Women from forest-dependent Indigenous Peoples (IPs) and local communities (LCs) play a key role in forest management, yet are frequently marginalized from decision making related to actions in their forests.
Overall, the design and implementation of REDD+ actions may be repeating the mistakes of prior conservation and development actions that failed to build in responsiveness to women’s rights and gender equality; safeguards standards may be a way to change these practices.
Our analysis shows that despite a commendable turn away from gender-blind requirements in safeguards, there is still much to be done.
Most of the standards included some gender-related criteria regarding land and resource rights, but only one specifically considered securing IP and LC women’s land and resource rights.
Standards have a range of gender equality requirements regarding REDD+ benefit sharing mechanisms; these range from strategies to assure women receive equal access to benefits, to securing women’s participation in the construction of those mechanisms.
However, only two standards required that grievance mechanisms were gender-responsive or accessible to women; this is an aspect that should receive more attention to bridge the gap between the potential and real impact of these standards.