REDD+ policy networks in Brazil: Constraints and opportunities for successful policy making

Ecology and Society

Volumn 19, Issue 3, 2014, Pages

  Gebara, Maria Fernanda ^a,b,c   Fatorelli, Leandra ^d   May, Peter ^a,b   Zhang, Shaozeng ^e  

^a FEDERAL RURAL UNIVERSITY OF RIO DE JANEIRO   (Brazil)

^b Center for International Forestry Research   (Brazil)

^c LONDON SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS   (United Kingdom)

^d UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS   (United Kingdom)

^e UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Actors; Brazil; Networks; Policy making; REDD+

Indexed keywords

ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY; GOVERNANCE APPROACH; POLARIZATION; POLICY IMPLEMENTATION; POLICY MAKING; STAKEHOLDER;

BRAZIL;

EID: 84911450531     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17083087     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5751/ES-06744-190353     Document Type: Article

References (68)

1. Agrawal, A., D. G. Brown, G. Rao, R. Riolo, D. T. Robinson and M. Bommarito II. 2012. Interactions between organizations and networks in common-pool resource governance. Environmental Science & Policy 25:138-146. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. envsci.2012.08.004
2. Angelsen, A., M. Brockhaus, M. Kanninen, E. Sills, W. Sunderlin, and S. Wertz-Kanounnikoff, editors. 2009. Realising REDD+: national strategy and policy options. CIFOR, Borgor, Indonesia.
3. Assunção, J., C. Gandour, R. Rocha, and R. Rocha. 2013. Does credit affect deforestation? Evidence from a rural credit policy in the Brazilian Amazon. Technical Report, Climate Policy Initiative, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. [online] URL: http://climatepolicyinitiative. org/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Does-Credit-Affect-Deforestation- Evidence-from-a-Rural-Credit-Policy-in-the-Brazilian-Amazon- Technical-Paper-English.pdf
4. Berkes, F. 2006. From community-based resource management to complex systems: the scale issue and marine commons. Ecology and Society 11(1): 45. [online] URL: http:/www.ecologyandsociety. org/vol11/iss1/art45/
5. Besussi, E. 2006. Policy networks: conceptual developments and their European applications. Working Paper Series Paper 102. Centre for advanced spatial analysis, University College London, London, UK.
6. Bodin, Ö., and B. Crona. 2009. The role of social networks in natural resource governance: what relational patterns make a difference? Global Environmental Change 19:366-374. http://dx. doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2009.05.002
7. Bodin, Ö., B. Crona, and H. Ernstson. 2006. Social networks in natural resource management: What is there to learn from a structural perspective? Ecology and Society 11(2): r2. [online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss2/resp2/
8. Bodin, Ö., and C. Prell, editors. 2011. Social networks and natural resource management: uncovering the social fabric of environmental governance. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511894985
9. Bonfante, T. M., M. Voivodic, and L. Meneses Filho. 2010. Desenvolvendo Salvaguardas Socioambientais de REDD+: um guia para processos de construção coletiva. Imaflora, Piracicaba, SP, Brazil. 40 p.
10. Borgatti, S. P., M. G. Everett, and L. C. Freeman. 2002. UCINET for Windows: software for social network analysis. Analytic Technologies, Harvard, Massachusetts, USA. [online] URL: https://sites.google.com/site/ucinetsoftware/home
11. Börzel, T. A. 1998. Organizing Babylon: on the different conceptions of policy networks. Public Administration 76 (2):253-273. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9299.00100
12. Börzel, T. A., and K. Heard-Lauréote. 2009. Networks in EU multi-level governance: concepts and contributions. Journal of Public Policy 29(2):135-151. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/ S0143814X09001044
13. Brockhaus, M., and A. Angelsen. 2012. Seeing REDD+ through 4Is. A political economy framework. Pages 15-30 in A. Angelsen, M. Brockhaus, W. Sunderlin, and L. Verchot, editors. Analysing REDD+: challenges and choices. Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor, Indonesia.
14. Brockhaus, M., and M. Di Gregorio. 2012. A brief overview: component 1 on national REDD+ policies and processes. CIFOR Infobrief 13. Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor, Indonesia.
