Research on the contribution of forests to local livelihoods has so far had a strong focus on quantifying the monetary value of forest-derived products and services. In this paper, we move beyond monetary valuation and integrate the less tangible and sometimes culturally complex dimensions through which forests support local livelihoods. We look at four local contexts in the Brazilian, Bolivian and Ecuadorian Amazon, which differ markedly in terms of their biophysical, sociocultural and geopolitical settings. Combining economic and anthropological data, we used quantitative and qualitative methods, and measures of the ecological impacts of local forest uses. Quantitative analyses drew on datasets from 48 communities, and 510 households, while the qualitative analyses relied on semi-structured interviews with 78 families in 22 communities. Forest-based livelihoods exhibited complex portfolios, diversified produc-tion systems, seasonal variation of activities, and different specialization strategies. Beyond a source of subsistence and cash incomes, forests were locally valued by people across all sites in terms of identities, worldviews, territorial attachment, governance, and conservation. Populations with a longer history of interactions with the environment displayed more complex forest-related cultural systems, but even among people who had migrated into the forest in a more recent historical period, forest-based self -cultural identification was evident. At all sites, forests were unanimously recognized as critical to people's health and wellbeing, despite substantial differences in local histories, policy and market environments. The findings underscore the persistent importance of non-economic values of forests as both Indigenous and non-Indigenous groups constantly adapt their forest and land use practices based on transcultural exchange and changing conditions. A focus on economic value as the rationale for forest conservation disregards the striking resilience of cultural values in promoting forest conservation and use by diverse local and Indigenous communities, especially when supported by favorable policies and markets.(c) 2023 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Rigorous impact evaluations of local REDD+ (reduced emissions from deforestation and forest degradation) initiatives have shown some positive outcomes for forests, while well-being impacts have been mixed. However, will REDD+ outcomes persist over time after interventions have ended? Using quasi-experimental methods, we investigated the effects of one REDD+ project in the Brazilian Amazon on deforestation and people's well-being, including intra-community spillover effects (leakage). We then evaluated to what extent outcomes persisted after the project ended (permanence). This project combined Payments for Environmental Services (PES) with sustainable livelihood alternatives to reduce smallholder deforestation. Data came from face-to-face surveys with 113 households (treatment: 52; non-participant from treatment communities: 35; control: 46) in a three-datapoint panel design (2010, 2014 and 2019). Results indicate the REDD+ project conserved an average of 7.8% to 10.3% of forest cover per household and increased the probability of improving enrollees' well-being by 27-44%. We found no evidence for significant intra-community leakage. After the project ended, forest loss rebounded and perceived well-being declined - yet, importantly, past saved forest was not cleared. Therefore, our results confirm what the theory and stylized evidence envisioned for temporal payments on activity-reducing ('set-aside'): forest loss was successfully delayed but not permanently eradicated.

Hundreds of projects to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation and enhance carbon stocks (REDD+) are implemented globally, many by non-governmental organizations (NGOs) or for-profit companies. Yet, at the global level, the Paris Agreement focuses on jurisdictional (national and subnational) REDD+. We ask: (1) How much can REDD+ projects contribute to achieving national and international climate objectives? (2) What are the issues in integrating REDD+ projects into national carbon accounting? Our snapshot of 377 REDD+ projects covering 53 million ha in 56 countries is based on data from the International Database on REDD+ Projects (ID-RECCO) supplemented with new data on projects’ accounting methods. The number of new REDD+ projects declined steadily from 45 new projects in 2011 to five in 2019. We examined 161 certified projects that started between 2007 and 2017; 96 of these could sell carbon credits in voluntary carbon markets by 2020 and spent on average 4.7 (± 2.4) years between project start and sales in voluntary carbon markets. Globally, REDD+ projects claim to reduce an average of 3.67 tCO2e/ha annually. This figure - combined with projects limited coverage - implies that projects need to be upscaled more than 40x to fulfil the potential contribution of tropical and subtropical forests towards limiting global warming to well below 2oC. Compared to the national carbon accounting methods, most projects in Colombia, Indonesia and Peru (63 of 86) use at least one different carbon accounting parameter. Carbon accounting inconsistencies across levels need to be addressed. Overall, the argument for REDD+ projects lies in the emissions reductions they can achieve, diversifying participation in REDD+ and providing non-carbon benefits to local communities, potentially leading to broader support for climate action.

