CIFOR-ICRAF aborda retos y oportunidades locales y, al mismo tiempo, ofrece soluciones a los problemas globales relacionados con los bosques, los paisajes, las personas y el planeta.

Aportamos evidencia empírica y soluciones prácticas para transformar el uso de la tierra y la producción de alimentos: conservando y restaurando ecosistemas, respondiendo a las crisis globales del clima, la malnutrición, la pérdida de biodiversidad y la desertificación. En resumen, mejorando la vida de las personas.

CIFOR-ICRAF produce cada año más de 750 publicaciones sobre agroforestería, bosques y cambio climático, restauración de paisajes, derechos, políticas forestales y mucho más, y en varios idiomas. .

CIFOR-ICRAF aborda retos y oportunidades locales y, al mismo tiempo, ofrece soluciones a los problemas globales relacionados con los bosques, los paisajes, las personas y el planeta.

Aportamos evidencia empírica y soluciones prácticas para transformar el uso de la tierra y la producción de alimentos: conservando y restaurando ecosistemas, respondiendo a las crisis globales del clima, la malnutrición, la pérdida de biodiversidad y la desertificación. En resumen, mejorando la vida de las personas.

CIFOR–ICRAF publishes over 750 publications every year on agroforestry, forests and climate change, landscape restoration, rights, forest policy and much more – in multiple languages.

CIFOR–ICRAF addresses local challenges and opportunities while providing solutions to global problems for forests, landscapes, people and the planet.

We deliver actionable evidence and solutions to transform how land is used and how food is produced: conserving and restoring ecosystems, responding to the global climate, malnutrition, biodiversity and desertification crises. In short, improving people’s lives.

REDD+ and equity outcomes: Two cases from Cameroon

Exportar la cita

One reason for recent opposition to REDD+ stems from concerns about possible welfare impacts on forest-dependent, especially indigenous peoples. We assess how two projects with community payments (PES / REDD+) impacted indigenous peoples (Baka) relative to the locally dominant ethnic group (Bantu) in south-eastern Cameroon, trying to understand to which extent the projects addressed equity concerns. We gathered empirical data through a household questionnaire survey, indepth interviews, and focus group discussions in six villages. Overall, we found little support for the hypothesis that indigenous peoples were disadvantaged by the projects, absolutely and relative to the locally dominant ethnic group, along procedural and distributive equity dimensions. Yet, upfront contextual inequities with respect to technical capabilities, power, gender, level of education, and wealth are key to determining an individual’s likelihood of participating in and benefiting from the projects. Our analysis also revealed that more complex and time-consuming free prior informed consent processes could actually come to reinforce power imbalances and inequities. Hence, we call attention to the key role contextual factors play for equity and social safeguards when implementing REDD+ and associated interventions.

DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2021.07.003
Dimensiones Recuento de citas:

Publicaciones relacionadas