Can REDD+ Save the Forest? The Role of Payments and Tenure
Can REDD+ Save the Forest? The Role of Payments and Tenure
复制标题
REDD能拯救森林吗？
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2012
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
A. Tesfaw
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
E. Barbier;A. Tesfaw
最近，遏制全球森林砍伐和退化以及由此产生的任何温室气体排放的一项政策回应是REDD+，其中还包括保护、可持续管理森林和增加森林碳储量的作用。尽管REDD+仍处于起步阶段，但它的成功将在很大程度上取决于它在经济上是否可行，以及由此产生的任何支付是否足以覆盖机会成本和任何交易成本。在森林权属保障薄弱的地方，REDD+可能会给森林社区带来风险，他们可能被剥夺土地，被排斥和边缘化。本文对现有研究进行了回顾，探讨了避免毁林的补偿和森林权属如何在有效性、效率和公平性方面影响REDD+项目的成功。有效性是指实施REDD+与不实施REDD+的森林砍伐之间的差异，效率是指以最小的成本避免森林砍伐，而公平性是指REDD+对利益分享的影响。我们得出的结论是，REDD+作为减少森林砍伐和森林公地碳排放手段的潜在成功或失败，关键取决于设计在现有非正式权益制度下工作的项目，以确保碳储存效益与生计效益相一致。
A recent policy response to halting global forest deforestation and degradation, and any resulting greenhouse gas emissions is REDD+, which also includes the role of conservation, sustainable management of forests and enhancement of forest carbon stocks. Although still in its infancy, the success of REDD+ will depend significantly on whether it can be economically viable and if any resulting payments are sufficient to cover the opportunity cost plus any transaction cost. Where tenure security over forest is weak, REDD+ can pose a risk for forest communities, who could be dispossessed, excluded and marginalized. This review of existing studies explores how payment for avoided deforestation, and forest tenure impact the success of REDD+ projects in terms of effectiveness, efficiency and equity. Effectiveness refers to the difference between deforestation with and without REDD+, efficiency refers to avoiding deforestation at minimal cost, and equity refers to the implication of REDD+ on benefit sharing. We conclude that the potential success or failure of REDD+ as a means to reduce deforestation and carbon emission on forest commons depends critically on designing projects that work within existing informal tenure institutions to ensure that carbon storage benefits align with livelihood benefits.