Subnational initiatives to Reduce Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation and enhance carbon stocks (REDD+) have been implemented across the tropics over the last decade. Such initiatives are often embedded within pre-existing conservation policies, such as forest law enforcement, making it challenging to disentangle attributable impacts. In this article, we analyze a new REDD+ project implemented in Brazil nut concessions in the southeastern Peruvian Amazon. Public law enforcement to verify compliance with Peru's Forest Law was already ongoing and intensified locally during our study period. Thus, we combine longitudinal data from remote sensing and household surveys of 197 concessionaires in a before–after control-intervention (BACI) study design to: a) evaluate the project's impacts during the 2012–2018 period on deforestation, forest degradation, and the participants' wellbeing and b) assess how the law-enforcing field inspections may have complemented the project effects. Our results show that the REDD+ initiative had insignificant effects on deforestation and forest degradation, but confirm the curbing effects of the field inspection measures on forest loss. The non-significance of the REDD+ effects may reflect delays in cash incentive payments to enrolled concessionaires, lack of careful alignment of benefit provision with project participants, and limited enforcement of project conditionalities. Most REDD+ participants reported a reduced subjective wellbeing, which may reflect the frustrated expectations associated with project implementation. We discuss the implications of our results and outline lessons for similar tropical forest conservation initiatives.

Collective Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES), where forest users receive compensation conditional on group rather than individual performance, are an increasingly used policy instrument to reduce tropical deforestation. However, implementing effective, (cost) efficient and equitable (3E) collective PES is challenging because in-dividuals have an incentive to free ride on others' conservation actions. Few comparative studies exist on how different enforcement strategies can improve collective PES performance. We conducted a framed field experi-ment in Brazil, Indonesia and Peru to evaluate how three different strategies to contain the local free-rider problem perform in terms of the 3Es: (i) Public monitoring of individual deforestation, (ii) internal, peer-to-peer sanctions (Community enforcement) and (iii) external sanctions (Government enforcement). We also examined how inequality in wealth, framed as differences in deforestation capacity, affects policy performance. We find that introducing individual level sanctions can improve the effectiveness, efficiency and equity of col-lective PES, but there is no silver bullet that consistently improves all 3Es across country sites. Public monitoring reduced deforestation and improved the equity of the program in sites with stronger history of collective action. External sanctions provided the strongest and most robust improvement in the 3Es. While internal, peer enforcement can significantly reduce free riding, it does not improve the program's efficiency, and thus par-ticipants' earnings. The sanctioning mechanisms failed to systematically improve the equitable distribution of benefits due to the ineffectiveness of punishments to target the largest free-riders. Inequality in wealth increased group deforestation and reduced the efficiency of Community enforcement in Indonesia but had no effect in the other two country sites. Factors explaining differences across country sites include the history of collective action and land tenure systems.

REDD+ was conceived as a system of incentives for reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation. While this could include many different types of interventions to reduce deforestation and degradation, a consensus has emerged that they should safeguard and "do no harm" to the forest-based livelihoods of local people. Many REDD+ projects have been designed to incentivize forest conservation and support local livelihoods by promoting sustainable use of the forest, hence increasing the revenues earned by local households from forest products. We examine two such projects in the Peruvian Amazon, using panel survey data from over 400 households gathered in 2011 and 2014. In the 3 years between surveys, we observed a severe decline in forest revenue. However, by using a BACI study design and matching, we show that this decrease was not caused by the REDD+ interventions. Thus, REDD+ "did no harm" to local people, at least in terms of forest revenues in the early phases of these two projects in the Peruvian Amazon.

Pesan-pesan kunci Melalui kemitraan erat dengan asosiasi pemerintahan Lingkar Temu Kabupaten Lestari (LTKL) dan upaya awal menunjukkan kemajuan berkelanjutan pada yurisdiksi subnasional, CIFOR melanjutkan aktivitasnya pada pendekatan yurisdiksional dalam pembangunan desa rendah emisi di tingkat kabupaten di Indonesia. Kemitraan antara CIFOR dan LTKL dimulai pada 2019 dan telah membuahkan hasil, antara lain kontribusi pada nota konsep pendekatan yurisdiksional yang telah diintegrasikan dalam dokuman perencanaan pembangunan nasional, serta penyusunan profil yurisdiksi tingkat kabupaten yang pertama (di Kabupaten Sintang, Kalimantan Barat). Profil ini diluncurkan pada Forum Bentang Alam Global (Global Landscape Forum), 2020. Bersama dengan LTKL, CIFOR merancang kuesioner dan metode pengumpulan data untuk Kerangka Daya Saing Daerah (KDSD). KDSD adalah sebuah sistem pemantauan dan pelaporan yang dikembangkan oleh Sekretariat LTKL dan kabupaten anggotanya untuk mengukur kemajuan kabupaten dalam mewujudkan Tujuan Pembangunan Berkelanjutan (SDG). CIFOR juga mengembangkan panduan untuk pelatihan dan pelaksanaan KDSD. Pendekatan yurisdiksi diperluas dan direplikasi, semakin banyak anggota LTKL menunjukkan minatnya dalam menerapkan KDSD dan menyusun profil yurisdiksi.

FTA, the world's largest research for development partnership on forests, trees

• Through a strong partnership with an association of district governments, Lingkar Temu Kabupaten Lestari (the Sustainable Districts Association, or LTKL), and earlier efforts to showcase the sustainability progress of subnational jurisdictions, CIFOR has continued its work on jurisdictional approaches to low-emission rural development in Indonesian districts. • The CIFOR-LTKL partnership began in 2019 but has already yielded results, like contributions to a jurisdictional approach concept note that has now been integrated into Indonesia’s national development planning document, as well as the creation of the first ever district-level jurisdictional profile (in Sintang District, West Kalimantan), launched at the 2020 Global Landscapes Forum. • Together with LTKL, CIFOR co-designed the questionnaire and data collection techniques for Kerangka Daya Saing Daerah (Regional Competitiveness Framework, or KDSD), a monitoring and reporting system developed by LTKL Secretariat and its member districts to measure districts’ progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). CIFOR also developed training and implementation guidelines for KDSD. • The jurisdictional approach is scaling up, with more LTKL member districts showing interest in implementing the KDSD and in creating a jurisdictional profile. Sandy Nofyanza, Swetha Peteru, Tobias Thürer and Amy E Duchelle DOI: 10.17528/cifor/008049 | cifor.org No. 329, July 2021

Sustainable management of resources is crucial for balancing competing livelihood, economic, and environmental goals. Since forests and other systems do not exist in isolation, comprehensive jurisdictional approaches to forest, and land-use governance can help promote sustainability. The ability of jurisdictions to provide evidence of progress toward sustainability is essential for attracting public and private sector investments and maintaining local stakeholder involvement. The Sustainable Landscapes Rating Tool (SLRT) provides a way to assess enabling conditions for jurisdictional sustainability through an evidence-based rating system. We applied this rating tool in 19 states and provinces across six countries (Brazil, Ecuador, Indonesia, Cote d'Ivoire, Mexico, Peru) that are members of the Governors' Climate and Forests Task Force (GCF TF). Each SLRT assessment was completed using publicly available information, interviews with stakeholders in the jurisdiction, and a multi-stakeholder workshop to validate the indicator ratings. This paper explores the effects of stakeholder involvement in the validation process, along with stakeholder perceptions of the tool's usefulness. Our analysis shows that the validation workshops often led to modifications of the indicator ratings, even for indicators originally assessed using publicly available data, highlighting the gap between existence of a policy and its implementation. Also, a more diverse composition of stakeholders at the workshops led to more changes in indicator ratings, which indicates the importance of including different perspectives in compiling and validating the assessments. Overall, most participants agreed that the tool is useful for self-assessment of the jurisdiction and to address coordination gaps. Further, the validation workshops provided a space for discussions across government agencies, civil society organizations (CSOs), producer organizations, indigenous peoples and local community representatives, and researchers about improving policy and governance conditions. Our findings from the analysis of a participatory approach to collecting and validating data can be used to inform future research on environmental governance and sustainability.