15. Brockhaus, M., M. Di Gregorio, and S. Mardiah. 2013. Governing the design of national REDD+: an analysis of the power of agency. Forest Policy and Economics. In press. http://dx. doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2013.07.003
16. Brondizio, E. S., E. Ostrom, and O. R. Young. 2009. Connectivity and the governance of multilevel social-ecological systems: the role of social capital. Annual Review of Environment and Resources 34:253-278. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.environ.020708.100707
17. Burt, R. S. 2005. Brokerage and closure: an introduction to social capital. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
18. Carlsson, L. 2000. Policy networks as collective action. Policy Studies Jornal 28(3):502-520. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.2000. tb02045.x
19. Cash, D. W., W. N. Adger, F. Berkes, P. Garden, L. Lebel, P. Olsson, L. Pritchard, and O. Young. 2006. Scale and cross-scale dynamics: governance and information in a multilevel world. Ecology and Society 11(2): 8. [online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety. org/vol11/iss2/art8/
20. Costenbader, J. 2010. REDD+ benefit sharing: a comparative assessment of three national policy approaches. International Union for Conservation of Nature, Gland, Switzerland.
21. Crona, B., H. Ernstson, C. Prell, M. Reed, and K. Hubacek. 2011. Combining social network approaches with social theories to improve understanding of natural resource governance. Pages 44-72 in Ö. Bodin and C. Prell, editors. Social networks and natural resource management: uncovering the social fabric of environmental governance. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511894985.004
22. Cronkleton, P., D. B. Bray, and G. Medina. 2011. Community forest management and the emergence of multi-scale governance institutions: lessons for REDD+ development from Mexico, Brazil and Bolivia. Forests 2(2):451-473. http://dx.doi. org/10.3390/f2020451
23. Cumming, G. S., Ö. Bodin, H. Ernston, and T. Elmqvist. 2010. Network analysis in conservation biogeography: challenges and opportunities. Diversity and Distributions 16:414-425. http://dx. doi.org/10.1111/j.1472-4642.2010.00651.x
24. Dassen, A. 2010. Networks: structure and action: steering in and steering by policy networks. Thesis. Twente University, Enschede, Netherlands. http://dx.doi.org/10.3990/1.9789036529624
25. Di Gregorio, M., M. Brockhaus, T. Cronin, and E. Muharrom. 2012. Politics and power in national REDD+ policy processes. Pages 69-90 in A. Angelsen, M. Brockhaus, W. Sunderlin, and L. Verchot, editors. Analysing REDD+: challenges and choices. Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor, Indonesia.
26. Diani, M. 2003. "Leaders" or brokers? Positions and influence in social movement networks. Pages 105-122 in M. Diani, and D. McAdam, editors. Social movements and networks: relational approaches to collective action. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
27. Dietz, T., E. Ostrom, and P. C. Stern. 2003. The struggle to govern the commons. Science 302(5652):1907-1912. http://dx.doi. org/10.1126/science.1091015
28. Eliasch, J. 2008. Climate change: financing global forests: the Eliasch review. Office of Climate Change, London, UK. [online] URL: http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/ other/9780108507632/9780108507632.pdf
29. Ernstson, H. 2011. Transformative collective action: a network approach to transformative change in ecosystem-based management. Pages 255-287 in Ö. Bodin and C. Prell, editors. Social networks and natural resource management: uncovering the social fabric of environmental governance. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511894985.012
30. Fawcett, P., and C. Daugbjerg. 2012. Explaining governance outcomes: epistemology, network governance and policy network analysis. Political Studies Review 10(2):195-207. http://dx.doi. org/10.1111/j.1478-9302.2012.00257.x
31. Fischer, M., A. Fischer, and P. Sciarini. 2009. Power and conflict in the Swiss political elite: an aggregation of existing network analyses. Swiss Political Science Review 15(1):31-62. http://dx.doi. org/10.1002/j.1662-6370.2009.tb00122.x
