Search

Integrating peatland restoration measures with climate policy is critical for meeting climate targets, but the current policies often fall short of utilizing the large potential that exists. Despite growing private sector interest, few regional voluntary carbon markets for peatlands have emerged worldwide. In this study, we explore three pioneering examples from Europe. From the perspective of social innovation, we aim to provide clarity on how these innovations emerged and developed, which actors drove the innovation process by assuming which roles, and which factors fostered or hindered the development. We do so by mapping the innovation process using Process Net-Map. The results show that all three cases have followed remarkably similar patterns in their innovation processes. Four phases, i.e. preparation, definition, refinement, and up-scaling were identified, as were actors' roles as innovators, promoters, intermediaries, implementers, and knowledge providers. However, the case studies are very different with regard to which actor constellation drove the innovation process: MoorFutures is driven by public and scientific actors, Valuta vor Veen is promoted by civil society actors in consultation with practitioners, and Hiilipörssi shifted from civil society to private actors. The governance modes, that is, actor constellation and their goals, have led to differences in concept, robustness of methodology, mitigation measure, and possibly potential for up-scaling. Our study indicates that the timing of interventions when actors with certain roles stepped in can accelerate the innovation process. Important political, economic, technical, and social factors influencing the innovation process, especially knowledge and trust accumulated between some key actors, are outlined. Private funding for regional voluntary carbon markets (VCMs) can tap the climate mitigation potential from peatlands, which is not currently adequately addressed by governments. Actor constellation drove the innovation process, leading to different concepts, methodologies, and mitigation measures. The timing of interventions by actors, notably providing seed funding, network, expertise and visibility, was critical for success. Building trust for regional VCMs requires not only a robust methodology to calculate emission reductions but also partnership and endorsement. The future development of climate policy on peatlands could be a decisive factor in regional VCMs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Global efforts for biodiversity protection and land use-based greenhouse gas mitigation call for increases in the effectiveness and efficiency of environmental conservation. Incentive-based policy instruments are key tools for meeting these goals, yet their effectiveness might be undermined by such factors as social norms regarding whether payments are considered fair. We investigated the causal link between equity and conservation effort with a randomized real-effort experiment in forest conservation with 443 land users near a tropical forest national park in the Vietnamese Central Annamites, a global biodiversity hotspot. The experiment introduced unjustified payment inequality based on luck, in contradiction of local fairness norms that were measured through responses to vignettes. Payment inequality was perceived as less fair than payment equality. In agreement with our preregistered hypotheses, participants who were disadvantaged by unequal payments exerted significantly less conservation effort than other participants receiving the same payment under an equal distribution. No effect was observed for participants advantaged by inequality. Thus, equity effects on effort can have consequences for the effectiveness and efficiency of incentive-based conservation instruments. Furthermore, we show that women exerted substantially more conservation effort than men, and that increasing payment size unexpectedly reduced effort. This emphasizes the need to consider social comparisons, local equity norms, and gender in environmental policies using monetary incentives to motivate behavioral change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract While incentive-based approaches like Payments for Ecosystem Services abound in current theoretical debates and environmental governance, their social impact is often unclear. It is highly relevant to ask if costs and benefits of such interventions are allocated equitably, and if the distribution of payments is dependent on a policy's socio-political context. Literature speaks of distributive and contextual equity here, but evidence on how these two dimensions are interlinked is scarce. Thus, our study investigates Vietnam's Payments for Forest Environmental Services scheme and assesses its implementation's cost benefit-allocation at the local level. Pre-existing political, economic, and social conditions are examined for their impact on current payment distribution. The study takes a qualitative case study approach with semi-structured in-depth interviews with local, provincial, and national respondents focusing on the district of Nam Đông. Findings reveal that various gains were distributed unevenly among individuals. While some community members benefitted from privileged positions in local hierarchies, others were excluded from participation and from tapping into funds. Such results hint to the functional importance of equity for incentive-based resource management. They demonstrate that environmental policies can reinforce existing asymmetries in power and wealth if they do not consider the socio-political context they operate in. