Forests and carbon sequestration have become fundamental themes in climate change mitigation. The idea of Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD+) has generated significant interest in forest governance from United Nations (UN) climate strategies over the past decade. REDD+ was initially hailed as a smart and cost-effective way to mitigate climate change. As it is rolling out, ambiguities and controversies are increasingly surfacing to the stakeholders at different levels. Examining the forest governance of Nepal in detail, this research examines how relationships between national and local forest actors have changed, and how REDD+ discourses have evolved among them at the interface between global interests in carbon commodification on one hand, and local realities of community forestry on the other hand. To better understand these competing positions, the study uses a post-structural political ecology perspective with elements of discourse analysis. Using data from interviews with policy actors and members of three local community forest user groups, focus group discussions, policy event observations, and document reviews, this paper highlights how global forest carbon commodification has been affecting community forestry governance. It also illustrates different storylines that actors employ to influence policy discourse and REDD+ debates, indicating a considerable range of problem definitions and policy solutions of climate change among the actors. The analysis highlights the connection between power relationships and the evolution of discourses surrounding REDD+, and how an external discourse can reinforce or challenge local governance and the centralization of forest authority. As such, the research also offers a new application of discursive storylines to climate change discourse analysis across national and local scales. The findings emphasize the importance of a more open and transparent dialogue across Nepal's forest governance and management levels to ensure actual benefits for healthy forests, strong communities, and effective climate change mitigation. Nepal's findings also suggest highly relevant lessons to other developing countries with significant community forest governance, and a strong planned focus on REDD+.

Nepal is currently undergoing a Reducing Emission from Deforestation and Forest Degradation, sustainable management of forest, and conservation and enhancement of carbon (REDD+) readiness process. The Government of Nepal has announced a high level political commitment, willingness and preparedness to attract diverse interests in policy deliberation for its REDD+ process. This paper examines Nepal’s REDD+ policy deliberation process from a political ecology perspective, focusing on expressions of discursive power and representation within Nepal’s ongoing multi-stakeholder REDD+ preparation. The analysis is based on interviews, policy document reviews and observations of public consultations to solicit comments for REDD+ strategy during the year 2013-2014. The analysis found that Nepal’s institutional REDD+ planning structure is highly dominated by techno-bureaucratic top-down practices representing government interests and international donors’ requirements, while sub-national and non-governmental stakeholders often find themselves to be merely used to legitimize the policy process rather than to actively shape it. A considerable share of policy preparations is left to the outsourced experts, and the multi-stakeholder consultation meetings have proven to be ineffective to bring the weak actors’ perspectives that actually participate in those meetings. Both the ‘geographical space’ and ‘political space’ offered in the consultations are not favourable for the local actors, but are controlled by the dominant actors. Overall, our analysis highlights important challenges and an urgent need to improve design and practice of the consultation process in order to ensure a sound multi-stakeholder process so as to meet the demands of the local forest realities as well as those of the international REDD+ requirements.Journal of Forest and Livelihood 13 (1) May, 2015, Page :30-43

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract