Alternative models for carbon payments to communities under REDD+: A comparison using the Polis model of actor inducements

Environmental Science and Policy

Volumn 14, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 140-151

  Skutsch, Margaret ^a,b   Vickers, Ben ^c   Georgiadou, Yola ^d   McCall, Michael ^a,d  

^a INSTITUTO DE MATEMÁTICAS   (Mexico)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TWENTE   (Netherlands)

^c The Centre for People and Forests (RECOFTC)   (Thailand)

^d UNIVERSITY OF TWENTE   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Carbon credits; Community Forest Management; Payments for Environmental Services; Policy inducements; REDD+

Indexed keywords

CARBON;

ARTICLE; CARBON SEQUESTRATION; DEFORESTATION; EXHAUST GAS; FOREST MANAGEMENT; POLICY; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

EID: 79952622192     PISSN: 14629011     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.envsci.2010.12.005     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Realising REDD+; National Strategy and Policy Options 2009, CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia. A. Angelsen (Ed.).
2. Basnet-Parasai R. Will poor Nepalese communities be able to access REDD+ carbon credits? A legal analysis. Community Forest Monitoring for the Carbon Market: Opportunities Under REDD 2011, Earthscan, London. M. Skutsch (Ed.).
3. Benneker C., McCall M. REDD Strategies: A Case Study From Mexico 2009, EFTRN Newsletter 50: Forests and Climate Change: Adaptation and Mitigation.
4. Blom B., Sunderland T., Mudiyarso D. Getting REDD to work locally: lessons learned from integrated conservation and development projects. Environmental Science and Policy 2010, 13:164-172.
5. Chhatre A., Agrawal A. Trade-offs and synergies between carbon storage and livelihood benefits from forest commons. PNAS 2009, 106(4):17667-17670.
6. DeLeon P. Advice and Consent: The Development of the Policy Sciences 1989, The Russell Sage Foundation, New York.
7. DfID, 2010. Department for International Development: Terms of Reference: UK REDD+ scoping study. London. http://www.dfid.gov.uk/Documents/procurement/trms-of-ref-sco-stdy-redd-port.pdf.
8. Dryzek J.S. Policy sciences of democracy. Polity 1989, 22 (Fall):97-118.
9. Engel S., Pagiola S., Wunder S. Designing payments for environmental services in theory and practice: an overview of the issues. Ecological Economics 2008, 65(4):663-674.
10. Fischer F., Forester J. The Argumentative Turn in Policy Analysis and Planning 1993, Duke University Press, pp. 327.
11. Grieg-Gran M., Poras I., Moreno M.L. The Social Impacts of Payments for Environmental Services in Costa Rica: A Quantitative Field Survey and Analysis of the Virilla Watershed 2003, IIED, London.
12. Hajer M., Wagenaar H. Deliberative Policy Analysis 2003, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
13. Karky, B., 2008. The economics of reducing emissions in community managed forests in Nepal Himalaya. PhD thesis. University of Twente, The Netherlands.
14. Karky B., Skutsch M. The cost of carbon abatement through community forest management in Nepal Himalaya. Ecological Economics 2010, 69(3):666-672.
15. Lee E., Mahanty S. Payments for Environmental Services and Poverty Reduction: Risks and Opportunities 2009, RECOFTC, Bangkok.
16. Miranda M., Poras I., Moreno M. The Social Impacts of Payment for Environmental Services in Costa Rica 2003, IIED: Markets for Environmental Services Series no. 1, London.
17. Muñoz-Piña C., Guevera A., Torres J.M., Braña J. Paying for the hydrological services of Mexico's forests: analysis, negotiations and results. Ecological Economics 2008, 65:725-734.
18. Muradian R., Corbera E., Pascual U., Kosoy N., May P.H. Reconciling theory and practice: an alternative conceptual framework for understanding payments for environmental services. Ecological Economics 2010, 69(6):1202-1208.
19. Pagiola S. Payments for environmental services in Costa Rica. Ecological Economics 2008, 65:712-724.
20. Parker C., Mitchell A., Trivedi M., madras M. The Little REDD+ Book 2009, Global Canopy Programme, Oxford, U.K.
