected by REDD+ to ensure that their voices could be heard in decision-making processes.
Highlights
Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries (REDD+)is an emerging policy instrument in climate negotiations, and represents a next-generation mechanism in encouraging the sustainable management of forests as a means of reducing greenhouse gas emissions.In the Asia-Pacific region, 20 countries have been engaged in preparing to be ready for implementingREDD+ at country-level, with support from multilateral initiatives, Forests 2016, 7, 195; doi:10.3390/f7090195 www.mdpi.com/journal/forestsForests 2016, 7, 195 including the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF) of the World Bank and/or UN-REDDProgramme [1,2]
In the cases of Cambodia, Lao PDR, Papua New Guinea, and Vietnam, this body takes the form of a committee or council, chaired by the ministerial or secretary general level, and involving representatives from other relevant ministries
In the case of Indonesia, along with the co-operation with the Norway Government (Letter of Intent: LOI), overall responsibility for developing REDD+ Readiness was mandated under the authority of the President’s Delivery Unit for Monitoring, Development and Oversight (UKP4)
Summary
Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries (REDD+)is an emerging policy instrument in climate negotiations, and represents a next-generation mechanism in encouraging the sustainable management of forests as a means of reducing greenhouse gas emissions.In the Asia-Pacific region, 20 countries have been engaged in preparing to be ready for implementingREDD+ at country-level (referred to REDD+ Readiness), with support from multilateral initiatives, Forests 2016, 7, 195; doi:10.3390/f7090195 www.mdpi.com/journal/forestsForests 2016, 7, 195 including the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF) of the World Bank and/or UN-REDDProgramme [1,2]. To move REDD+ Readiness forward, these countries have designed and developed institutional frameworks for REDD+, whose objectives include ensuring overall responsibilities and coordination for REDD+, developing strategy, action plan and programs, channeling international funding, and monitoring and reporting REDD+ actions [3]. REDD+ can be considered as a new form of environmental governance that frames problems of forest management and land use in the context of climate change and sets up new rules and norms aligning specific stakeholders and vision, while marginalizing others [4,6] This notion of governance poses important concerns about the practice of institutional arrangements for REDD+ at country-level: What do they look like, who participates where, and what decision-making powers they have (or do not have) within the frameworks?
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
