Search

Graphical abstract Highlights • Specialisation at national level hampers mitigation-adaptation integration. • Local actors prioritize climate adaptation but lack of influence hinders action. • Decentralisation affects cross-level power differentials in land and climate domains. • Dominant national level communities exclude localities from policy decisions. Abstract This article proposes an innovative theoretical framework that combines institutional and policy network approaches to study multi-level governance. The framework is used to derive a number of propositions on how cross-level power imbalances shape communication and collaboration across multiple levels of governance. The framework is then applied to examine the nature of cross-level interactions in climate change mitigation and adaptation policy processes in the land use sectors of Brazil and Indonesia. The paper identifies major barriers to cross-level communication and collaboration between national and sub-national levels. These are due to power imbalances across governance levels that reflect broader institutional differences between federal and decentralized systems of government. In addition, powerful communities operating predominantly at the national level hamper cross-level interactions. The analysis also reveals that engagement of national level actors is more extensive in the mitigation and that of local actors in the adaptation policy domain, and specialisation in one of the climate change responses at the national level hampers effective climate policy integration in the land use sector. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation (REDD+) in tropical countries is an important and contested element of the post-Kyoto climate regime. For policy options which generate controversy between diverse actor groups, such as REDD+, mass media plays an important role in defining and supporting policy possibilities. Analysis of the way in which national media frames issues of climate change and deforestation can offer insights into the nature of the contested domains of the REDD+ policy process. Here, we examine the Brazilian national media discourses surrounding REDD+ because it contributes to setting the tone of policy debates at the federal level. Specifically, we ask the following: (i) How was REDD+ portrayed in the Brazilian national print media and whose opinions and perceptions were represented? and (ii) How have media frames on REDD+ in the national print media changed over time? Our results contribute with new knowledge for understanding the observed progress of REDD+ in Brazil. We identify two main themes that dominate the focus in the national media coverage of REDD+, specifically 'politics and policymaking' (representing half the coverage) and 'economics and market' (with over a third). Results show that discussions around carbon markets were amongst the most contested and that optimism in relation to REDD+ effectiveness declined over time. The analysis suggests that positions adopted on the national REDD+ strategy were shaped by state and federal collision of interests. We demonstrate an evolution of national concerns from an initial focus on efficiency (e.g. finance and carbon markets) to a recentred focus on equity issues (e.g. implementation of safeguards). We conclude with some thoughts on the implications of these features for REDD+ interventions and implementation in Brazil. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

REDD+ social safeguards have gained increasing attention in numerous forums. This paper reviews the evolution of multi-level policy dialogues, processes, and actions related to REDD+ social safeguards (e.g., Cancun Safeguards 1–5) among policy makers, civil society organizations, and within the media in Brazil, Indonesia and Tanzania, three countries with well advanced REDD+ programs. We find that progress on core aspects of social safeguards is uneven across the three countries. Brazil is by far the most advanced having drafted a REDD+ social safeguards policy. Both Brazil and Indonesia have benefited from progress made by strong sub-national entities in the operationalization of REDD+ safeguards including free prior and informed consent (FPIC), participation, and benefit sharing. Tanzania has weakly articulated how social safeguards will be operationalized and has a more top-down approach. We conclude that in all three countries, measuring, reporting and verifying progress on social safeguards is likely to be a complex issue. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]