21. Peters-Guarin, G., McCall, M., 2010. Community carbon forestry (CCF) for REDD: Using Cybertracker for mapping and visualization of community forest management in the context of REDD. K:TGAL project. http://www.communitycarbonforestry.org/.
22. RECOFTC REDD+2010: Moving Forward for People and Forests 2010, RECOFTC, Bangkok.
23. Sanchez A., Pfaff A., Robalino J., Boomhower J. Costa Rica's payment for environmental services program: intention, implementation, and impact. Conservation Biology 2007, 21(5):1165-1173.
24. Santilli M., Moutinho P., Schwartzman S., Nepstad D., Curran L., Nobre C. Tropical deforestation and the Kyoto Protocol; an editorial essay. Climatic Change 2005, 71(3):267-276.
25. Satz J. Economic Impacts of Community Forestry in Siraha, Saptari and Udayapur Districts of Nepal: Balancing Costs and Benefits 2004, GTZ/GOPA-AGEG.
26. SBSTA, 2009. FCCC/SBSTA/2009/L.9 10 June 2009, SBSTA, 13th session, Bonn, 1-10 June 2009, Agenda item 5. Reducing emissions from deforestation in developing countries: approaches to stimulate action.
27. Community Forest Monitoring for the Carbon Market: Opportunities Under REDD 2011, Earthscan, London. M. Skutsch (Ed.).
28. Skutsch M., Zahabu E., Karky B., Danielsen F. The costs and reliability of forest carbon monitoring by communities. Community Forest Monitoring for the Carbon Market: Opportunities Under REDD. 2011, Earthscan, London, (Chapter 6). M. Skutsch (Ed.).
29. Sommerville M.M., Jones J.P.G., Milner-Gulland E.J. A revised conceptual framework for payments for environmental services. Ecology and Society 2009, 14(2):34. [online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol14/iss2/art34/.
30. Stone D. Policy Paradox: The Art of Political Decision Making 2002, Norton and Company, New York/London, (First edition 1988). Revised edition.
31. UN-REDD, 2010. 'Design of a REDD-compliant benefit distribution system for Vietnam'.
32. UNFCCC, 2009a. Ad-Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action (AWG LCA), Draft conclusions proposed by the Chair -/CP.15. Policy approaches and positive incentives on issues relating to reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries; and the role of conservation, sustainable management of forests and enhancement of forest carbon stocks in developing countries. http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2009/awglca8/eng/l07a06.pdf.
33. UNFCCC, 2009b. Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA), Draft decision -/CP.15, Methodological guidance for activities relating to reducing emissions from deforestation and the role of conservation, sustainable management of forest and enhancement of forest carbon stocks in developing countries. http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2009/sbsta/eng/l19a01.pdf.
34. UNFCCC, 2009c. Decision -/15, Copenhagen Accord, President's Draft. http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2009/cop15/eng/l07.pdf.
35. Van Laake, P., Skutsch, M., McCall, M., 2009. Data collection at local/national level. Chapter 3.4 in GOFC-GOLD: Reducing GHG Emissions From Deforestation and Degradation in Developing Countries: A Sourcebook of Methods and Procedures for Monitoring, Measuring and Reporting. Report version COP15. Alberta, Canada.
36. Verplanke, J., Zahabu, E., 2009. A field guide for assessing and monitoring reduced forest degradation and carbon sequestration by local communities. K:TGAL project. pp. 93. http://www.communitycarbonforestry.org/.
37. Wertz-Kanounnikov S., Angelsen A. Global and national REDD+ architecture: linking institutions and actions. Realising REDD+; National Strategy and Policy Options 2009, CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia. A. Angelsen (Ed.).
38. Wunder S. Payment for Environmental Services: Some Nuts and Bolts. Occasional Paper 42 2005, CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia, pp. 24.
39. Zahabu, E., 2008. Sinks and sources, a strategy to involve local communities in Tanzania in global climate policy. PhD thesis. University of Twente, The Netherlands.
40. Deliberative Ecological Economics 2008, Oxford University Press. C. Zografos, R.B. Howarth (Eds.).