National REDD+ policy networks: From cooperation to conflict

Ecology and Society

Volumn 19, Issue 4, 2014, Pages

  Brockhaus, Maria ^a   Di Gregorio, Monica ^b  

^a CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL FORESTRY RESEARCH   (Indonesia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Comparative analysis; Conflict; Cooperation; Policy networks; Power; REDD+; Social network analysis

Indexed keywords

CARBON EMISSION; DECISION MAKING; DEFORESTATION; DEVELOPING WORLD; ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY; INTERNATIONAL COMPARISON; NATIONAL PLANNING; NETWORK ANALYSIS; POWER RELATIONS; SOCIAL NETWORK;

EID: 84924350146     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17083087     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5751/ES-06921-190414     Document Type: Article

References (96)

1. Alemagi, D., and R. A. Kozak. 2010. Illegal logging in Cameroon: causes and the path forward. Forest Policy and Economics 12 (8):554-561. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2010.07.008
2. Angelsen, A. 2013. REDD+ as performance-based aid: general lessons and bilateral agreements of Norway. World Institute for Development Economics Research (WIDER) Working Paper No. 2013/135. United Nations University-WIDER, Helsinki, Finland.
3. Angelsen, A., M. Brockhaus, W. D. Sunderlin, and L. V. Verchot. 2012. Introduction. Pages 1-12 in A. Angelsen, M. Brockhaus, W. Sunderlin, and L. V. Verchot, editors. Analysing REDD+: challenges and choices. Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor, Indonesia.
4. Angelsen, A., and D. McNeill. 2012. The evolution of REDD+. Pages 30-49 in A. Angelsen, M. Brockhaus, W. D. Sunderlin, and L. V. Verchot, editors. Analysing REDD+: challenges and choices. Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor, Indonesia.
5. Arts, B. 2004. Non-state actors in global governance: three faces of power. Max-Planck-Projektgruppe Recht der Gemeinschaftsguter, Bonn, Germany.
6. Babon, A., D. McIntyre, G. Y Gowae, C. Gallemore, R. Carmenta, M. Di Gregorio, and M. Brockhaus. 2014. Advocacy coalitions, REDD+, and forest governance in Papua New Guinea: how likely is transformational change? Ecology and Society 19(3): 16. http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-06486-190316
7. Barr, C. 2001. Banking on sustainability: structural adjustment and forestry reform in post-Suharto Indonesia. Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor, Indonesia.
8. Barr, C., A. Dermawan, H. Purnomo, and H. Komarudin. 2010. Financial governance and Indonesia’s Reforestation Fund during the Soeharto and post-Soeharto periods, 1989-2009: a political economic analysis of lessons for REDD+. Occasional Paper No. 52. Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor, Indonesia.
9. Berkes, F., and C. Folke, editors. 1998. Linking social and ecological systems. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
10. Biermann, F. 2010. Beyond the intergovernmental regime: recent trends in global carbon governance. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2(4):284-288. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2010.05.002
11. Bodin, O., and C. Prell. 2011. Social network analysis in natural resource governance: summary and outlook. Pages 347-373 in O. 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/CBO9780511894985.015
12. Borgatti, S. P., M. G. Everett, and L. C. Freeman. 2002. UCINET for Windows: software for social network analysis. Analytic Technologies, Harvard, Massachusetts, USA.
13. Breiger, R. L., S. A. Boorman, and P. Arabie. 1975. An algorithm for clustering relational data with applications to social network analysis and comparison with multidimensional scaling. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 12:328-383. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0022-2496(75)90028-0
14. Brock, K., R. McGee, and R. Ssewakiryanga. 2002. Poverty knowledge and policy processes: a case study of Ugandan national poverty reduction policy. Research report. Institute of Development Studies, Brighton, UK.
15. Brockhaus, M., and A. Angelsen. 2012. Seeing REDD+ through 4Is: a political economy framework. Pages 15-30 in A. Angelsen, M. Brockhaus, W. D. Sunderlin, and L. V. Verchot, editors. Analysing REDD+: challenges and choices. Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor, Indonesia.
