Benefit sharing redd women

2016

Concerns about gender equality and women’s empowerment are re-emerging as part of the post-2015 global development agenda,and addressing them is one of the Sustainable Development Goals(SDGs).Every five years, the United Nations Division for the Advancement of Women(known since 2010 as UN Women),publishes a ‘World Survey onthe Role of Women in Development’. These Surveys are presented to the Second Committee of the General Assembly and focus on specific development themes.The 2014Survey focuses on gender equality and sustainable development and was commissionedto inform the SDG process.Itmakes a case for linking gender equality andsustainable development on the grounds that ‘causes and underlying drivers of unsustainability and of gender inequality are deeply interlocked’(p.11). Furthermore, itnotes that: ‘women’s knowledge, agency and collective action are central to finding, demonstrating and building more economically, socially and environmentally sustainable pathways to manage l...

Climate Policy, 2019

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.

2013

Mitigating these risks will require improved coordination among actors, better law enforcement, clear guidance for and monitoring of financial flows, improved information exchange and stronger capacity of the actors involved. Whether REDD+ can catalyse these changes will depend in part on how the costs and benefits of REDD+ are shared, and whether the benefits are sufficient incentive to induce changes in entrenched behaviours and policies at all levels of government. The successful design and implementation of benefit-sharing mechanisms -and hence the legitimacy and acceptance of REDD+ -depend on having clear objectives, procedural equity and an inclusive process, and on engaging in a rigorous analysis of the options for benefit sharing to assess their possible effects on both beneficiaries and climate mitigation efforts. CIFOR advances human wellbeing, environmental conservation and equity by conducting research to inform policies and practices that affect forests in developing countries. CIFOR is a CGIAR Consortium Research Center. CIFOR's headquarters are in Bogor, Indonesia. It also has offices in Asia, Africa and South America.

2012

Unasylva 239, Vol. 63, 2012/1 Women contribute significantly to forest management; for example, they practise traditional agroforestry and gather fuelwood and non-wood forest products (NWFPs) for food, medicine and fodder. In some countries, such as Indonesia and Viet Nam, women engage in nursery activities and patrol and monitor forests. Given their involvement in forest management, women should be among the beneficiaries of forest-related sustainable development initiatives. One way in which forest ecosystem services can be monetized is through REDD+, which is a mechanism to encourage developing countries to contribute to climate change mitigation in the forest sector through the following activities: reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation; the conservation of forest carbon stocks; the sustainable management of forests; and the enhancement of Ensuring that women benefit from REDD+

Development and Change, 1997

For poor households, and especially for the women who own little private land, forests and village commons have always been critical sources of basic necessities in rural India. However, the availability of these resources has been declining rapidly, due both to degradation and to shifts in property rights away from community control and management to State and individual control and management. More recently, though, we are seeing small but notable reversals in these processes toward a re-establishment of greater community control over forests and village commons. Numerous forest management groups have emerged, initiated variously by the State, by village communities, or by non-governmental organizations. However, unlike the old systems of communal property management which recognized the usufruct rights of all villagers, the new ones represent a more formalized system of rights based on membership. In other words, under the new initiatives, membership is replacing citizenship as the de®ning criterion for establishing rights in the commons. This raises critical questions about participation and equity, especially gender equity. Are the bene®ts and costs of the emergent institutional arrangements being shared equally by women and men? Or are they creating a system of property rights in communal land which, like existing rights in privatized land, are strongly male centred? What is women's participation in these initiatives? What constrains or facilitates their participation and exercise of agency? This article provides pointers. It also demonstrates the relevance of the feminist environmentalist perspective, as opposed to the ecofeminist perspective, in understanding gendered responses to the environmental crisis. 1 1.

Questions of equity, gender, power and rights are central to environmental justice in climate mitigation schemes such as REDD+ (Reducing Emissions From Deforestation and Degradation). Drawing on the ideas of co-benefits and safeguards, the strategies for challenging mainstream discourse on gender in REDD+ – from the outside and within – are examined of two organisations that have attempted to bring a political concept – gender – into the largely technical discourse of climate policy. The analysis points to the risks of co-option that women’s organisations face, trying to challenge and change the mainstream discourse on gender in climate policy-making. The need for diverse and flexible strategies for resistance and influence in order to seize opportunities that may arise in countering the depoliticising force of global climate governance are highlighted.

2006

The Forum on Social Wealth has called our attention to something profound – the numerous informal, non-market ways in which value is created in our society, our significant dependence on this common wealth, and our need to preserve and steward it. I congratulate the Forum for sounding the alert that we might lose this invaluable wealth – wealth that enriches our lives but which we take for granted and so make invisible. Indeed Nancy’s and Jim’s own work takes cognizance of these issues in subtle, creative ways.

This paper presents communities expectations on access and benefit sharing in seven selected REDD pilot projects in Tanzania. The pilot projects are being implemented by African Wildlife Foundation, Tanzania Traditional Energy and Environmental Organization, Mpingo Conservation and Development Initiative, Tanzania Forest Conservation Group,Jane Goodle Institute, Wilidlife Conservation Society and Care International in Tanzania. Key informants interviews, focus group discussions and a questionnaire to 615 household heads in the selected household representatives in 14 REDD pilot villages were administered. Findings indicate that, majority (89.9%) of the community representatives have primary school as their highest level of education. 80.5% of the representatives’ main economic activity is agriculture. On REDD awareness, 68.9% of the community representatives are aware and 42.2% indicated to have received some incentives under the REDD pilot projects. Only 7% indicated to be satisfied with the benefit received from REDD pilot projects in the respective projects areas. On the forest related resources, 61% of the community representative reported to have lost access to fuel wood, charcoal making were (30.6%), and construction materials including poles and reeds were (7.8%). Communities ranked (i) poor access to REDD related benefits, (ii) Few people being involved in REDD, (iii)Poor governance, (iv)leakage, (v) land alienation,(vi)conflicts on benefit sharing and (vii) un acceptance of the projects by local communities as implementation challenges in REDD pilot projects in their respective villages. In implementing theREDD pilot projects, issues of benefit sharing mechanisms, equity, governance and leakage should be given priority for sustainability of such projects under carbon market. Keywords: awareness; conflicts, equity, governance, leakage

2004

Chapter 1-Introduction 2. Chapter 2-Background 2.1. An evolving understanding of environmental management during events leading up to the UNCCD 2.2. Desertification and Women as part of the 1992 UNCED Agenda 2.3. From Rio to Paris or from Chapter 12 to UNCCD 2.4. The UNCCD and the role of women 3. Chapter 3-Major groups' role in supporting the role of women and gender equality in the UNCCD 3.1. Positions of Official Delegations regarding gender mainstreaming and women's participation in the UNCCD 3.2. Global Institutions of the UNCCD 3.

Gender and rural globalization: international perspectives on gender and rural development