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper focuses on the assessment of legislative considerations and local perceptions of equity in Vietnam's Payments for Forest Ecosystem Services scheme (PFES). Equity perceptions are powerful determinants of human behaviour and, consequently, many environmental conflicts arise from contested visions of what constitutes as ‘equitable’ environmental management. Therefore, equity can play an instrumental role in shaping outcomes of PFES schemes. This paper analyzes how contextual, procedural and distributive equity considerations are reflected in national PFES legislation and implementation, how equity outcomes are perceived locally, and whether local perceptions match legislative considerations. We reviewed national legislation and government reports, conducted expert interviews on the national and provincial level, as well as surveys, focus group discussions, and in-depth interviews on the local level. Our findings reveal that equity outcomes are very much affected by contextual factors, such as how the Forest Land Allocation regulation determines the distribution of use rights. In the implementation of PFES national aspirations and rationales of equity as outlined in legislation were not met due to technical constraints, financial costs, and social and institutional conflicts. The implementation on the ground contrasts with local interests. Our results show that on the local level the preference for a distributive equity principle is very much influenced by the degree of transparency of the payment distribution process. The prevailing perceptions of equitable benefit distribution by local PFES participants correspond to a merit-based principle of compensation for the effort of forest protection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

International negotiations for reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation and the enhancement of forest carbon stocks (REDD+) under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) were finally concluded in 2015. However, due to the complex design and implementation processes of REDD+ policies and measures, including benefit sharing at national and subnational levels, several challenges exist for sustainably reducing emissions while simultaneously managing the provision of social and environmental side-objectives. We review the realities of REDD+ implementation in 13 REDD+ candidate countries and the risks related to REDD+ policies and benefit sharing based upon a synthesis of the findings presented in ‘country profiles’ that were developed between 2009 and 2013 as part of the Center for International Forestry Research's (CIFOR) Global Comparative Study on REDD+. We find that REDD+ policies in all countries studied are at high risk of ineffectiveness, inequity and inefficiency. By classifying these risks and understanding not only their impacts on different stakeholder groups, but also the consequences for achieving specific objectives, countries can identify solutions in order to address these shortcomings in their implementation of REDD+. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Benefit-sharing mechanisms are a central design aspect of REDD+ because they help to create the necessary incentives to reduce carbon emissions. However, if stakeholders do not perceive the benefit sharing as fair, the legitimacy of REDD+, and support for the mechanism, will be weakened. In this paper, drawing on data from CIFOR's Global Comparative Study on REDD+, we analyze national policy processes in 6 countries and incipient benefit-sharing arrangements in 21 REDD+ project sites. Through our analysis of current practices and debates, we identify six rationales that have been put forward to justify how benefits should be distributed and to whom. These rationales encompass a range of perspectives. Some hold that benefit sharing should be related to actual carbon emission reductions or to costs incurred in achieving the reduction of emissions; others emphasize the importance of a legal right to benefit, the need to consider aspects such as poverty reduction or the appropriateness of rewarding those with a history of protecting the forest. Each rationale has implications for the design of benefit-sharing mechanisms and the equity of their outcomes. We point out that, given the wide range of rationales and interests at play, the objectives of REDD+ and benefit sharing must be clearly established and the term "benefit" defined before effective benefit-sharing mechanisms can be designed. For stakeholders to support REDD+, the legitimacy of decision-making institutions, consideration of context, and attention to process are critical. Building legitimacy requires attention not only to fair distributional outcomes but also to consensus on relevant institutions' authority to make decisions and to procedural equity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article we analyze the equity and distribution of financial incentives in Ecuador's Programa Socio Bosque (PSB). PSB aims to conserve native ecosystems on privately owned lands while reducing rural poverty. Based on the analysis of 1,563 conservation contracts, representing nearly 900,000 ha of land in Ecuador and more than 90,000 beneficiaries, we scrutinize the regional distribution of benefits among three regions (the Coast, the Andes, and the Amazon) and two contract types: land under individual ownership and land under collective ownership. We compare incentive distribution before and after a substantial change in the incentive scale, differentiating collective and individual landowners as well as forests and páramo ecosystems. Although PSB is a mechanism that incentivizes conservation stewardship, its distributional equity and ability to reduce rural poverty remain questionable, because poverty levels and population density in collective contracts are not sufficiently considered in the incentive scale. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