16. Brockhaus, M., and M. Di Gregorio. 2012. A brief overview: component 1 on national REDD+ policies and processes. CIFOR Infobrief No. 13. Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor, Indonesia.
17. Brockhaus, M., K. Obidzinski, A. Dermawan, Y Laumonier, and Luttrell. 2012. An overview of forest and land allocation policies in Indonesia: is the current framework sufficient to meet the needs of REDD+? Forest Policy and Economics 18:30-37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2011.09.004
18. Brown, H. C. P., J. N. Nkem, D. J. Sonwa, and Y Bele. 2010. Institutional adaptive capacity and climate change response in the Congo Basin forests of Cameroon. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change 15(3):263-282. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11027-010-9216-3
19. Bulkeley, H., and P. Newell. 2010. Governing climate change. Routledge, London, UK.
20. Bumpus, A., and D. Liverman. 2011. Carbon colonialism? Offsets, greenhouse gas reductions, and sustainable development. Pages 203-224 in R. Peet, P. Robbins, and M. Watts, editors. Global political ecology. Routledge, London, UK.
21. Bushley, B. R. 2014. REDD+ policy making in Nepal: toward state-centric, polycentric, or market-oriented governance? Ecology and Society 19(3): 34. http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-06853-190334
22. Casson, A., and K. Obidzinski. 2002. From new order to regional autonomy: shifting dynamics of “illegal” logging in Kalimantan, Indonesia. World Development 30(12):2133-2151. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0305-750X(02)00125-0
23. Corbera, E., and H. Schroeder. 2011. Governing and implementing REDD+. Environmental Science & Policy 14 :89-99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2010.11.002
24. 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. D. Sunderlin, and L. V. Verchot, editors. Analysing REDD+: challenges and choices. Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor, Indonesia.
25. Di Gregorio, M., M. Brockhaus, T. Cronin, E. Muharrom, L. Santoso, S. Mardiah, and M. Budenbender. 2013. Equity and REDD+ in the media: a comparative analysis of policy discourses. Ecology and Society 18(2): 39. http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-05694-180239
26. Dkamela, G. P. 2010. The context of REDD+ in Cameroon: drivers, agents, and institutions. Occasional Paper No. 57. Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor, Indonesia.
27. Dkamela, G., M. Brockhaus, F. Kengoum Djiegni, J. Schure, and S. Assembe Mvondo. 2014. Lessons for REDD+ from Cameroon’s past forestry law reform: a political economy analysis. Ecology and Society 19(3): 30. http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-06839-190330
28. Doherty, E., and H. Schroeder. 2011. Forest tenure and multilevel governance in avoiding deforestation under REDD+. Global Environmental Politics 11(4):66-88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/GLEPa00084
29. Driscoll, R., Z. Kizilbash Agha, M. Cali, and D. W. Velde. 2007. Growth and trade in Africa’s second generation poverty reduction strategies. Overseas Development Institute, London, UK.
30. Environmental Investigation Agency. 2011. Crossroads: the illicit timber trade between Laos and Vietnam. Environmental Investigation Agency, London, UK.
31. Ernstson, H., S. Barthel, E. Andersson, and S. T. Borgstrom. 2010. Scale-crossing brokers and network governance of urban ecosystem services: the case of Stockholm. Ecology and Society 15(4): 28. [online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss4/art28/
32. Evers, A. 1990. Shifts in the welfare mix: introducing a new approach to the study of transformations in welfare and social policy. Pages 7-30 in A. Evers and H. Winterberg, editors. Shifts in the welfare mix: their impact on work, social services and welfare policies. Campus Verlag, Frankfurt, Germany.
33. 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
34. Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF). 2013. REDD readiness progress fact sheet: Indonesia. FCPF, Washington, D. , USA.
35. Forsyth, T. 2009. Multilevel, multiactor governance in REDD+: participation, integration and coordination. Page 113-122 in A. Angelsen, M. Brockhaus, M. Kanninen, E. Sills, W. D. Sunderlin, and S. Wertz-Kanounnikoff. Realising REDD+: national strategy and policy options. Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor, Indonesia.
