Framing REDD+ in India: Carbonizing and centralizing Indian forest governance?

M.J. Vijge, A. Gupta

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

16 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This article analyzes the interaction of newly articulated climate governance goals with long-standing forest policies and practices in India. We focus on India's REDD+ (reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation and related forest activities) strategy, with a particular focus on the Green India Mission (GIM). The GIM calls for a doubling of the area for afforestation and reforestation in India in the next decade as a dominant climate mitigation strategy. We analyze how the GIM policy document frames carbon versus non-carbon benefits to be derived from forest-related activities; and how the GIM envisages division of authority (between national, regional and local levels) in its implementation. We are interested in assessing (a) whether the GIM promotes a “carbonization” of Indian forest governance, i.e. an increased focus on forest carbon at the expense of other ecosystem services; and (b) whether it promotes an increased centralization of forest governance in India through retaining or transferring authority and control over forest resources to national and state-level authorities, at the expense of local communities. We argue that the GIM frames the climate-forest interaction as an opportunity to synergistically enhance both carbon and non-carbon benefits to be derived from forests; while simultaneously promoting further decentralization of Indian forest governance. However, based on past experiences and developments to date, we conclude that without significant investments in community-based carbon and biodiversity monitoring, as well as institutionalized benefit-sharing mechanisms that reach down to the local level, the posited REDD+-induced move toward more holistic and decentralized Indian forest governance is unlikely to take place.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)17-27
JournalEnvironmental Science & Policy
Volume38
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2014

Fingerprint

governance
India
carbon
climate
centralization
forest resource
reforestation
afforestation
decentralization
ecosystem service
deforestation
interaction
mitigation
biodiversity
community
degradation
monitoring
resources

Keywords

  • countries

Cite this

@article{cd131d3a3982491288a565e75007d568,
title = "Framing REDD+ in India: Carbonizing and centralizing Indian forest governance?",
abstract = "This article analyzes the interaction of newly articulated climate governance goals with long-standing forest policies and practices in India. We focus on India's REDD+ (reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation and related forest activities) strategy, with a particular focus on the Green India Mission (GIM). The GIM calls for a doubling of the area for afforestation and reforestation in India in the next decade as a dominant climate mitigation strategy. We analyze how the GIM policy document frames carbon versus non-carbon benefits to be derived from forest-related activities; and how the GIM envisages division of authority (between national, regional and local levels) in its implementation. We are interested in assessing (a) whether the GIM promotes a “carbonization” of Indian forest governance, i.e. an increased focus on forest carbon at the expense of other ecosystem services; and (b) whether it promotes an increased centralization of forest governance in India through retaining or transferring authority and control over forest resources to national and state-level authorities, at the expense of local communities. We argue that the GIM frames the climate-forest interaction as an opportunity to synergistically enhance both carbon and non-carbon benefits to be derived from forests; while simultaneously promoting further decentralization of Indian forest governance. However, based on past experiences and developments to date, we conclude that without significant investments in community-based carbon and biodiversity monitoring, as well as institutionalized benefit-sharing mechanisms that reach down to the local level, the posited REDD+-induced move toward more holistic and decentralized Indian forest governance is unlikely to take place.",
keywords = "countries",
author = "M.J. Vijge and A. Gupta",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.1016/j.envsci.2013.10.012",
language = "English",
volume = "38",
pages = "17--27",
journal = "Environmental Science & Policy",
issn = "1462-9011",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

Framing REDD+ in India: Carbonizing and centralizing Indian forest governance? / Vijge, M.J.; Gupta, A.

In: Environmental Science & Policy, Vol. 38, 2014, p. 17-27.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Framing REDD+ in India: Carbonizing and centralizing Indian forest governance?

AU - Vijge, M.J.

AU - Gupta, A.

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - This article analyzes the interaction of newly articulated climate governance goals with long-standing forest policies and practices in India. We focus on India's REDD+ (reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation and related forest activities) strategy, with a particular focus on the Green India Mission (GIM). The GIM calls for a doubling of the area for afforestation and reforestation in India in the next decade as a dominant climate mitigation strategy. We analyze how the GIM policy document frames carbon versus non-carbon benefits to be derived from forest-related activities; and how the GIM envisages division of authority (between national, regional and local levels) in its implementation. We are interested in assessing (a) whether the GIM promotes a “carbonization” of Indian forest governance, i.e. an increased focus on forest carbon at the expense of other ecosystem services; and (b) whether it promotes an increased centralization of forest governance in India through retaining or transferring authority and control over forest resources to national and state-level authorities, at the expense of local communities. We argue that the GIM frames the climate-forest interaction as an opportunity to synergistically enhance both carbon and non-carbon benefits to be derived from forests; while simultaneously promoting further decentralization of Indian forest governance. However, based on past experiences and developments to date, we conclude that without significant investments in community-based carbon and biodiversity monitoring, as well as institutionalized benefit-sharing mechanisms that reach down to the local level, the posited REDD+-induced move toward more holistic and decentralized Indian forest governance is unlikely to take place.

AB - This article analyzes the interaction of newly articulated climate governance goals with long-standing forest policies and practices in India. We focus on India's REDD+ (reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation and related forest activities) strategy, with a particular focus on the Green India Mission (GIM). The GIM calls for a doubling of the area for afforestation and reforestation in India in the next decade as a dominant climate mitigation strategy. We analyze how the GIM policy document frames carbon versus non-carbon benefits to be derived from forest-related activities; and how the GIM envisages division of authority (between national, regional and local levels) in its implementation. We are interested in assessing (a) whether the GIM promotes a “carbonization” of Indian forest governance, i.e. an increased focus on forest carbon at the expense of other ecosystem services; and (b) whether it promotes an increased centralization of forest governance in India through retaining or transferring authority and control over forest resources to national and state-level authorities, at the expense of local communities. We argue that the GIM frames the climate-forest interaction as an opportunity to synergistically enhance both carbon and non-carbon benefits to be derived from forests; while simultaneously promoting further decentralization of Indian forest governance. However, based on past experiences and developments to date, we conclude that without significant investments in community-based carbon and biodiversity monitoring, as well as institutionalized benefit-sharing mechanisms that reach down to the local level, the posited REDD+-induced move toward more holistic and decentralized Indian forest governance is unlikely to take place.

KW - countries

U2 - 10.1016/j.envsci.2013.10.012

DO - 10.1016/j.envsci.2013.10.012

M3 - Article

VL - 38

SP - 17

EP - 27

JO - Environmental Science & Policy

JF - Environmental Science & Policy

SN - 1462-9011

ER -