Advanced

Are REDD+ community forest projects following the principles for collective action, as proposed by Ostrom?

Saeed, Abdul Razak; McDermott, Constance and Boyd, Emily LU (2017) In International Journal of the Commons 11(1). p.572-596
Abstract

Forested countries in the global south that have agreed to engage in REDD+, a policy mechanism for addressing climate change, are receiving support to improve laws, policies, systems and structures. As a mechanism initiated at the global level and seeking to use forests to address a global commons crisis (atmospheric carbon concentration), understanding how REDD+ translates into implementation at the local level is essential. Therefore, using a systematic review approach, we examined 15 studies of REDD+ in the context of public and/or community managed forests, drawn from a comprehensive application of inclusion criteria to identify relevant published peer-reviewed empirical research. The common property resources literature was used to... (More)

Forested countries in the global south that have agreed to engage in REDD+, a policy mechanism for addressing climate change, are receiving support to improve laws, policies, systems and structures. As a mechanism initiated at the global level and seeking to use forests to address a global commons crisis (atmospheric carbon concentration), understanding how REDD+ translates into implementation at the local level is essential. Therefore, using a systematic review approach, we examined 15 studies of REDD+ in the context of public and/or community managed forests, drawn from a comprehensive application of inclusion criteria to identify relevant published peer-reviewed empirical research. The common property resources literature was used to highlight the role of local institutions in REDD+ and to distil how REDD+ community forest projects conform to Ostrom’s collective action principles. The review revealed limited sharing of information and decision-making authority with communities; a general absence of FPIC; and a lack of defined benefit sharing and conflict resolution arrangements in many of the REDD+ projects.

(Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
keywords
Climate change, Collective action, Forest, Local communities, REDD+, Systematic review
in
International Journal of the Commons
volume
11
issue
1
pages
25 pages
external identifiers
  • scopus:85017594455
  • wos:000400043600020
ISSN
1875-0281
DOI
10.18352/ijc.700
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
0b24f541-ad11-40d1-b5a4-1ee742548e35
date added to LUP
2017-05-10 08:30:27
date last changed
2017-09-18 11:35:29
@article{0b24f541-ad11-40d1-b5a4-1ee742548e35,
  abstract     = {<p>Forested countries in the global south that have agreed to engage in REDD+, a policy mechanism for addressing climate change, are receiving support to improve laws, policies, systems and structures. As a mechanism initiated at the global level and seeking to use forests to address a global commons crisis (atmospheric carbon concentration), understanding how REDD+ translates into implementation at the local level is essential. Therefore, using a systematic review approach, we examined 15 studies of REDD+ in the context of public and/or community managed forests, drawn from a comprehensive application of inclusion criteria to identify relevant published peer-reviewed empirical research. The common property resources literature was used to highlight the role of local institutions in REDD+ and to distil how REDD+ community forest projects conform to Ostrom’s collective action principles. The review revealed limited sharing of information and decision-making authority with communities; a general absence of FPIC; and a lack of defined benefit sharing and conflict resolution arrangements in many of the REDD+ projects.</p>},
  author       = {Saeed, Abdul Razak and McDermott, Constance and Boyd, Emily},
  issn         = {1875-0281},
  keyword      = {Climate change,Collective action,Forest,Local communities,REDD+,Systematic review},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {1},
  pages        = {572--596},
  series       = {International Journal of the Commons},
  title        = {Are REDD+ community forest projects following the principles for collective action, as proposed by Ostrom?},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.18352/ijc.700},
  volume       = {11},
  year         = {2017},
}