Globally, countries report forest information to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations Global Forest Resources Assessments (FRA) at regular intervals. While the status and trends of national forest monitoring capacities have been previously assessed for the tropics, this has not been systematically done worldwide. In this paper, we assess the use and quality of forest monitoring data sources for national reporting to the FRA in 236 countries and territories. More specifically, we (a) analyze the use of remote sensing (RS) for forest area monitoring and the use of national forest inventory (NFI) for monitoring forest area, growing stock, biomass, carbon stock, and other attributes in FRA 2005–2020, (b) assess data quality in FRA 2020 using FAO tier-based indicators, and (c) zoom in to investigate changes in tropical forest monitoring capacities in FRA 2010–2020. Globally, the number of countries monitoring forest area using RS at good to very good capacities increased from 55 in FRA 2005 to 99 in FRA 2020. Likewise, the number of countries with good to very good NFI capacities increased from 48 in FRA 2005 to 102 in FRA 2020. This corresponds to ∼85% of the global forest area monitored with one or more nationally-produced up-to-date RS products or NFI in FRA 2020. For large proportions of global forests, the highest quality data was used in FRA 2020 for reporting on forest area (93%), growing stock (85%), biomass (76%), and carbon pools (61%). Overall, capacity improvements are more widespread in the tropics, which can be linked to continued international investments for forest monitoring especially in the context of reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in tropical countries (REDD+). More than 50% of the tropical countries with targeted international support improved both RS and NFI capacities in the period 2010–2020 on top of those that already had persistent good to very good capabilities. There is also a link between improvements in national capacities and improved governance measured against worldwide governance indicators (WGI). Our findings—the first global study—suggest an ever-improving data basis for national reporting on forest resources in the context of climate and development commitments, e.g. the Paris Agreement and Sustainable Development Goals.

Local projects for reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+) were frequently designed as pilot actions to inform future upscaled initiatives. Drawing lessons from these project experiences may thus help improve the design of jurisdictional programs, which is the focus of REDD+ implementation in the Paris Agreement. Here we first scrutinize how REDD+ was historically conceptualized, the most prominent model being that of a multitier payments for environmental services (PES) scheme of “passing on” carbon mitigation responsibilities and credits across scales, from international buyers to forestland owners. Then we analyze two REDD+ project databases, ID-RECCO and GCS-REDD, using principal component and regression analysis. Among 226 conservation-oriented REDD+ projects, only 88 had planned conditional incentives to landowners—the key feature of PES. Intentions to apply PES rose after 2007, and correlate strongly with efforts to seek certification, including as a benefit-sharing strategy, and with carbon sales. Zooming closer into a portfolio of 23 local REDD+ projects that were actually implemented on the ground, we found project implementers reported conditional incentives as potentially being both the most promising and effective intervention. Likewise, treated households identified conditional incentives as comparatively effective in changing their land-use plans, while also providing above-average welfare returns. Still, these conditional incentives remained underutilized in implementation, with only one-third of the treatment intensity compared to non-conditional incentives. Project implementers cited insecure land tenure and uncertain REDD+ financial flows as key impediments to using conditional incentives. The original vision of a multitier PES model for REDD+ thus ran into both supply and demand side problems, jointly explaining the discrepancy between REDD+ theory and practice. Since jurisdictional approaches to REDD+ so far also receive only hesitant and slow climate financing flows, coming mostly in non-conditional form, and operate under forest-frontier governance with similar tenure restrictions, jurisdictions would seem well-advised to plan for conditional landowner incentives only in scenarios where the preconditions for PES are met. Implementers of jurisidictional approaches may also want to avoid conceptualizing their new model too narrowly and prescriptively, as was arguably the case with the conceptualization of REDD+ as a multitier PES scheme.

