Moving ahead with REDD: issues, options and implications

By A. Angelsen. 2008

575 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Eited by A ild A nelsen Moving Ahead with REDD Issues, Options and Implications Mving Aead ith REDD Isues, O pions nd Im plitions REDD (reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation) is based on a simple idea: pay developing countries to reduce CO2 emissions from the forest sector. Nevertheless, design and implementation of a REDD system raise many hard questions: How are emissions reductions monitored, reported and veri ed? How should REDD be nanced? Should payments be directed to countries, projects, or both? How should reference levels be set? How are non-permanence and leakage accounted? How to achieve REDD co-bene ts and avoid doing harm?

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Global and Planetary Change

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/78ca1d87f47d0471cd5821a02dd5147fb18124dd

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

In Global and Planetary Change

Citations in the corpus

Policy design for forest carbon sequestration: A review of the literature (2016, background): “However, neither Dutschke and Angelsen (2008) nor Palmer (2011) provide in-depth analysis of efficient design of suggested policies.”
Enhancing the sustainability of commodity supply chains in tropical forest and agricultural landscapes (2013, background): “REDD+ is a set of policies and incentives by which governments in countries with high-greenhouse gas emissions are able to commit funds to countries that demonstrate reduced greenhouse gas emissions from the clearance and degradation of forests (Angelsen, 2008; Parker et al., 2009).”
Assessing the Relationship Between Human Well-being and Ecosystem Services: A Review of Frameworks (2014, background): “Myriad policies have been developed and implemented in an attempt to minimise the impact of biodiversity loss, habitat degradation and land-use change on people and the environment (Angelsen 2008; Engel et al. 2008; Heller and Zavaleta 2009; Stern 2009; TEEB 2010; GEF 2012).”
The Impact of Land-Use Change on Ecosystem Services, Biodiversity and Returns to Landowners: A Case Study in the State of Minnesota (2011, background): “…in terrestrial ecosystems has emerged as an important issue in international climate negotiations and there is great interest in giving climate change mitigation credit to land use or land management that results in higher levels of carbon storage (e.g., Angelsen 2008; Canadell and Raupach 2008).”
Carbon payments as a safeguard for threatened tropical mammals (2009, background): “Some of these issues, such as setting meaningful emissions “baselines,” minimizing and accounting for leakage, and monitoring emissions reductions to ensure that they are real and lasting, are general to all countries and have been reviewed elsewhere (e.g., Angelsen 2008; Ebeling & Yasue 2008).”
Can REDD+ social safeguards reach the ‘right’ people? Lessons from Madagascar (2016, background): “Advocates have claimed that REDD+ offers a win-win-win (Angelsen and Atmadja, 2008): climate mitigation while also conserving tropical forests (good for biodiversity) and protecting indigenous rights and providing livelihood support for local communities (good for people).”
Community Participation and Benefits in REDD+: A Review of Initial Outcomes and Lessons (2013, background): “This is evidenced by the widespread uptake of voluntary certification standards that require forest carbon projects deliver socio-economic ―co-benefits‖, such as the Climate, Community, and Biodiversity (CCB) and Plan Vivo standards [5–7] and the narratives dominating REDD+ policy discourse (see [8]”