At its 16th session in Cancun, the Conference of Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change decided on a framework for implementing the reduction of deforestation and degradation (REDD). This global compensation mechanism for the ecosystem services, such as carbon storage and sequestration by forests in the developing countries, however, left critical details untouched regarding future REDD negotiations. Among others, the question of how to design a proper financing mechanism for the final phase of REDD implementation remains. This article reviews theoretical approaches on payments for ecosystem service schemes and provides recommendations for future negotiations on funding REDD mechanisms. Of special interest is the classification of forest ecosystem services according to physical and economic characteristics, rivalry and excludability, scale and directional flow. These characteristics help to determine which kind of funding mechanism should be set up at the global scale. Carbon storage and carbon sequestration are classified as common-pool services, which are most efficiently provided through a market mechanism. However, market mechanisms for small sets of forest ecosystem services can lead to trade-offs, having negative effects on the provision of particularly biodiversity-dependent services. Potential trade-offs are identified and a strongly regulated market mechanism bundling global scale ecosystem services is recommended. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

REDD+ was designed globally as a results-based instrument to incentivize emissions reduction from deforestation and forest degradation. Over 50 countries have developed strategies for REDD+, implemented pilot activities and/or set up forest monitoring and reporting structures, safeguard systems and benefit sharing mechanisms (BSMs), offering lessons on how particular ideas guide policy design. The implementation of REDD+ at national, sub-national and local levels required payments to filter through multiple governance structures and priorities. REDD+ was variously interpreted by different actors in different contexts to create legitimacy for certain policy agendas. Using an adapted 3E (effectiveness, efficiency, equity and legitimacy) lens, we examine four common narratives underlying REDD+ BSMs: (1) that results-based payment (RBP) is an effective and transparent approach to reducing deforestation and forest degradation; (2) that emphasis on co-benefits risks diluting carbon outcomes; (3) that directing REDD+ benefits predominantly to poor smallholders, forest communities and marginalized groups helps address equity; and (4) that social equity and gender concerns can be addressed by well-designed safeguards. This paper presents a structured examination of eleven BSMs from within and beyond the forest sector and analyses the evidence to variably support and challenge these narratives and their underlying assumptions to provide lessons for REDD+ BSM design. Our findings suggest that contextualizing the design of BSMs, and a reflexive approach to examining the underlying narratives justifying particular design features, is critical for achieving effectiveness, equity and legitimacy. Key policy insights A results-based payment approach does not guarantee an effective REDD+; the contexts in which results are defined and agreed, along with conditions enabling social and political acceptance, are critical. A flexible and reflexive approach to designing a benefit-sharing mechanism that delivers emissions reductions at the same time as co-benefits can increase perceptions of equity and participation. Targeting REDD+ to smallholder communities is not by default equitable, if wider rights and responsibilities are not taken into account Safeguards cannot protect communities or society without addressing underlying power and gendered relations. The narratives and their underlying generic assumptions, if not critically examined, can lead to repeated failure of REDD+ policies and practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Mainstreaming of ecosystem service approaches has been proposed as one path toward sustainable development. Meanwhile, critics of ecosystem services question if the approach can account for the multiple values of ecosystems to diverse groups of people, or for aspects of inter- and intra-generational justice. In particular, an ecosystem service approach often overlooks power dimensions and capabilities that are core to environmental justice. This article addresses the need for greater guidance on incorporating justice into ecosystem services research and practice. We point to the importance of deep engagement with stakeholders and rights holders to disentangle contextual factors that moderate justice outcomes on ecosystem service attribution and appropriation in socio-political interventions. Such a holistic perspective enables the integration of values and knowledge plurality for enhancing justice in ecosystem services research. This broadened perspective paves a way for transformative ecosystem service assessments, management, and research, which can help inform and design governance