Reducing Emissions, Forest Management and Multiactor Perspectives: Problem Representation Analysis of Laos REDD+ Programs
Versions
- 2019-10-26 (2)
- 2019-10-26 (1)
Additional Files
Deprecated: json_decode(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($json) of type string is deprecated in /home/journal33/public_html/plugins/generic/citations/CitationsPlugin.inc.php on line 49
Every policy solution is embedded in a certain “problem representation” that is taken for granted and assumed by policymakers. This paper examines how emission reductions and forest management have been problematized for policymaking and solution implementation from multiple actors’ perspectives. Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+), particularly Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF) programs, in the Lao People’s Democratic Republic (Lao PDR) serves as a demonstrative example. By applying the ‘What is the Problem Represented to be’ (WPR) approach as a poststructuralist method, this study first comparatively analyzes the general problem as represented by multiple actors, including the government, media, academia and civil society. In particular, queries such as what and how the “problem” is represented and what is not problematized are reflected during the analyses. Next, this research further examines the corresponding problematization gap based on drivers of deforestation and forest degradation and discusses the noncarbon benefits of FCPF in the rhetoric. The objective of the study is to not to find the best policy choice but to reveal the heterogeneity in problem representations formulated by multiple actors to yield space for alternative and disruptive change for future problem solving in emission reductions and forest management
Bacchi, C. (1999). Women, Policy, and Politics : The Construction of Policy Problems. Sage, London, UK.
Bacchi, C. (2009). Analysing Policy : What’s the Problem Represented to Be? Frenchs Forest. Pearson, N.S.W, Australia.
Bacchi, C. (2012). Why study problematizations? Making politics visible. Open Journal of Political Science, 2(01), 1–8. doi: https://doi.org/10.4236/ojps.2012.21001
Bacchi, C. (2015). Problematizations in alcohol policy: WHO’s ‘alcohol problems’. Contemporary Drug Problems, 42(2), 130–147. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0091450915576116
Bacchi, C. & Goodwin, S. (2016). Poststructural Policy Analysis : A Guide to Practice. Palgrave Macmillan, New York, US.
Baird, I.G. (2014). Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD) and access and exclusion: obstacles and opportunities in Cambodia and Laos. Southeast Asian Studies, 3(3), 643–668. doi: https://doi.org/10.20495/seas.3.3_643
Baledón, M. & Kosoy, N. (2018). Problematizing” carbon emissions from international aviation and the role of alternative jet fuels in meeting ICAO’s mid-century aspirational goals. Journal of Air Transport Management, 71(July), 130–137. doi: https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.jairtraman.2018.06.001
Bletsas, A. & Beasley, C. (2012). Engaging with Carol Bacchi : Strategic Interventions and Exchanges. University of Adelaide Press, Adelaide, South Australia.
Büscher, B., Sullivan, S., Neves, K., Igoe, J. & Brockington, D. (2012). Towards a synthesized critique of neoliberal biodiversity conservation. Capitalism Nature Socialism, 23(2), 4–30. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/10455752.2012.674149
Cavanagh, C.J., Vedeld, P.O. & Trædal, L.T. (2015). Securitizing REDD+? Problematizing the emerging illegal timber trade and forest carbon interface in East Africa. Geoforum 60,72–82. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2015.01.011
Christie, N. & Bruun, K. (1969). Alcohol Problems: The Conceptual Framework. In: Keller, M. & Coffey, T,G. (eds) Proceedings of the 28th International Congress on Alcohol and Alcoholism. Hillhouse Press, Highland Park, New Jersey. pp. 65–73.
Corbera, E. (2012). Problematizing REDD+ as an experiment in payments for ecosystem services. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 4(6), 612–619. doi: https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.cosust.2012.09.010
Deacon, R. (2000). Theory as Practice: Foucault’s Concept of Problematization. Telos 118, 127–142.
