Land tenure and REDD+: The good,the bad and the ugly |
| |
| Authors: | Anne M Larson Maria Brockhaus William D Sunderlin Amy Duchelle Andrea Babon Therese Dokken Thu Thuy Pham IAP Resosudarmo Galia Selaya Abdon Awono Thu-Ba Huynh |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Center for International Forestry Research, Av. La Molina 1895, Lima, Peru;2. Center for International Forestry Research, P.O. Box 0113 BOCBD, Bogor 16000, Indonesia;3. Center for International Forestry Research, Rua do Russel, 450/sala 601, Bairro: Glória, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil;4. Charles Darwin University, Melbourne, Australia;5. UMB School of Economics and Business, P.O. Box 5003, NO-1432 Aas, Norway;6. Center for International Forestry Research, No. 8, Lot 13A, Trung Hoa Street, Yen Hoa Ward, Cau Giay Dist., Hanoi, Viet Nam;7. Center for International Forestry Research, P.O. Box 2909, Santa Cruz, Bolivia;8. Center for International Forestry Research, c/o IITA Humid Forest Ecoregional Center B.P. 2008, Yaounde, Cameroon;9. Department of Resource Management and Geography, University of Melbourne, Australia |
| |
| Abstract: | A number of international donors, national governments and project proponents have begun to lay the groundwork for REDD+, but tenure insecurity – including the potential risks of land grabbing by outsiders and loss of local user rights to forests and forest land – is one of the main reasons that many indigenous and other local peoples have publicly opposed it. Under what conditions is REDD+ a threat to local rights, and under what conditions does it present an opportunity? This article explores these issues based on available data from a global comparative study on REDD+, led by the Center for International Forestry Research, which is studying national policies and processes in 12 countries and 23 REDD+ projects in 6 countries. The article analyses how tenure concerns are being addressed at both national and project level in emerging REDD+ programs. The findings suggest that in most cases REDD+ has clearly provided some new opportunities for securing local tenure rights, but that piecemeal interventions by project proponents at the local level are insufficient in the absence of broader, national programs for land tenure reform. The potential for substantial changes in the status quo appear unlikely, though Brazil – the only one with such a national land tenure reform program – offers useful insights. Land tenure reform – the recognition of customary rights in particular – and a serious commitment to REDD+ both challenge the deep-rooted economic and political interests of ‘business as usual’. |
| |
| Keywords: | Community forestry Forest tenure reform Indigenous peoples Tenure security Property rights Customary rights |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
