Using REDD+ Policy to Facilitate Climate Adaptation at the Local Level: Synergies and Challenges in Vietnam

Abstract

Attention has recently been paid to how REDD+ mitigation policies are integrated into other sectoral policies, particularly those dealing with climate adaptation at the national level. But there is less understanding of how subnational policy and local projects are able to incorporate attention to adaptation; therefore, we use a case study in Vietnam to discuss how REDD+ projects and policies address both concerns of mitigation and adaptation together at subnational levels. Through stakeholder interviews, focus groups, and household surveys in three provinces of Vietnam with REDD+ activities, our research sought to understand if REDD+ policies and projects on the ground acknowledge that climate change is likely to impact forests and forest users; if this knowledge is built into REDD+ policy and activities; how households in forested areas subject to REDD+ policy are vulnerable to climate change; and how REDD+ activities can help or hinder needed adaptations. Our findings indicate that there continues to be a lack of coordination between mitigation and adaptation policies in Vietnam, particularly with regard to REDD+. Policies for forest-based climate mitigation at the national and subnational level, as well as site-based projects, have paid little attention to the adaptation needs of local communities, many of whom are already suffering from noticeable weather changes in their localities, and there is insufficient discussion of how REDD+ activities could facilitate increased resilience. While there were some implicit and coincidental adaptation benefits of some REDD+ activities, most studied projects and policies did not explicitly target their activities to focus on adaptation or resilience, and in at least one case, negative livelihood impacts that have increased household vulnerability to climate change were documented. Key barriers to integration were identified, such as sectoral specialization; a lack of attention in REDD+ projects to livelihoods; and inadequate support for ecosystem-based adaptation.

Forest Management Approaches for Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation: a Comparison Between Germany and Japan

“…Critics of climate projects in the forestry sector argue that reforestation practices underlining carbon sequestration overlook the improved adaptive capacity (B. Locatelli et al, 2015;McElwee et al, 2016). It is true that the targets of each project are different; however, adaptation-focused approaches have advantages that enable them to maintain forest resources and enhance ecosystem services.…”

Bối cảnh cho REDD+ tại Việt Nam: Nguyên nhân, đối tượng và thể chế [Tái bản lần 2]

“…Một vài dự án thí điểm REDD+ được xem xét trong nghiên cứu này đã không nhìn nhận rõ ràng việc biến đổi khí hậu có thể tác động đến sinh kế hộ gia đình, và vai trò của những các đối tượng dễ bị tổn thương có thể ảnh hưởng đến sự tham gia REDD+ (McElwee et. al 2016).…”

“…Trong một số dự án thử nghiệm REDD+ tại Kon Tum, việc các hoạt động sinh kế bị hạn chế bởi REDD+ đã tạo ra các hậu quả tiêu cực, đặc biệt là đối với các hộ gia đình có thu nhập thấp. Các hoạt động gây ảnh hưởng bao gồm việc cấm canh tác nương rẫy và khai thác lâm sản ngoài gỗ, thiếu các kế hoạch tạo sinh kế thay thế, và trì hoãn việc tìm kiếm các nguồn tài chính cácbon (McElwee et. al 2016).…”

REDD+ policy design and policy learning: The emergence of an integrated landscape approach in Vietnam

“…Vietnam was the first country to develop a national REDD+ Action Plan, and it has been highlighted for its progress in capacity building, benefit distribution, and MRV (Hoang et al, 2013;Minang et al, 2014;Ochieng et al, 2016). However, there have been challenges for policy integration, questions about REDD+'s viability and effectiveness, and setbacks and delays for implementation (Ankersen et al, 2015;McElwee, 2017;Pham et al, 2014). The United Nations REDD+ (UN-REDD) and the World Bank's Forest Carbon Partnership Facility have also taken different approaches to REDD+ policy design at subnational levels of governance, which provides an opportunity to investigate and compare different REDD+ design and implementation approaches (FCPF, 2014;UN-REDD, 2015a).…”