Governing agriculture-forest landscapes to achieve climate change mitigation

Agrawal, Arun; Wollenberg, Eva K.; Persha, Lauren

doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.10.001

Cited by 82 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 108 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Bressers and O'Toole (2005) argue that the interaction type depends on the actors, groups, or processes targeted by measures, on the one hand, and by interdependence between different domains of policy action, on the other. May et al (Agrawal et al, 2014). Combining different methods and adopting the categories established by May et al (2012), we analyse the practical elements that shape the social space in which landscape interventions are implemented in SFX.…”

Section: The Policyscape Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

“…We adopt an expanded version of this concept called "multifunctional landscapes" (Tress & Tress, 2001), considering not only ecological but also economic, cultural and historical contexts, and social dimensions. We define multifunctional landscapes as composed of patches of natural and human-influenced vegetation, constantly shaped by the social practices, preferences, and power relations that drive land-use changes (Agrawal, Wollengerg, & Persha, 2014;van Oosten & Hijweege, 2012;Wiersum, 2003). In other words, these landscapes are shaped by the different possible forms of landscape governance.…”

Section: Redd+ Policies and Measures At Landscape Levelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To avoid arbitrary and narrow definitions of what constitutes a LA, while still distinguishing it from landscape governance, we draw on literature (Agrawal et al, 2014;Reed et al, 2015;Sayer et al, 2013;van Oosten & Hijweege, 2012;Wiersum, 2003) to identify LA elements imperative for successful implementation. Recognising landscapes are impermanent and multifunctional spaces, these elements vary according to context but may include (a) heterogeneity; (b) collaborative governance and collective action (i.e., shared responsibility); (c) cross-sector linkages (i.e., coordination and communication); (d) local practices (i.e., cultural and power relations); and (e) supply and demand chains.…”

Section: Redd+ Policies and Measures At Landscape Levelmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Deconstructing the policyscape for reducing deforestation in the Eastern Amazon: Practical insights for a landscape approach

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In international debates on climate change mitigation and forests, there is increased recognition of the importance of a landscape approach to effectively address tropical deforestation. Such an approach, although increasingly promoted, remains only loosely defined and requires further development in order to effectively integrate different interventions at landscape level. In particular, it is important to understand the possible interactions between different landscape interventions at local level—where they are intended to have effect—and the challenges associated with them. Inspired by the complexity of policy mix analysis, this article seeks to shed light on these interactions by analysing how different policies and measures for reducing deforestation and degradation have played out in a jurisdiction with wide‐ranging actors and interventions aimed at shaping their behaviour. Focusing on smallholders, we examine the Sustainable Landscapes Pilot Programme in São Félix do Xingu, looking at how different policies interact—categorising interactions as “complementary,” “mutually reinforcing” (synergistic), “in conflict,” “interdependent,” and/or “redundant”—and explain how proponents of this pilot programme seek to integrate them. Most analysis is based on primary data collected through quantitative (i.e., random stratified sampling and surveys) and qualitative (i.e., observation and focus groups) methods. The São Félix do Xingu case shows that understanding effects of different policies and measures on people's behaviour requires a deeper look at local perceptions and reactions to such policies and measures, something most studies on the topic have overlooked. Ultimately, the heterogeneity and complexity of social practices that permeate landscapes must be recognised in order to integrate diverse measures to reduce deforestation.

show abstract

Section: The Policyscape Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Redd+ Policies and Measures At Landscape Levelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Redd+ Policies and Measures At Landscape Levelmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Deconstructing the policyscape for reducing deforestation in the Eastern Amazon: Practical insights for a landscape approach

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These interventions have motley records of success. A recent meta-analysis shows that variation in policy, socio-political, and market environments differentiates the impacts of a given intervention type across locales, even as tenure security and effective enforcement facilitate positive forest outcomes (Agrawal et al, 2014). Amid the tangle of causal elements, parsing out what changes in land cover result from a policy intervention or other factors is a formidable challenge.…”

Section: Forest Transitions and Incentive-based Forestationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Forest transitions in Chinese villages: Explaining community-level variation under the returning forest to farmland program

Zhang

Zinda

2017

Land Use Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

China's Returning Farmland to Forest Program (RFFP) aimed to transform rural landscapes and livelihoods by compensating households for planting trees on retired farmland. The program has been attributed a key role in an apparent forest transition. Studies uncover great local variation in its impacts, but the mechanisms behind them have received little attention. We examine such heterogeneity in 12 communities in northwest Yunnan, assessing the hypothesis that the RFFP catalyzed a state-led forest transition by evaluating the contributions of RFFP implementation and other processes to land cover change. Our dataset combines socioeconomic data from household surveys, focus groups, and intensive interviews with remote sensing data for a linked, cross-scale analysis. Results show no significant relationship between RFFP implementation and community-level vegetation cover change. Between 2000 and 2010, high-elevation communities had larger vegetation gains, while from 2010 to 2014, low-elevation communities had larger gains. Regression analyses and interview data show off-farm labor, tree crop planting, and changing energy sources influenced the rate of community-level vegetation change. This pattern, combining tree crop cultivation with labor outflows, may represent a distinct "policy plantation" pathway of forest gain. Meanwhile, new, high-elevation cash crops may be constraining forest expansion. This analysis suggests limited additionality for the RFFP in this region and highlights how heterogeneous, intersecting land use processes bring uneven forest transitions.

show abstract

“…(For some notable exceptions, see [15,39]. In a broader context, complementary studies of labor and agriculture in global governance, as well as GEG and biotechnology, see notably [40][41][42][43]. )…”

Section: Protectionism In a Neoliberal World?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Sociology in Global Environmental Governance? Neoliberalism, Protectionism and the Methyl Bromide Controversy in the Montreal Protocol

Gareau

2017

Environments

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sociological studies of global agriculture need to pay close attention to the protectionist aspects of neoliberalism at the global scale of environmental governance. With agri-food studies in the social sciences broadening interrogations of the impact of neoliberalism on agri-food systems and their alternatives, investigating global environmental governance (GEG) will help reveal its impacts on the global environment, global science/knowledge, and the potential emergence of ecologically sensible alternatives. It is argued here that as agri-food studies of neoliberalism sharpen the focus on these dimensions the widespread consequences of protectionism of US agri-industry in GEG will become better understood, and the solutions more readily identifiable. This paper illustrates how the delayed phase out of the toxic substance methyl bromide in the Montreal Protocol exemplifies the degree to which the US agri-industry may be protected at the global scale of environmental governance, thus prolonging the transition to ozone-friendly alternatives. Additionally, it is clear that protectionism has had a significant impact on the dissemination and interpretation of science/knowledge of methyl bromide and its alternatives. Revealing the role that protectionism plays more broadly in the agriculture/environmental governance interface, and its oftentimes negative impacts on science and potential alternatives, can shed light on how protectionism can be made to serve ends that are at odds with environmental protection.

show abstract

Governing agriculture-forest landscapes to achieve climate change mitigation

Cited by 82 publications

References 108 publications

Deconstructing the policyscape for reducing deforestation in the Eastern Amazon: Practical insights for a landscape approach

Deconstructing the policyscape for reducing deforestation in the Eastern Amazon: Practical insights for a landscape approach

Forest transitions in Chinese villages: Explaining community-level variation under the returning forest to farmland program

Sociology in Global Environmental Governance? Neoliberalism, Protectionism and the Methyl Bromide Controversy in the Montreal Protocol

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About