Offsetting Benefits? Analyzing Access to Forest Carbon

By E. Corbera, K. Brown. 2010

133 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Global and Planetary Change

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/922ccfa77fc985125d875223536afb3077431f91

How researchers see this paper

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

In Global and Planetary Change

1. E. Corbera
2. Tracey Osborne
3. J. Dempsey
4. Daniel Suarez
5. P. May
6. B. Brown
7. P. Pacheco
8. S. Spiegel

Citations in the corpus

• Property Rights Regimes and Natural Resources: A Conceptual Analysis Revisited (2017, unknown): “They develop use rights to indirect benefits by virtue of their superior command over finance, networks, and expertise (Corbera & Brown, 2010; Mathur et al. , 2014).”
• Carbon forestry and agrarian change: access and land control in a Mexican rainforest (2011, background): “However, while questions over the intersection of carbon and land access have been a source of contention among activists and communities on the ground, scholarship is just beginning to grapple directly with this issue (Basnet 2009 , Corbera and Brown 2010 , Saunders et al.”
• Coal, Climate Justice, and the Cultural Politics of Energy Transition (2019, background): “…schemes, have been critiqued for what Lohmann (2008) terms the production of ignorance: erasing historical and cultural contexts and replacing local knowledge, experience, and preferences with universal metrics of value determined by the market (see also Bracking 2015; Corbera and Brown 2010).”
• Examining equity: a multidimensional framework for assessing equity in payments for ecosystem services (2013, unknown): “…serve the interests of elites and intermediary organisations, while local actors lose access to significant livelihood resources without any significant benefits or influence over the terms of trade (Corbera and Brown, 2010; Kosoy and Corbera, 2010; McAfee and Shapiro, 2010; Pascual et al., 2010).”
• Arrested Development? The Promises and Paradoxes of “Selling Nature to Save It” (2016, background): “…have explored myriad instances of something akin to for-profit conservation, drawing out many of its on-the-ground consequences, including inequities (e.g., Corbera, Kosoy, and Tuna 2007; Kosoy et al. 2007; Corbera and Brown 2010) and new insecurities for local people (Igoe and Brockington 2007).”
• Problematizing REDD+ as an experiment in payments for ecosystem services (2012, background): “The case of forestry carbon offsets is in this regard explanatory because it has been influenced by carbon prices in larger emission trading markets, such as the European Emissions Trading Scheme, whilst institutions like the World Bank have also played a key role in setting up benchmark prices thro”
• Rights to Land, Forests and Carbon in REDD+: Insights from Mexico, Brazil and Costa Rica (2011, background): “Evidence from carbon forestry projects, for example, suggests that collective ownership can result in carbon revenues being distributed in favor of those households with more available capital, disposable labor and more active participation in project activities, and against actors who lack resource”