32. Freeman, L. C. 1979. Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification. Social Networks 1(3):215-239. http://dx.doi. org/10.1016/0378-8733(78)90021-7
33. Gebara, M. F. 2011. REDD+ institutions: a preliminary analysis. Pages 161-176 in C. C. Oliveira and R. S. Rocha Sampaio, editors. A economia do verde no contexto do desenvolvimento sustentável: a governança dos atores públicos e privados. Fundação Getulio Vargas (FGV) Direito Rio, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
34. Gebara, M. F. 2013. Importance of local participation in achieving equity in benefit-sharing mechanisms for REDD+: a case study from the Juma Sustainable Development Reserve. International Journal of the Commons 7(2). [online] URL: http:// www.thecommonsjournal.org/index.php/ijc/article/view/301/328
35. Gebara, M. F., P. May, R. S. Rocha Sampaio, and A. Thuault. 2012. REDD+ initiatives in Brazil: how are global climate accords reflected on the ground? Pages 25-42 in J. Similä and E. Primmer, editors. Legal analysis of the relationship between WTO law, European state aid and nature conservation law, and economic instruments for biodiversity protection. POLICYMIX Report, Issue 7/2012. [online] URL: http://policymix.nina.no/Portals/ policymix/Documents/POLICYMIX%20Report%207_2012.pdf
36. Gould, R. V., and R. M. Fernandez. 1989. Structures of mediation: a formal approach to brokerage in transactions networks. Sociological Methodology 19:89-126. http://dx.doi. org/10.2307/270949
37. Government of Brazil. 2013. Estratégia Nacional de REDD+ do Brasil. Versão Preliminar. Comitê Interministerial de Mudança do Clima (CIM), Grupo Executivo sobre Mudanças Climáticas (GEx) and Grupo de Trabalho Interministerial sobre REDD+ (GT REDD+). Brasília, DF, Brazil.
38. Griffiths, T. 2008. Seeing "REDD"? Forests, climate change mitigation and the rights of indigenous peoples and local communities. Forest Peoples Programme, Moreton-in-Marsh, UK.
39. Hanneman, R. A. M., and M. Riddle. 2005. Introduction to social network methods. University of California, Riverside, California, USA. [online] URL: http://faculty.ucr.edu/~hanneman/nettext/
40. Hargrave, J., and K. Kis-Katos. 2013. Economic causes of deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon: a panel data analysis for the 2000s. Environmental Resource Economics 54:471-494. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10640-012-9610-2
41. Instituto de Pesquisa Ambiental da Amazonia (IPAM). 2008. Declaração de Manaus. IPAM, Brasilia, Brazil. [online] URL: http://www.ipam.org.br/biblioteca/livro/Declaracao-de-Manaus/92
42. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2007. Climate change 2007: synthesis report summary for policymakers. Fourth assessment report. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
43. Janssen, M. A., Ö. Bodin, J. M. Anderies, T. Elmqvist, H. Ernstson, R. R. J. McAllister, P. Olsson, and P. Ryan. 2006. Toward a network perspective of the study of resilience in socialecological systems. Ecology and Society 11(1): 15. [online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss1/art15/
44. Knoke, D., and S. Yang. 2008. Social network analysis. Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences Series 154. 2nd edition. Sage, Thousand Oaks, California, USA.
45. Korhonen-Kurki, K., M. Brockhaus, A. Duchelle, S. Atmadja, and T. T. Pham. 2012. Multiple levels and multiple challenges for REDD+. Pages 91-110 in A. Angelsen, M. Brockhaus, W. Sunderlin and L. Verchot, editors. Analysing REDD+: challenges and choices. Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor, Indonesia.
46. Kovacevic, M. 2011. Durban talks both good and bad for REDD+, says expert. Forests News: a Blog by the Center for International Forestry Research, 14 December. [online] URL: http://blog.cifor.org/6507/durban-talks-both-good-and-bad-for-reddsays- expert/#.UbWGpvZgbpA
47. Kriesi, H., S. Adam, and M. Jochum. 2006. Comparative analysis of policy networks in Western Europe. Journal of European Public Policy 13(3):341-361. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13501760500528803
48. Luttrell, C., L. Loft, M. F. Gebara, D. Kweka, M. Brockhaus, A. Angelsen, and W. D. Sunderlin. 2013. Who should benefit from REDD+? Rationales and realities. Ecology and Society 18(4): 52. http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-05834-180452