Efforts to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation and enhancing forest carbon stocks (REDD+) have evolved over the past decade. Early REDD+ programs and local/subnational projects used various interventions (i.e. enabling measures, disincentives and incentives), implemented by government, the commercial and non-commercial private sector, but are currently understudied vis-a-vis their effectiveness to address site-specific drivers of deforestation and forest degradation (DD). We assess how well REDD+ inter-ventions addressed DD at five project sites in Peru (1), Brazil (1), Vietnam (1) and Indonesia (2). Our study design includes an integrated assessment of remotely sensed, spatially modelled, and locally reported drivers. First, we observe follow-up land use from high resolution imagery as proxy for direct deforestation drivers. Second, spatial Random Forest modelling of DD drivers allows for influence quantification of topographic, climatic and proximity variables at each site. Third, we report direct and indirect DD drivers from pre-intervention surveys and semi-structured interviews with five REDD+ implementers, 40 villages and 1200 households. Data gathered included perceived changes in forest cover and quality, and their causes. We found general agreement between observed, modelled and reported local DD drivers, yet some were inadequately addressed by inter-ventions. Intra-site differences in drivers underscores the importance of analysing micro-level DD drivers. Our interdisciplinary approach reveals the complexities of local direct and indirect DD drivers, and the complementarity of remotely sensed, spatially modelled and locally reported methods for driver identification. A better understanding of the alignment between DD drivers and REDD+ interventions is vital for practitioners and policy makers to enhance the effectiveness, efficiency, equity and co-benefits of REDD+ at the local level.

Jurisdictional approaches have become popular in international forums as promising strategies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions caused by deforestation and to guarantee sustainable commodity supply. Yet, despite their growing popularity, up to now, there is little consensus on how such approaches should move forward in specific jurisdictions. In this paper we examine two contrasting municipal-level case studies in the eastern Amazonian state of Para where jurisdiction-wide efforts are underway to reduce deforestation. By developing detailed forest governance intervention timelines since 2005, conducting semi-structured interviews with key informants, analyzing municipal deforestation trends, plus extensive examination of project reports, governmental documents and other secondary sources, this paper performs two main analyses. First, it characterizes the processes in each municipality by linking context and forest governance intervention timelines to deforestation trends. Second it provides a systematic comparison of processes based on (1) the role of the government, (2) multi-stakeholder participation and inclusiveness, (3) adaptive management, (4) horizontal and vertical coordination, and (5) alignment of public and private (supply-chain) initiatives. In so doing, this article answers some of the imperative questions on how to implement and improve jurisdictional approaches aimed at halting deforestation in the tropics.

Assessing the performance of efforts to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD +) requires data on forest cover change. Innovations in remote sensing and forest monitoring provide ever-increasing levels of coverage, spatial and temporal detail, and accuracy. More global products and advanced open-source algorithms are becoming available. Still, these datasets and tools are not always consistent or complementary, and their suitability for local REDD + performance assessments remains unclear. These assessments should, ideally, be free of any confounding factors, but performance estimates are affected by data uncertainties in unknown ways. Here, we analyse (1) differences in accuracy between datasets of forest cover change; (2) if and how combinations of datasets can increase accuracy; and we demonstrate (3) the effect of (not) doing accuracy assessments for REDD + performance measurements. Our study covers five local REDD + initiatives in four countries across the tropics. We compared accuracies of a readily available global forest cover change dataset and a locally modifiable open-source break detection algorithm. We applied human interpretation validation tools using Landsat Time Series data and high-resolution optical imagery. Next, we assessed whether and how combining different datasets can increase accuracies using several combination strategies. Finally, we demonstrated the consequences of using the input datasets for REDD + performance assessments with and without considering their accuracies and uncertainties. Estimating the amount of deforestation using validation samples could substantially reduce uncertainty in REDD + performance assessments. We found that the accuracies of the various data sources differ at site level, although on average neither one of the input products consistently excelled in accuracy. Using a combination of both products as stratification for area estimation and validated with a sample of high-resolution data seems promising. In these combined products, the expected trade-offs in accuracies across change classes (before, after, no change) and across accuracy types (user's and producer's accuracy) were negligible, so their use is advantageous over single-source datasets. More locally calibrated wall-to-wall products should be developed to make them more useful and applicable for REDD + purposes. The direction and degree of REDD+ performance remained statistically uncertain, as CIs were overlapping in most cases for the deforestation estimates before and after the start of the REDD + interventions. Given these uncertainties and inaccuracies and to increase the credibility of REDD+ it is advised to (1) be conservative in REDD+ accounting, and (2) not to rely on results from single currently available global data sources or tools without sample-based validation if results-based payments are intended to be made on this basis.

