figshare
Browse
tcpo_a_1507897_sm2467.docx (28.65 kB)

What drives policy change for REDD+? A qualitative comparative analysis of the interplay between institutional and policy arena factors

Download (28.65 kB)
Version 2 2018-09-07, 12:17
Version 1 2018-08-11, 16:05
journal contribution
posted on 2018-09-07, 12:17 authored by Kaisa Korhonen-Kurki, Maria Brockhaus, Jenniver Sehring, Monica Di Gregorio, Samuel Assembe-Mvondo, Andrea Babon, Melaku Bekele, Vanessa Benn, Maria Fernanda Gebara, Hermann W. Kambire, Felicien Kengoum, Cynthia Maharani, Mary Menton, Moira Moeliono, Robert Ochieng, Naya Sharma Paudel, Thuy Thu Pham, Guy Patrice Dkamela, Almeida Sitoe

Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD+) has emerged as a promising climate change mitigation mechanism in developing countries. In order to identify the enabling conditions for achieving progress in the implementation of an effective, efficient and equitable REDD+, this paper examines national policy settings in a comparative analysis across 13 countries with a focus on both institutional context and the actual setting of the policy arena. The evaluation of REDD+ revealed that countries across Africa, Asia and Latin America are showing some progress, but some face backlashes in realizing the necessary transformational change to tackle deforestation and forest degradation. A Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) undertaken as part of the research project showed two enabling institutional configurations facilitating progress: (1) the presence of already initiated policy change; and (2) scarcity of forest resources combined with an absence of any effective forestry framework and policies. When these were analysed alongside policy arena conditions, the paper finds that the presence of powerful transformational coalitions combined with strong ownership and leadership, and performance-based funding, can both work as a strong incentive for achieving REDD+ goals.

Key policy insights

The positive push of already existing policy change, or the negative stress of resource scarcity together with lack of effective policies, represents institutional conditions that can support REDD+ progress.

Progress also requires the presence of powerful transformational coalitions and strong ownership and leadership. In the absence of these internal drivers, performance-based funding can work as a strong incentive.

When comparing three assessments (2012, 2014, 2016) of REDD+ enabling conditions, some progress in establishing processes of change can be observed over time; however, the overall fluctuation in progress of most countries reveals the difficulty in changing the deforestation trajectory away from business as usual.

The positive push of already existing policy change, or the negative stress of resource scarcity together with lack of effective policies, represents institutional conditions that can support REDD+ progress.

Progress also requires the presence of powerful transformational coalitions and strong ownership and leadership. In the absence of these internal drivers, performance-based funding can work as a strong incentive.

When comparing three assessments (2012, 2014, 2016) of REDD+ enabling conditions, some progress in establishing processes of change can be observed over time; however, the overall fluctuation in progress of most countries reveals the difficulty in changing the deforestation trajectory away from business as usual.

Funding

Funding was provided by the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation; the Australian Agency for International Development; the European Comission (EC); the International Climate Initiative (IKI) of the German Federal Ministry for the Environment; and the United Kingdom Department for International Development.

History

Usage metrics

    Climate Policy

    Licence

    Exports

    RefWorks
    BibTeX
    Ref. manager
    Endnote
    DataCite
    NLM
    DC