In 2007, REDD+ emerged as the leading option for early climate change mitigation. In 2010, after the failure of negotiations at the Copenhagen COP, observers cited REDD+ projects and other subnational initiatives as examples of the polycentric governance (based on multiple independent actors operating at multiple levels) necessary to move climate change mitigation forward in the absence of a binding international agreement. This paper examines the ways subnational initiatives can and cannot play this role, based on the experiences and opinions of 23 REDD+ proponent organizations in six countries. These proponents have tested various approaches to climate change mitigation, demonstrating the value of a polycentric approach for promoting innovation and learning. However, from our sample, six initiatives have closed, four no longer label themselves as REDD+, only four are selling carbon credits, and less than half view conditional incentives (initially the core innovation of REDD+) as their most important intervention. While polycentric governance in REDD+ has benefits, it will not enable implementation of REDD+ as originally conceived unless accompanied by a binding international agreement.En 2007, la REDD+ est apparue comme la solution prépondérante en matière d'atténuation précoce du changement climatique. En 2010, après l'échec des négociations à la COP de Copenhague, les observateurs ont mis en avant les projets et les autres initiatives infranationales de REDD+ en tant qu'exemples de la gouvernance polycentrique (reposant sur plusieurs acteurs indépendants intervenant à des niveaux différents) nécessaire pour faire avancer l'atténuation du changement climatique en l'absence d'accord international contraignant. Le présent article examine les cas dans lesquels les initiatives infranationales peuvent effectivement jouer ce rôle et ceux dans lesquels elles ne le peuvent pas, à partir de l'analyse d'expériences et d'opinions collectées auprès de 23 organisations promotrices d'initiatives REDD+ dans six pays. L'étude des diverses approches de l'atténuation du changement climatique testées par ces promoteurs de la REDD+ met en évidence l'intérêt d'une approche polycentrique de la promotion de l'innovation et de l'apprentissage. Cependant, parmi les initiatives de l'échantillon étudié, six n'existent plus, quatre ne se considèrent plus comme relevant du mécanisme REDD+, quatre seulement commercialisent des crédits carbone, et moins de la moitié considèrent les incitations conditionnelles (l'innovation centrale de la REDD+ au départ) comme leur intervention la plus importante. Si la gouvernance polycentrique de la REDD+ comporte des avantages, elle ne permettra pas de mettre en oeuvre le mécanisme comme il avait été conçu à l'origine si elle n'est pas accompagnée d'un accord international contraignant.

Participatory Forest Management (PFM) and the more recent framework for Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) are two resource management strategies that were introduced in part for their cobenefits, including forest protection, employment opportunities, and added income for forest adjacent communities. In this paper we examine the early implementation of PFM in Tanzania's Kilwa District, led and promoted by the nongovernmental organisation Mpingo Conservation and Development Initiative (MCDI). This organisation has also recently received support to design a REDD+ project that could potentially realise additional financial benefits for local communities through the sale of carbon offsets in PFM-supported villages. We explore the ways in which MCDI has established a PFM scheme in four villages, how it has supported the emergence of more robust local governance structures, and what villagers perceive to have been the main outcomes and pitfalls of PFM to date. MCDI has managed to reduce many of the challenges that have characterised PFM schemes in other contexts, such as conflicts arising from forest governance restructuring, elite capture, and illegitimate benefit sharing, but has been less successful in addressing some aspects related to participation, such as involving village hamlets and women more effectively in decision making due to spatial configuration of landscapes and settlements and to existing cultural norms. These insights suggest that well-implemented PFM can provide a solid foundation for REDD+ implementation but that full realisation of REDD+'s equitable benefit-sharing principle, particularly at the intracommunity level, may take time and will be dependent upon prevailing local cultural norms

A project combining participatory forest management and REDD+ (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation) is underway in south-eastern Tanzania. It introduces early burning practices to reduce the number and (heat) intensity of wild and late-season fires, to develop robust carbon accounting methods. Our analysis considers the causes of forest fires, and local people's knowledge of the early burning process and its impacts on livelihoods, through the development of early burning activities as a potential source of carbon revenue. Some of the difficulties of implementation have been resolved over time (e.g. the premature introduction of carbon contracts), whereas others remain: there are inequalities in knowledge, awareness and participation in early burning and the broader REDD+ process at village level. A more structured approach to early burning, with well-publicized advance planning, that includes all community members and subvillages would make a significant difference. Further challenges exist in the form of both legal and illegal hunting, a cause of forest fires that could undermine the early burning process. We argue that the long-term commitment of project managers to gain detailed knowledge of social-ecological systems, forest governance and local politics is required to successfully develop this and other similar REDD+ projects.

No abstract