36. Freeman, L. C. 1978-1979. Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification. Social Networks 1(3):215-239. http://dx. doi.org/10.1016/0378-8733(78)90021-7
37. Gallemore, C. T., R. Dini Prasti H, and M. Moeliono. 2014. Discursive barriers and cross-scale forest governance in Central Kalimantan, Indonesia. Ecology and Society 19(2): 18. http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-06418-190218
38. Gebara, M., L. Fatorelli, P. May, and S. Zhang. 2014. REDD+ policy networks in Brazil: constraints and opportunities for successful policy making. Ecology and Society 19(3): 53. http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-06744-190353
39. Giddens, A. 1984. The constitution of society: outline of the theory of structuration. Polity, Cambridge, UK.
40. Giddens, A. 2009. The politics of climate change. Polity, Cambridge, UK.
41. Government of Papua New Guinea (GovPNG). 1975. Constitution of the independent state of Papua New Guinea. GovPNG, Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea.
42. Griffiths, T. 2009. Seeing “REDD”: forests, climate change mitigation and the rights of indigenous peoples and local communities. Forest Peoples Programme, Moreton-in-Marsh, UK.
43. Grindle, M. S. 1996. Challenging the state: crisis and innovation in Latin America and Africa. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511521829
44. Guardian. 2011. Papua New Guinea in crisis as two claim to be prime minister. 14 December. [online] URL: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/dec/14/papua-new-guinea-prime-ministership
45. Heaney, M. T. 2014. Multiplex networks and interest group influence reputation: an exponential random graph model. Social Networks 36:66-81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet..2012.11.003
46. Indrarto, G. B., P. Murharjanti, J. Khatarina, I. Pulungan, F. Ivalerina, J. Rahman, M. N. Prana, I. A. P. Resosudarmo, and E. Muharrom. 2012. The context of REDD+ in Indonesia: drivers, agents and institutions. Working Paper No. 92. Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor, Indonesia.
47. Kanninen, M., D. Murdiyarso, F. Seymour, A. Angelsen, S. Wunder, and L. German, editors. 2007. Do trees grow on money? The implications of deforestation research for policies to promote REDD. Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor, Indonesia.
48. Katzenstein, M. F. 1998. Stepsisters: feminist movement activism in different institutional spaces. Pages 195-216 in D. S. Meyer and S. Tarrow, editors. The social movement society: contentious politics for a new century. Rowman and Littlefield, Lanham, Maryland, USA.
49. Kengoum, D. F. 2011. REDD+ politics in the media: a case study from Cameroon. Working Paper No. 51. Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor, Indonesia.
50. Kenis, P., and V. Schneider. 1991. Policy networks and policy analysis: scrutinizing a new analytical toolbox. Pages 25-59 in B. Marin and R. Mayntz, editors. Policy networks: empirical evidence and theoretical considerations. Westview, Boulder, Colorado, USA.
51. Knoke, D., F. U. Pappi, J. Broadbent, and Y Tsujinaka. 1996. Comparing policy networks: labor politics in the U.S., Germany, and Japan. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139174497
52. Korhonen-Kurki, K., J. Sehring, M. Brockhaus, and M. Di Gregorio. 2014. Enabling factors for establishing REDD+ in a context of weak governance: a qualitative comparative analysis. Climate Policy 14(2):167-186. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/146930-62.2014.852022
53. 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
54. Kriesi, H., and M. Jegen. 2001. The Swiss energy policy elite: the actor constellation of a policy domain in transition. European Journal of Political Research 39(2):251-287. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.00577
55. Labianca, G., and D. J. Brass. 2006. Exploring the social ledger: negative relationships and negative asymmetry in social networks in organizations. Academy of Management Review 31(3):596-614. http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2006.21318920
56. Larson, A. M., M. Brockhaus, W. D. Sunderlin, A. Duchelle, A. Babon, T. Dokken, T. T. Pham, I. A. P. Resosudarmo, G. Selaya Awono, and T.-B. Huynh. 2013. Land tenure and REDD+: the good, the bad and the ugly. Global Environmental Change 23 :678-689. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.02.014
