The experience of FLEGT Voluntary Partnership Agreements offer several lessons on how to design benefit sharing mechanisms under REDD+ so that they build credibility and trust among the potential recipients of REDD+ benefits. This paper focuses on lessons for three specific design aspects of REDD+ benefit-sharing mechanisms: (i) the balance between state and non-state actors in the architecture of benefit-sharing mechanism institutions; (ii) the role of civil society organizations (CSOs) in monitoring; and (iii) the design of multistakeholder processes. The choice and arrangement of institutions and actors is crucial for credibility: independence can be enhanced or reduced by the architecture of check and balance mechanisms and the type of actors involved. Lessons from VPAs also highlight the trade-off between the cost efficiency and capacity building gains of using existing (often state) institutions and actors versus the potential increased effectiveness and independence that may be provided by new and/or non-state institutions and actors. The use of civil society monitors and multistakeholder processes can provide credibility through enhancing accountability and transparency as well as increasing commitment and confidence in the system. The impact of civil society monitoring can be enhanced by formal recognition of its role, establishing complaints mechanisms and formalizing access to information. Multistakeholder processes can be strengthened by clarifying roles, responsibilities and decision-making mandates of the process; clarifying who should be included; accepting that such processes take time; and maintaining technical and financial support.

Key lessons While the constitutional rights (e.g. property rights) of indigenous peoples (IP) are strong in Brazil and may help to overcome their vulnerability, they are rarely enforceable and do not offer sufficient safeguards.Informed consultation and a structured free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) process that considers cultural issues are fundamental to ensuring acceptance and consent by IP.Local environmental funds can be a tool for increasing autonomy and decentralization while sharing benefits with IP and financing long-term and specific demands that can change over time.Safeguard strategies implemented by the Amazon Fund to avoid conflicts of interest may result in restrictions on the participation of IP, having implications related to the legitimacy of decision-making in the distribution of benefits.The absence of timely financial flows to meet IP needs may be a considerable risk since it can encourage environmentally damaging activities.Relying on the voluntary market may be risky for IP initiatives because of market instability and possible lack of funding.

This book is a printed edition of the Special Issue "REDD+ Crossroads Post Paris: Politics, Lessons and Interplays" that was published in Forests

It is now well accepted that deforestation is a key source of greenhouse gas emissions and of climate change, with forests representing major sinks for carbon. As a result, public and private initiatives for reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD) have been widely endorsed by policy-makers. A key issue is the feasibility of carbon trading or other incentives to encourage land-owners and indigenous people, particularly in developing tropical countries, to conserve forests, rather than to cut them down for agricultural or other development purposes. This book presents a major critique of the aims and policies of REDD as currently structured, particularly in terms of their social feasibility. It is shown how the claims to be able to reduce greenhouse gas emissions as well as enhance people's livelihoods and biodiversity conservation are unrealistic. There is a naive assumption that technical or economic fixes are sufficient for success. However, the social and governance aspects of REDD, and its enhanced version known as REDD+, are shown to be implausible. Instead to enhance REDD's prospects, the author provides a roadmap for developing a new social contract that puts people first.

Guyana is a small country with 87.5% of its area covered with forest (GFC 2018b) and lies in the center of the Guiana Shield, one of the four largest remaining standing tropical rainforests in the world. In 2006, Guyana took advantage of the recognition of the value of standing forest to mitigate climate change and became actively engaged in REDD+. Subsequently, in 2009, a Memorandum of Understanding was signed with Norway to support implementation of a Low Carbon Development Strategy (LCDS). This was a national plan to reorient Guyana’s economy and move towards more sustainable extractive industries and forest management. The bilateral agreement with Norway established a framework for performance-related finance of up to USD 250 million from 2010 to 2015 for implementation of the LCDS. Three main pillars of the LCDS, linked to its REDD+ agenda, included maintaining historically low deforestation, endorsing low carbon development and adapting to climate change (Bellfield et al. 2015).More recently, and building on the LCDS, a new Green State Development Strategy: Vision 2040 has been developed for Guyana as a “twenty-year, national development policy that reflects the guiding vision and principles of the ‘green agenda’. The central objective is development that provides a better quality of life for all Guyanese derived from the country’s natural wealth – its diversity of people and abundant natural resources (land, water, forests, mineral and aggregates, biodiversity)” (GoG 2019b, p. 1).Since 2009, CIFOR has conducted the Global Comparative Study (GCS) in 13 countries, with Guyana as the final addition. Among the GCS-REDD+ case studies, Guyana is one of the most advanced REDD+ countries, alongside Brazil (KorhonenKurki et al. 2019), and the Norway–Guyana bilateral agreement is the world’s second largest national-level REDD+ scheme (Bade 2013). Yet, Guyana’s economy still largely depends on extractive resources, with mining remaining the main driver of deforestation and forest degradation. The potential revenue anticipated from offshore oil extraction might change the country’s landscape and outlook, putting the permanence of REDD+ under scrutiny. The Guyana case study, therefore, presents many lessons on how to balance development paths without jeopardizing national forest resources.

Recognizing the invaluable role of forests in the fight against climate change, countries and the international community have established a framework known as Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation, and the role of conservation, sustainable forest management, and the enhancement of forest carbon stocks in developing countries (REDD+). This framework aims to encourage countries to reduce deforestation and degradation by offering financial rewards or results-based payments (RBPs) for verified emission reductions, at the same time promoting sustainable development. While the existence of various international RBPs and carbon market schemes valuing emission reductions (ERs) presents multiple opportunities for countries participating in REDD+, there is a critical need to clarify ERs rights and determine who benefits from REDD+ results. This study offers a comprehensive comparative analysis that focuses on the nature and allocation of ER rights, as well as the legal entitlements associated with REDD+ outcomes. To conduct this study, legislation from more than twenty countries across Africa, Asia and the Pacific, and Latin America was reviewed between November 2021 and June 2023.

Redefining Diversity and Dynamics of Natural Resources Management in Asia, Volumes 1-4 brings together scientific research and policy issues across various topographical area in Asia to provide a comprehensive overview of the issues facing the region. Sustainable Natural Resources Management in Dynamic Southeast Asia, Volume 1, pulls together regional experts in the field to look specifically at sustainability issues across the region, to see what has been implemented, what the impacts have been, and what other options are available. In the race to be a developed region, many Southeast Asian countries have foregone natural resources through haphazard use. As a result, the people are faced with numerous environmental challenges, particularly deforestation and forest degradation, biodiversity loss and ecosystem degradation, reduction in soil quality, and decreases in the quantity of available water. Community-based forest management is the involvement of local communities in the protection, conservation and management of public forests to prevent degradation through sustainable practices while still responding to the basic social and economic needs of local populations. When the people who depend on forest resources for their livelihoods are jointly responsible for managing and protecting them, they tend to do so in a more sustainable manner by focusing on the long-term benefits rather than the immediate short-term gains. However, when tenure rights are weak, unclear, or insecure, or offer limited benefits, people are incited in extracting more immediate benefits, resulting in suboptimal forest management and the reduction of carbon stocks. - Features case studies that cover issues such as rising levels of deforestation, forest degradation, regional food security, ecosystem degradation, biodiversity loss, conflicts over natural resource use, water management issues, and impacts on local communities - Includes contributions from local researchers who are dealing with these issues first hand, and on a daily basis - Includes a comparative review on REDD+ implementation in different communities - Focuses on sustainability issues across the region