- Several studies on well-being outcomes of REDD+ interventions found small or mixed effects on livelihoods or welfare, which were more likely to be positive when incentives were offered.
- The slow pace of REDD+ implementation, and lack of robust studies quantifying both its forest/land-use and well-being outcomes, make it difficult to draw conclusions about trade-offs. But separate evidence on similar local-level PES initiatives points to challenges for designing REDD+ initiatives that are both effective at reducing forest carbon emissions and strongly pro-poor.
- Results that are more equitable and long-lasting are more likely when local people are genuinely involved in REDD+ programme design and implementation.
Topic: climate change, ecosystem services, mitigation, emissions, forests
Publisher: Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), Bogor, Indonesia
Publication Year: 2018
Source: A. Angelsen, C. Martius, V. de Sy, A.E. Duchelle, A.M. Larson, Pham T.T. (eds.) Transforming REDD+: Lessons and new directions. 131-143Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.