REDD+ as an international cooperation strategy under the global climate change regime

Abstract

Under the global climate negotiations, a REDDþ (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation, conservation of forest carbon stocks; sustainable management of forests, and enhancement of forest carbon stocks) regime is established by multi-stakeholders such as transnational organizations, states, and non-governmental organizations (NGOs). However, several developed countries have strategically exerted their leadership in forming and implementing a REDDþ regime in the international community. This paper attempts to investigate national REDDþ strategies of Norway, Germany, Australia, the US, and Japan which have contributed to forming a global REDDþ regime. REDDþ strategies and policies of the five countries were analyzed using three categories: pledge, type of support, and approach. These five countries have commonalities in that they pledged their commitment to establishing a REDDþ architecture through nonbinding agreements such as the Copenhagen Accord and the REDDþ Partnership. Furthermore, they have been providing developing countries with financial and technical assistance through multilateral and bilateral schemes using their own international initiatives on climate and forest. Nevertheless, they have different approaches and scoping for REDDþ. The results from this study indicate that developed countries contribute to building a global regime on REDDþ with different strategies based on their interests and perspectives. These can be elucidated as leadership in forming the REDDþ regime. Analysis on activities to support REDDþ as international cooperation strategies by developed countries will help the dynamics of a global regime of REDDþ to be understood.

Experimentalist governance in climate finance: the case of REDD+ in Brazil

“…Previous studies provided important guidelines for the architecture of the emerging international REDD+ regime. Examples are the works of Corbera, Estrada, and Brown (2010), Corbera and Schroeder (2011), Gupta (2012) Park, Choi, and Youn (2013), Phelps, Webb, and Agrawal (2010), and Somorin et al (2012). Most of these studies have a political economics approach.…”

Governing REDD+: a state of the art review

“…Previous studies provided important guidelines for the architecture of the emerging international REDD+ regime. Examples are the works of Corbera, Estrada, and Brown (2010), Corbera and Schroeder (2011), Gupta (2012), Hajek, Ventresca, Scriven, and Castro (2011), Kanowski, McDermott, and Cashore (2011), Karsenty (2008), Levin, McDermott, and Cashore (2008), Park, Choi, and Youn (2013), Phelps, Webb, and Agrawal (2010), and Somorin et al (2012). Most of these studies have a political economics approach.…”

Forest income and inequality in Kampong Thom province, Cambodia: Gini decomposition analysis

“…Yet these issues remain unresolved. For example, Schmitt et al (2009); Park et al (2013); Keenan et al (2015) and FAO (2016) asserted that there was a 3% net decrease in global forest area between 1990 and 2015, from 4128 M ha to 3999 M ha. In addition, FAO (2018, p.xi) reported that forest cover decreased from 31.6% to 30.6% of global land area between 1990 and 2015, while UN (2015) estimated that at least 5.1 million hectares of forest had been lost by 2010.…”

“…Consequently, significant global resolutions have called for attention to climate change to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation and manage forests sustainably. Examples include; 1) UNFCCC (UN 1992;Park et al 2013); 2) the adoption of the Paris Agreement (UN 2015a;Bretschger et al 2018;Nieto et al 2018 Under SDG15, the State Parties agreed to protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss (UN 2015c). This requires them to implement policies and national plans of action, build capacity and arrange their national institutions accordingly.…”