REDD+ was designed globally as a results-based instrument to incentivize emissions reduction from deforestation and forest degradation. Over 50 countries have developed strategies for REDD+, implemented pilot activities and/or set up forest monitoring and reporting structures, safeguard systems and benefit sharing mechanisms (BSMs), offering lessons on how particular ideas guide policy design. The implementation of REDD+ at national, sub-national and local levels required payments to filter through multiple governance structures and priorities. REDD+ was variously interpreted by different actors in different contexts to create legitimacy for certain policy agendas. Using an adapted 3E (effectiveness, efficiency, equity and legitimacy) lens, we examine four common narratives underlying REDD+ BSMs: (1) that results-based payment (RBP) is an effective and transparent approach to reducing deforestation and forest degradation; (2) that emphasis on co-benefits risks diluting carbon outcomes; (3) that directing REDD+ benefits predominantly to poor smallholders, forest communities and marginalized groups helps address equity; and (4) that social equity and gender concerns can be addressed by well-designed safeguards. This paper presents a structured examination of eleven BSMs from within and beyond the forest sector and analyses the evidence to variably support and challenge these narratives and their underlying assumptions to provide lessons for REDD+ BSM design. Our findings suggest that contextualizing the design of BSMs, and a reflexive approach to examining the underlying narratives justifying particular design features, is critical for achieving effectiveness, equity and legitimacy.
Key policy insights
A results-based payment approach does not guarantee an effective REDD+; the contexts in which results are defined and agreed, along with conditions enabling social and political acceptance, are critical.
A flexible and reflexive approach to designing a benefit-sharing mechanism that delivers emissions reductions at the same time as co-benefits can increase perceptions of equity and participation.
Targeting REDD+ to smallholder communities is not by default equitable, if wider rights and responsibilities are not taken into account
Safeguards cannot protect communities or society without addressing underlying power and gendered relations.
The narratives and their underlying generic assumptions, if not critically examined, can lead to repeated failure of REDD+ policies and practices.
土壤关键源区是指流域内对侵蚀产沙量起决定性作用的区域,控制了关键区域的土壤侵蚀就能有效降低流域的侵蚀量,因此,在关键源区识别的基础上评价基于关键源区的水土流失治理的有效性是流域管理的关键问题.SWAT模型是流域关键源区识别的重要工具,但现有的基于SWAT模型的关键源区识别研究,鲜有对于关键源区水土流失治理效益的评价.本文以黄土高原丘陵沟壑区典型小流域羊道沟流域为例,基于SWAT模型模拟流域内的土壤侵蚀过程,根据HRUs土壤侵蚀模数的排序,将产沙量排在前20%的HRU提取为关键源区.在所提取的关键源区上设置合理的水土保持措施,再基于模型模拟评价水保措施的减沙效果.研究结果表明,SWAT模型能较好地模拟流域的产流产沙过程,所提取的关键源区集中分布在坡度较陡的沟坡和坡耕地.覆盖流域内20%面积的关键源区,其产沙贡献量达到44%.覆盖关键源区的水土保持措施的单位面积减沙量(24115 t km-2 y-1)要显著高于全流域治理的单位面积减沙量(20290 t km-2 y-1),说明基于关键源区布设水土保持措施,能有效提高流域土壤侵蚀控制效率.因此,在关键源区识别的基础上合理布设水土保持措施,是一种有效的流域治理方法. 相似文献