49. Marsh, D., and R. A. W. Rhodes, editors. 1992. Policy networks in British government. Clarendon Press, Oxford, UK. http://dx. doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198278528.001.0001
50. May, P. H., B. Calixto, and M. F. Gebara. 2011b. REDD+ politics in the media: a case study from Brazil. Working paper 55. Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor, Indonesia.
51. May, P. H., B. Millikan, and M. F. Gebara. 2011a. The context of REDD+ in Brazil: drivers, agents and institutions. Occasional paper 55, revised edition. Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor, Indonesia.
52. Ministério do Meio Ambiente (MMA). 2012. REDD+: Relatório de Painel Técnico do MMA sobre financiamento, benefícios e cobenefícios. MMA, Brasília, DF, Brazil. [online] URL: http:// www.conservation.org.br/arquivos/redd+_relatorio_de_painel_tecnico_ do_mma_sobre_financiamento_beneficios_e_cobeneficios. pdf
53. Newig, J., D. Günther, and C. Pahl-Wostl. 2010. Synapses in the network: learning in governance networks in the context of environmental management. Ecology and Society 15(4): 24. [online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss4/ art24/
54. Newman, L., and A. Dale. 2005. The role of agency in sustainable local community development. Local Environment 10(5):477-486. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13549830500203121
55. Ostrom, E. 2009. A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social-ecological systems. Science 325 (5939):419-422. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1172133
56. Prell, C. 2011. Some basic structural characteristics of networks. Pages 29-43 in Ö. Bodin and C. Prell, editors. Social networks and natural resource management: uncovering the social fabric of environmental governance. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511894985.003
57. Prell, C., K. Hubacek, and M. Reed. 2009. Stakeholder analysis and social network analysis in natural resource management. Society and Natural Resources 22(6):501-518. http://dx.doi. org/10.1080/08941920802199202
58. Reed, M. S., A. Graves, N. Dandy, H. Posthumus, K. Hubacek, J. Morris, C. Prell, C. H. Quinn, and L. C. Stringer. 2009. Who's in and why? A typology of stakeholder analysis methods for natural resource management. Journal of Environmental Management 90(5):1933-1949. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. jenvman.2009.01.001
59. Rhodes, R. A. W. 1997. Understanding governance: policy networks, governance, reflexivity and accountability. Open University Press, Buckingham, UK.
60. Sabatier, P. A., and H. C. Jenkens-Smith. 1993. Policy change and learning: an advocacy coalition approach. Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado, USA.
61. Sandström, A. 2011. Social networks, joint image building, and adaptability: the case of local fishery management. Pages 288-321 in Ö. Bodin and C. Prell, editors. Social networks and natural resource management: uncovering the social fabric of environmental governance. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511894985.013
62. Santilli, M., P. Moutinho, S. Schwartzman, D. Nepstad, L. Curran and C. Nobre. 2005. Tropical deforestation and the Kyoto Protocol. Climatic Change 71(3):267-276 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/ s10584-005-8074-6
63. Scott, J. 2000. Social network analysis: a handbook. Sage, London, UK.
64. Stern, N. 2007. The economics of climate change: the Stern review. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. http://dx.doi. org/10.1017/CBO9780511817434
65. Thorelli, H. B. 1986. Networks: between markets and hierarchies. Strategic Management Journal 7(1):37-51. http://dx.doi. org/10.1002/smj.4250070105
66. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). 2007. Decision-/CP.13 Bali Action Plan. UNFCCC, Bali, Indonesia. [online] URL: http://unfccc.int/files/meetings/ cop_13/application/pdf/cp_bali_action.pdf
67. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). 2010. Outcome of the work of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action under the Convention. Cancun Agreements, FCCC/CP/2010/7/Add. 1. Decision 1/CP. 16. UNFCCC, Cancun, Mexico. [online] URL: https://unfccc.int/ files/meetings/cop_16/application/pdf/cop16_lca.pdf
68. Wasserman, S., and K. Faust. 1994. Social network analysis: methods and applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815478