structures that nourish human agency to sustainably identify, manage, and enjoy ecosystem services for human wellbeing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Today, peatland management is more and more perceived as a fundamentally important land use based greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation option. Understanding current peatland use and expected changes provides a background to develop recommendations for future management frameworks and can facilitate good peatland management practices (PMP) permitting long-term emission mitigation in Europe. The objective of this study was to exemplify knowledge and stakeholder's views on peatland management status and development in Europe and to show the relationship between PMP with climate mitigation potential under different environmental conditions and institutional settings. Our research questions, to facilitate in-depth examination of PMP were: i) Which PMP exist and what are expected trends? ii) What is the current implementation status of PMP with regards to evaluating their GHG mitigation potential? iii) How are GHG emissions and removals from organic soils currently reported to the UNFCCC and what are the challenges in reporting development? iv) Are there governmental incentive-based policy instruments and innovative voluntary private sector initiatives, aiming at PMP that support climate change mitigation?We carried out a web-based survey in eight peatland-rich European countries (Finland, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, UK, the Netherlands, Germany, Poland). 60 experts, including researchers, stakeholders acting as multipliers for farmers (e.g. farmer's associations, NGOs) and government representatives, provided valuable insights on a regional and national level.In our survey, stakeholders saw agriculture as main driver to peatland use, with increased GHG emissions, biodiversity loss and declined water quality as its main impacts. Majority of the stakeholders expected croplands to be used as grasslands and agricultural areas to be rewetted. However, geographic variability of expected land use changes was apparent. Prevailing PMP (such as drainage methods) were also reported to vary significantly across Europe. Therefore, the development and assessment of PMP and especially the policy instruments guiding them should account for the regional drivers and bottlenecks. Survey results further show that a range of PMP, aiming at GHG emission reduction while maintaining production options, are in testing phases across Europe. Only a few, however, can be considered mitigating climate impacts (i.e. good PMP) to the date. It is therefore required to promote further research on the mitigation potential of currently tested PMP. The lack of data (activity, mapping, and emission) and in some cases poor separation of peatlands from other land use types was also seen as a bottleneck for developing evaluation methods for national greenhouse gas reporting to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Integrating identified good PMP as part of the IPCC reporting, however, would provide positive feedback and motivation for practical implementation. Only few policies and policy instruments directly aiming at GHG mitigation on peatlands exist. Other policy instruments mentioned, may not set GHG mitigation on peatland as the main goal but might have a spill-over effect. Cross-sectoral institutional interlinkages on multiple governance levels indicate that climate change mitigation is just starting to be mainstreamed.The study is part of the PeatWise (Wise use of drained peatlands in a bio-based economy) – project funded by the FACCE ERAGAS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Drained peatlands are a large source for CO2 emission in Europe (500 Million ton a-1). The ERA-GAS project PEATWISE has the aim to analyse assessment practices and sustainable techniques for the mitigation of greenhouse gases from drained peatlands within Northern Europe and New Zealand. The projects that are part of PEATWISE all focus on reducing greenhouse gas emissions while maintaining the land for agricultural purposes or forestry. The measures used can be divided into three main categories:• Elevation of water table with the same land-use (grading; submerged drains)• Change in water table and change in crop (paludiculture) or land-use (renaturation)• Change in soil properties (peat inversion; sand, gipsen, charcoal or ash addition)This presentation will give an overview of the first evaluation of the effect of the different measures on the greenhouse gas emission within Europe. Elevation of the water table seems only to be effective if the water table is close to soil surface. So far, there is no clear positive results found for CO2 reduction in changing the drainage system (grading, submerged drains). More research is needed to the effectiveness of small increase in water table. A better result is found with paludiculture, where the whole soil is rewetted. CO2 emission can strongly decrease, but the water table should stay below the soil surface, otherwise CH4 will increase to high numbers. The effect of nutrients in the topsoil on the CH4 production will be investigated.Sand addition and ash addition give promising results in an experimental setting.Some projects are in an early stage and data are not yet available. Therefore, these results will give an general but not a complete overview of the possibilities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from drained peatlands. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]