UDTR Global Rights of Nature Radar

Reducing REDD risks: affirmative policy on an uneven playing field

Identification

Public canonical key

doi:10.18352/bmgn-lchr.322

Authors

Jesse Ribot · Anne Larson

Reported year

2012

Reported language

en

Source type

article

First detected

2026-11-09T19:15:02.386705+00:00

Last metadata observation

2026-11-09T19:15:02.386705+00:00

Last HTTP verification

Not checked

Institutions reported by the source

Center for International Forestry Research · Central American University · University of Illinois System · University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign

Documentary abstract — original language

In spite of reforms since the end of the colonial period and more-recent discourses of participation and democracy, the forestry policy environment rarely supports the needs or aspirations of rural communities. Even when policies appear fair, the rural poor face severe biases in implementation. In addition, the poor must compete on an uneven playing field of class, ethnic and other social inequities and economic hurdles. With the development of the global forest (carbon) conservation strategy such as Reduced Emissions from Degradation and Deforestation (REDD), which is ushering in accelerated forest commodification, poor people living in forests risk further marginalisation, exclusion and rights abuses. This article examines how forestry policy and implementation maintain double standards on this uneven playing field in a manner that continues to exclude the rural poor from the natural wealth around them. Poverty is not just about being left out of economic growth. It is produced by the very policies that enable some to profit – today from timber, firewood and charcoal, tomorrow from carbon. For REDD interventions to support poverty alleviation, forestry policies must be radically reworked to counterbalance widespread regressive policies and structural asymmetries. To make forestry policy emancipatory, strong social protections or safeguards are still needed that require REDD and other interventions to support and work through local democratic institutions. Otherwise these policies will continue their regressive trends.

Identifiers

OPENALEX

W2114955946

DOI

10.18352/bmgn-lchr.322

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/10.18352/bmgn-lchr.322
• OpenAlex · https://openalex.org/W2114955946

Documented bibliographic relations

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

• Forests for people: community rights and forest tenure reform · CITES
• openalex:w1496285141 · CITES
• openalex:w1524614571 · CITES
• openalex:w1532410514 · CITES
• openalex:w1534579380 · CITES
• openalex:w1553100866 · CITES
• openalex:w1553965041 · CITES
• openalex:w15569160 · CITES
• openalex:w1561630947 · CITES
• openalex:w1564272830 · CITES
• openalex:w1583379703 · CITES
• openalex:w159340147 · CITES
• openalex:w1674485151 · CITES
• openalex:w1703818764 · CITES
• openalex:w1943581427 · CITES
• openalex:w1946609472 · CITES
• openalex:w1966861654 · CITES
• openalex:w1986219401 · CITES
• openalex:w1986945985 · CITES
• openalex:w2004310311 · CITES

8 incoming references within the detected corpus

Documentary status

Relevance pending

Library

This identity is not yet included in the Legal Library.