How much deforestation do protected areas avoid in tropical Andean landscapes?

For many decades, protected areas (PAs) have been considered by decision makers and conservation practitioners as one of the most common policies to promote biodiversity conservation. Diverse studies have assessed the impact of conservation policies at global and regional levels by comparing deforestation rates between PAs and unprotected areas. Most of these studies are based on conventional methods and could overestimate the avoided deforestation of PAs by omitting from their analyses the lack of randomness in the allocation of forest protection.We demonstrate that estimates of effectiveness can be substantially improved by controlling for biases along dimensions that are observable and testing the sensitivity of estimates of potential hidden biases. We used matching methods to evaluate the impact on deforestation of Ecuador's tropical Andean forest protected-area system between 1990 and 2008. We found that protection reduced deforestation in approximately 6% of the protected forests. These would have been deforested had they not been protected. Conventional approaches to estimate conservation impact, which fail to control for observable covariates correlated with both protection and deforestation, substantially overestimate avoided deforestation. Our conclusions are robust to potential hidden bias, as well as to changes in modeling assumptions. In addition, it is assumed that this research will help decision-making in the framework of international climate change mitigation policies, such as REDD+.     

林业REDD~+机制对中国低碳经济的启示——以环境与资源保护法为视角

森林固碳不仅成本低,并且还具有多种生态效益和巨大的经济、社会效益。发展碳汇林业,加强以林业为主的生态保护和建设,充分发挥森林生态系统作为生物措施对应对气候变化的作用显得尤为重要,也更具有长远和治本的意义。REDD+机制的提出,为广大发展中国家在共同但有区别的原则下参与全球气候变化活动带来了新的活力,也为中国的低碳经济带来了政策和法律的启示。但该机制对不同的国家有不同的内涵,国家责任不同,利益不同,代价亦不同,中国需持谨慎态度制定与之相关的政策法律。     

Analyzing REDD+ as an experiment of transformative climate governance: Insights from Indonesia

This paper contributes to an emerging body of literature on policy experimentation and governance transformation processes. We use the example of REDD+ as consisting of policy experiments in an emerging domestic policy domain to understand obstacles to transformations in forest and climate governance. We ask two interlinked questions: to what extent did the establishment of the REDD+ Agency challenge ‘business as usual’ in Indonesia’s forest and climate policy arena?; and what does this mean for a transformation away from policies and governance that enable deforestation and forest degradation? We draw on the transformation literature to better understand the role of REDD+ to achieve a transformative shift in climate governance. As an experiment of transformative climate governance, the study of REDD+ provides important insights for other forest or climate programs. Our analysis shows that the REDD+ Agency was successful in some extend in introducing an alternative governance mechanism and in shaking the governance structures but we also note that some of the key actors thought that greater ownership was achieved when the REDD+ Agency was dissolved and the mandate was returned to the ministries. We conclude that policy experimenting is a process, and while the creation of novel policies and their experimentation is important, also their assimilation may lead to new opportunities.     

What room for politics and change in global climate governance? Addressing gender in co-benefits and safeguards

Questions of equity, gender, power and rights are central to environmental justice in climate mitigation schemes such as REDD+ (Reducing Emissions From Deforestation and Degradation). Drawing on the ideas of co-benefits and safeguards, the strategies for challenging mainstream discourse on gender in REDD+ – from the outside and within – are examined of two organisations that have attempted to bring a political concept – gender – into the largely technical discourse of climate policy. The analysis points to the risks of co-option that women’s organisations face, trying to challenge and change the mainstream discourse on gender in climate policy-making. The need for diverse and flexible strategies for resistance and influence in order to seize opportunities that may arise in countering the depoliticising force of global climate governance are highlighted.