An Assessment Framework for Benefit Sharing Mechanisms to Reduce Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation within a Forest Policy Mix

Abstract

Policy instruments for implementing the Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation and the enhancement of forest carbon stocks (REDD+) mechanism operate within an orchestra of policy mixes that affect the forest and other land sectors. How will policymakers choose between the myriad of options for distributing REDD+ benefits, and be able to evaluate its potential effectiveness, efficiency and equity (3Es)? This is a pressing issue given the results‐based aspect of REDD+. We present here a three‐element assessment framework for evaluating the outcomes and performance of REDD+ benefit sharing mechanisms, using the criteria of effectiveness, efficiency and equity: (1) the structures (objective and policies) of a REDD+ benefit sharing mechanism; (2) the broader institutional and policy contexts underlying forest governance; (3) outcomes of REDD+ including emission reductions, ecosystem service provision and poverty alleviation. A strength of the assessment framework is its flexible design to incorporate indicators relevant to different contexts; this helps to generate a shared working understanding of what is to be evaluated in the different REDD+ benefit sharing mechanisms (BSMs) across complex socio‐political contexts. In applying the framework to case studies, the assessment highlights trade‐offs among the 3Es, and the need to better manage access to information, monitoring and evaluation, consideration of local perceptions of equity and inclusive decisionmaking processes. The framework does not aim to simplify complexity, but rather serves to identify actionable ways forward towards a more efficient, effective and equitable implementation and re‐evaluation of REDD+ BSMs as part of reflexive policymaking. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment

Policy Mixes: Aligning instruments for biodiversity conservation and ecosystem service provision

“…Three of the six papers in this special issue are based on case studies developed in the POLICYMIX project (Barton et al ., ; Davenport et al ., ; Droste et al ., ). The three papers from outside the project demonstrate complementary perspectives on policy mix analysis (Karsenty et al ., ; Rayner et al ., ; Wong et al ., ). Notably, while there are common concepts across all papers in this special issue, each study provides a unique framework and perspective on policy mix analysis.…”

“…The criteria used for comparison of these ICDP projects can also be compared with the ‘3E’ assessment criteria for REDD+ benefit sharing discussed by Wong et al . (). Davenport et al .…”

“…This is similar to evaluating governance process efficiency (Vatn et al ., ), while Wong et al . () use an interpretation of outcome efficiency as policy objectives achieved at least cost. Davenport and colleagues also show how complicated it is to carry out counterfactual impact analysis of ICDPs, because identification of individual instruments and directions of causality is not possible.…”

“…The policy ‘objectives’ and ‘mechanisms’ of Rayner and colleagues work at a similar intermediate level of abstraction to that of Wong et al . (), while on‐the‐ground ‘settings’ and ‘calibrations’ are at a similar level of abstraction to policy instrument rules in use in the work of Barton et al . ().…”

Local perpectives on drivers of deforestation and degradation and effectiveness of financial incentive mechanisms in Bach Ma National Park

“…While many studies have analyzed the first two factors, few studies to date have adopted a psychological approach to understanding local motivational values to conservation in PAs, particularly in Vietnam. Furthermore, while most conservation programs and financial incentives mechanism, including PES, focus on effectiveness and efficiency (Kerr et al 2017), few studies have considered social dimensions and how local perceptions of equity influence PES payment distribution (Pham et al 2014;Loft et al 2017;Wong et al 2017). …”