Critique constructive. Cet ouvrage propose une analyse critique de la mise en œuvre de la REDD+ jusqu'a present, etayee par des donnees scientifiques, sans perdre de vue le besoin urgent de reduire les emissions forestieres pour eviter des catastrophes liees au changement climatique.Tester la REDD+ a grande echelle : une necessite. Element innovant de la REDD+, le paiement base sur les resultats a rarement ete teste jusqu'ici. Qu’ils soient publics ou prives, les financements internationaux restent maigres, et la demande via les marches du carbone fait defaut.Des conditions plus favorables dans les pays. Plus de 50 pays ont inclus la REDD+ dans leurs contributions determinees au niveau national et elabore des strategies nationales de REDD+. La REDD+ a permis aux pays d'ameliorer leurs capacites de suivi-evaluation et de mieux comprendre les facteurs en jeu, a accru le nombre d'acteurs impliques et fourni une plateforme pour garantir les droits fonciers des populations autochtones et des autres communautes ; toutes ces conditions etant indispensables pour lutter contre la deforestation et de la degradation forestiere.Des impacts modestes pour les forets et sur le plan social. Les initiatives locales de REDD+ ont donne des resultats modestes, mais positifs, pour les forets. Limites et mitiges, les impacts sur le bien-etre sont plus susceptibles d'etre positifs en presence de mesures incitative.Une coordination nationale, accompagnee d'un argumentaire positif. Les strategies d'attenuation basees sur les forets doivent maintenant etre generalisees a l'ensemble des secteurs et des niveaux de l'administration. Un argumentaire convaincant et positif de la contribution des forets au developpement economique et aux objectifs climatiques pourrait donner un coup de fouet a l'attenuation basee sur les forets, en depit de l'incertitude politique qui regne actuellement dans certains des principaux pays emetteurs de gaz a effets de serre.Evolution de la REDD+ et nouvelles initiatives. La REDD+ a evolue, et de nouvelles initiatives sont apparues pour mener a bien son ambitieux objectif : engagements du secteur prive en faveur de la durabilite, agriculture intelligente face au climat, restauration des forets et des paysages, et approches juridictionnelles plus holistiques appliquees a des territoires bien definis sur le plan juridique.

The novel feature of REDD+ --payments for results at the scale of national or subnational jurisdictions-- is only now beginning to be tested, more than a decade since it was first embraced by the international community. Lessons are emerging about the degree to which such payments can prompt land use policy reforms to mitigate the emissions that cause climate change.National REDD+ initiatives have helped create domestic conditions for addressing deforestation and forest degradation, providing an important foundation for future impact. These conditions include better understanding of deforestation drivers, improved forest monitoring capacities, and increased stakeholder engagement.Subnational jurisdictional approaches are gaining traction as a strategic way to link REDD+ incentives, sustainable supply chain initiatives, and related domestic policies and finance. Many subnational jurisdictions across the tropics have made progress toward reducing deforestation; but more targeted policy reforms, including alignment of incentives at subnational, national, and international levels, are needed to sustain it.A first generation of REDD+ projects has yielded important insights into the drivers of deforestation that must be addressed at higher levels, including land tenure insecurity and demand for globally traded commodities. Rigorous evaluations of early project-scale REDD+ interventions can help inform the design and implementation of jurisdictional-scale policies, programs, and initiatives.