The evolution of REDD+: An analysis of discursive-institutional dynamics
- 1. International Union for Conservation of Nature National Committee of the Netherlands, Plantage Middenlaan 2K, 1018 DD Amsterdam (Netherlands)
- 2. Forest and Nature Conservation Policy Group, Wageningen University and Research Centre (WUR), 6708 PB Wageningen (Netherlands)
- 3. The World Bank, Washington DC (United States)
Description
Highlights: • A Discursive Institutional Analysis was conducted of the development of REDD+ from 2004 to 2011. • Rapid progress on REDD+ at the UNFCCC led to early agreement and preparatory arrangements. • This institutionalisation triggered responses from more actors generating new ideas. • Early implementation led to overlap of actors involved in piloting and in ongoing negotiations. • This helped introduce social, environment and governance safeguards in new agreements. -- Abstract: Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) is a policy that developed under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and is based on the idea that climate funds and carbon markets can be used to incentivise developing countries to reduce tropical deforestation. This paper analyses the development of REDD+ from 2004 to 2011 through Discursive Institutional Analysis (DIA). DIA seeks to analyse how new discourses become institutionalised in plans, regulations and guidelines, while including and excluding issues, (re)defining topics, and (re)shaping human interactions. The analysis of policy documents and 32 in depth interviews with actors involved in the climate negotiations illustrates how discursive and institutional dynamics influenced each other. Competing discourse coalitions struggled over the definition and scope of REDD+, the use of markets and funds, and the issue of social and environmental safeguards. The rapid development of the REDD+ discourse has nonetheless culminated in new institutional arrangements. The working of a 'discursive-institutional spiral' is revealed where discourse coalitions respond to the inclusion and exclusion of ideas in institutions and practices. The institutional contexts at the same time shape the boundaries within which actors can bring in new ideas and concepts
Availability note (English)
Available from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2013.03.009Additional details
Identifiers
- DOI
- 10.1016/j.envsci.2013.03.009;
- PII
- S1462-9011(13)00067-1;
Publishing Information
- Journal Title
- Environmental Science and Policy
- Journal Volume
- 35
- Journal Page Range
- p. 40-48
- ISSN
- 1462-9011
INIS
- Country of Publication
- United Kingdom
- Country of Input or Organization
- International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
- INIS RN
- 45066936
- Subject category
- S54: ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES;
- Descriptors DEI
- CARBON; CLIMATES; CLIMATIC CHANGE; DEFORESTATION; DEVELOPING COUNTRIES; ENVIRONMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY; FORESTS; INDIGENOUS PEOPLES; NEGOTIATION; REDD; SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT; UNFCCC
- Descriptors DEC
- AGREEMENTS; ELEMENTS; GOVERNMENT POLICIES; HUMAN POPULATIONS; INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS; NONMETALS; POPULATIONS; RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT
Optional Information
- Copyright
- Copyright (c) 2013 Elsevier Science B.V., Amsterdam, The Netherlands, All rights reserved.