57. Latour, B. 1986. The powers of association. Pages 264-280 in J. Law, editor. Power, action, belief: a new sociology of knowledge? Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, UK.
58. Lederer, M. 2011. From CDM to REDD+—what do we know for setting up effective and legitimate carbon governance? Ecological Economics 70(11):1900-1907. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.02.003
59. Luttrell, C. 2007. Ownership in relation to the design of verification systems. VERIFOR Briefing Paper. Overseas Development Institute, London, UK.
60. 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
61. Luttrell, C., I. A. P. Resosudarmo, E. Muharrom, M. Brockhaus, and F. Seymour. 2014. The political context of REDD + in Indonesia: constituencies for change. Environmental Science & Policy 35:67-75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2012.10.001
62. Marsh, D., and R. W. A. Rhodes. 1992. Policy networks in British government. Clarendon Press, Oxford, UK. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198278528.001.0001
63. May, P. H., B. Calixto, and M. F. Gebara. 2011a. REDD+politics in the media: a case study from Brazil. Working Paper No. 55. Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor, Indonesia.
64. May, P. H., B. Millikan, and M. F. Gebara. 2011b. The context of REDD+ in Brazil: drivers, agents, and institutions. Occasional Paper No. 55. Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor, Indonesia.
65. Meridian Institute. 2009. Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation: an options assessment report. Report prepared for the Government of Norway by A. Angelsen, S. Brown, C. Loisel, L. Peskett, C. Streck, and D. Zarin. Meridian Institute, Washington, D.C., USA. [online] URL: http://merid.org/content/projects/Govemment%20of/o20Norway%20REDD% 20Qptions%20Assessment%20Report.aspx
66. Moeliono, M., C. Gallemore, L. Santoso, M. Brockhaus, and M. Di Gregorio. 2014. Information networks and power: confronting the “wicked problem” of REDD+ policy in Indonesia. Ecology and Society 19(2): 9. http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-06300-190209
67. Moeliono, M., L. Santoso, and C. Gallemore. 2013. REDD+ policy networks in Indonesia. CIFOR Infobrief No. 63. Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor, Indonesia.
68. Murdiyarso, D., S. Dewi, D. Lawrence, and F. Seymour. 2011. Indonesia’s forest moratorium: a stepping stone to better forest governance? Working Paper No. 76. Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor, Indonesia.
69. Murdoch, J., and T. Marsden. 1995. The spatialization of politics: local and national actor-spaces in environmental conflict. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 20(3):368-380. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/622657
70. Newell, P. 2000. Climate for change: non-state actors and the global politics of the greenhouse. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511529436
71. Newig, J., D. Gunther, 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/
72. Okerere, C., and K. Dooley. 2010. Principles of justice in proposals and policy approaches to avoided deforestation: towards a post-Kyoto climate agreement. Global Environmental Change 20(1):82-95. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2009.08.004
73. Paudel, N. S., D. B. Khatri, D. R. Khanal, and R. Karki. 2011. The context of REDD+ in Nepal: drivers, agents, and institutions. Occasional Paper No. 81. Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor, Indonesia.
74. Peskett, L., and M. Brockhaus. 2009. When REDD+ goes national: a review of realities, opportunities and challenges. Pages 25-43 in A. Angelsen, M. Brockhaus, M. Kanninen, E. Sills, W. Sunderlin, and S. Wertz-Kanounnikoff, editors. Realising REDD+: national strategy and policy options. Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor, Indonesia.
75. Pham, T. T. 2011. REDD+politics in the media: a case study from Vietnam. Working Paper No. 53. Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor, Indonesia.
76. Pham, T. T., M. Brockhaus, G. Wong, N. D. Le, J. S. Tjajadi, L. Loft, C. Luttrell, and S. Assembe-Mvondo. 2013. Approaches to benefit sharing: a preliminary comparative analysis of 13 REDD+ countries. Working Paper No. 108. Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor, Indonesia.
