UDTR Global Rights of Nature Radar

Barriers to equity in REDD+: Deficiencies in national interpretation processes constrain adaptation to context

Identification

Public canonical key

doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2018.06.009

Authors

Neil M. Dawson · Michael Mason · David Mujasi Mwayafu · Hari Dhungana · Poshendra Satyal · Janet Fisher · Mark Zeitoun · Heike Schroeder

Reported year

2018

Reported language

en

Source type

article

First detected

2026-11-09T19:17:28.426006+00:00

Last metadata observation

2026-11-09T19:17:28.426006+00:00

Last HTTP verification

Not checked

Institutions reported by the source

London School of Economics and Political Science · Norwich Research Park · University of East Anglia · University of Edinburgh

Documentary abstract — original language

A national interpretation process involving diverse actors and interests is required to transform global environmental initiatives into policies appropriate to the national or subnational context. These processes of localising norms are critical spaces to formulate equitable pathways to environmental conservation, yet have received limited attention from policy makers and researchers. We explored national policy processes for Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD+) in Uganda and Nepal from the perspectives of ‘intermediaries’, state and civil society actors at subnational and national scale who promote the interests of various stakeholder groups. Through think-tank meetings and semi-structured interviews with a range of intermediaries, we uncovered that REDD+ implementation processes in both countries are dominated by international actors, applying a demanding administrative agenda and restricting space for deliberation. Consequently, social aspects of policy were compartmentalised, reduced to technical exercises and local equity concerns inadequately addressed in national REDD+ policies. For example, social safeguards approaches were perceived to lack substantive guidelines to promote equity. Limited national political space to criticise government policy and lack of attention to relevant evidence further restricted ability to address entrenched injustices such as status inequalities faced by marginalised groups. Although civil society organisations choose to maintain official involvement with REDD+, many expressed a possibility they would oppose REDD+ in future, or serious doubts about its design and expected outcomes. Concerns centred on lack of recognition of indigenous peoples’ and local communities’ values, identities, practices and institutions such as customary tenure systems, alongside possible detrimental impacts to decentralised forest governance regimes, well established in Nepal and emerging in Uganda. We suggest features to be enshrined in REDD+ policy for adapting national interpretation processes to become more effective spaces for empowering diverse intermediaries to negotiate and influence localisation of international norms, ultimately to promote more equitable pathways to reduced deforestation and degradation.

Identifiers

OPENALEX

W2807846828

DOI

10.1016/j.envsci.2018.06.009

Documentary context

Documentary family

Scholarship

Source-reported types

article

Natural entities mentioned

Forest

Entity mentions are not evidence of legal recognition. Jurisdiction studied is separate from author affiliation country.

Sources

OpenAlex · Record 1 · Record 2

• DOI · https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2018.06.009
• OpenAlex · https://openalex.org/W2807846828

Documented bibliographic relations

Source-declared references and links; they do not establish legal support or UGLC qualification. Up to 20 outgoing references are displayed.

• openalex:w1208424556 · CITES
• openalex:w1531974919 · CITES
• openalex:w1597421676 · CITES
• openalex:w1734754515 · CITES
• openalex:w1904473669 · CITES
• openalex:w1971038194 · CITES
• openalex:w1980426893 · CITES
• openalex:w1988894183 · CITES
• openalex:w1990000295 · CITES
• openalex:w2003460297 · CITES
• openalex:w2010938524 · CITES
• openalex:w2023983108 · CITES
• openalex:w2036551813 · CITES
• openalex:w2037165956 · CITES
• openalex:w2039511585 · CITES
• openalex:w2041952108 · CITES
• openalex:w2042615677 · CITES
• openalex:w2051864396 · CITES
• openalex:w2055360529 · CITES
• openalex:w2056179996 · CITES

4 incoming references within the detected corpus

Documentary status

Relevance pending

Library

This identity is not yet included in the Legal Library.