77. Pham, T. T., M. Di Gregorio, R. Carmenta, M. Brockhaus, and N. Le. 2014. The REDD+ policy arena in Vietnam: participation of policy actors. Ecology and Society 19(2): 22. http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-06389-190222
78. Pham, T. T., M. Moeliono, T. H. Nguyen, H. T. Nguyen, and T. Vu. 2011. The context of REDD+ in Vietnam: drivers, agents and institutions. Occasional Paper No. 75. Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor, Indonesia.
79. Phelps, J., E. L. Webb, and A. Agrawal. 2010. Does REDD+ threaten to recentralize forest governance? Science 328 (5976):312-313. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1187774
80. Poteete, A. 2012. Levels, scales, linkages, and other “multiples” affecting natural resources. International Journal of the Commons 6(2):134-150.
81. Rantala, S., and M. Di Gregorio. 2014. Multistakeholder governance in action: REDD+ discourse coalitions in Tanzania. Ecology and Society 19(2): 66. http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-06536-190266
82. Ridwan, M. F. 2013. Mubariq: menanti lembaga REDD. Jurnal Nasional. 20 February. [online] URL: http://www.jurnas.com/mews/83353/Mubariq-Memamti-Lembaga-RF.DD-2013/1/Sosia1-Budaya/Lingkungan
83. Romijn, E., M. Herold, L. Kooistra, D. Murdiyarso, and L. V. Verchot. 2012. Assessing capacities of non-Annex I countries for national forest monitoring in the context of REDD+. Environmental Science & Policy 19-20:33-48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2012.01.005
84. Sabatier, P. A., and H. C. Jenkins-Smith, editors. 1993. Policy change and learning: an advocacy coalition approach. Westview, Boulder, Colorado, USA.
85. Scott, J. 2000. Social network analysis: a handbook. Second edition. Sage, London, UK.
86. Sehring, J., K. Korhonen-Kurki, and M. Brockhaus. 2013. Qualitative comparative analysis (QCA): an application to compare national REDD+ policy processes. Working Paper 121. Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor, Indonesia.
87. Seymour, F., and A. Angelsen. 2012. Summary and conclusions: REDD+ without regrets. Pages 317-334 in A. Angelsen, M. Brockhaus, W D. Sunderlin, and L. V. Verchot, editors. Analysing REDD+: challenges and choices. Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor, Indonesia.
88. Sikor, T., and P. X. To. 2011. Illegal logging in Vietnam: Lam Tac (forest hijackers) in practice and talk. Society & Natural Resources: An International Journal 24(7):688-701. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08941920903573057
89. Somorin, O. A., H. C. P. Brown, I. J. Visseren-Hamakers, D. J. Sonwa, B. Arts, and J. Nkem. 2012. The Congo Basin forests in a changing climate: policy discourses on adaptation and mitigation (REDD+). Global Environmental Change 22 (1):288-298. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.g1oemvcha.2011.08.001
90. Stickler, C. M., D. C. Nepstad, A. A. Azevedo, and D. G. McGrath. 2013. Defending public interests in private lands: compliance, costs and potential environmental consequences of the Brazilian Forest Code in Mato Grosso. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences 368 (1619):20120160. http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2012.0160
91. Van Waarden, F. 1992. Dimensions and types of policy networks. European Journal of Political Research 21:29-52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6765.1992.tb00287.x
92. Wasserman, S., and K. Faust. 1994. Social network analysis: methods and applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815478
93. Wertz-Kanounnikoff, S., and D. McNeill. 2012. Performance indicators and REDD+ implementation. Pages 233-246 in A. Angelsen, M. Brockhaus, W. D. Sunderlin, and L. V. Verchot, editors. Analysing REDD+: challenges and choices. Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor, Indonesia.
94. Westholm, L. 2010. Getting ready for REDD+. Focali Report, 2010:01. University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
95. White, H. 1961. Management conflict and sociometric structure. American Journal of Sociology 67(2):185-199. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/223084
96. World Bank. 2006. Strengthening forest law enforcement and governance: addressing a systemic constraint to sustainable development. The World Bank, Washington, D.C., USA