Dijk, T.A. van (1984). Prejudice in Discourse : An Analysis of Ethnic Prejudice in Cognition and Conversation. J. Benjamins Pub. Co, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
FCPF (2015). Readiness Fund REDD+ Country Participants Progress Report Lao PDR.
FCPF (2016). Carbon Fund Methodological Framework.
FCPF (2018a). Forest Carbon Partnersbhip Facility 2018 Annual Report.
FCPF (2018b). Lao PDR FCPF Readiness Package Self-Assessment Report: Readiness for Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD+).
FCPF (2018c). Promoting REDD+ through Governance, Forest landscapes & Livelihood in Northern Lao PDR.
Federici, S., Tubiello, F.N., Salvatore, M., Jacobs, H. & Schmidhuber, J. (2015). New estimates of CO2 forest emissions and removals: 1990–2015. Forest Ecology and Management, 352, 89–98. doi: https://doi.org/ 10.1016/J.FORECO.2015.04.022
Flynn, T.R. (2005). Foucault’s mapping of history. In: Gutting, G. (ed.) The Cambridge Companion to Foucault. 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp. 29–48.
Foley, J.A., Defries, R., Asner, G.P., et al. (2005) Global consequences of land use. Science, 309(5734), 570–574. doi: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1111772
Forsyth, T. (2009). Multilevel, multiactor governance in REDD+: Participation, Integration and Coordinatio. In: Angelsen, A., Brockhaus, M., Kanninen, M.N., Sills, E., et al. (eds) Realising REDD+: Natonal Strategy and Policy Options. Bogor: Center for International Forestry Research, pp. 113–122.
Foucault, M. (1980). The History of Sexuality, Vol. I. An Introduction. Vintage Books, New York, USA.
Harcourt, B. (2007). An answer to the question: ‘What Is Poststructuralism?’ University of Chicago, Public Law Working Paper No. 156.
Hutchinson, J. & Eveline, J. (2010). Workplace bullying policy in the Australian public sector: Why has gender been ignored? Australian Journal of Public Administration, 69(1), 47–60. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8500.2010.00669.x
Keeley, J.E. (2001). Influencing Policy Processes for Sustainable Livelihoods: strategies for change. Brighton. Institute of Development Studies.
Lang, D.J., Wiek, A., Bergmann, M., Stauffacher, M. Martens, P. Moll, P. Swilling, M. & Thomas, C. J. (2012). Transdisciplinary research in sustainability science: practice, principles, and challenges. Sustainability Science, 7(S1), 25–43. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-011-0149-x
Lepers, E., Lambin, E.F., Janetos, A.C., DeFries, R. Achard, F., Ramankutty, N. & Scholes, R. J. (2005). A synthesis of information on rapid land-cover change for the period 1981–2000. BioScience, (55), 115–124. doi:https://doi.org/10.1641/00063568(2005)055[0115:ASOIOR]2.0.CO;2
Mcgregor, A., Weaver, S., Challies, E., Howson, P., Astuti, R. & Haalboom, B. (2014). Practical critique: Bridging the gap between critical and practice-oriented REDD+ research communities. Asia Pacific Viewpoint, 55(3), 277–291. doi:https//doi.org/10.1111/apv.12064
McGregor, A. (2010). Green and REDD: Towards a political ecology of deforestation in Aceh, Indonesia. Human Geography, 3(2), 21–34.
Moore, C., Ferrand, J. & Khiewvongphachan, X. (2011). Investigation of the Drivers of Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Nam Phui National Protected Area, Lao PDR. Climate Protection through Avoided Deforestation Programme, GIZ.
Pachauri, R., Allen, M., Barros, V., et al. (2014). Climate change 2014: synthesis report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the fifth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate.
PDR Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry (2018). Lao PDR’s Forest Reference Emission Level and Forest Reference Level for REDD+ Results Payment under the UNFCCC.
Pearse, R. (2012). Mapping REDD in the Asia-Pacific: Governance, marketisation and contention. Ephemera: Theory & politics in organization, 12(1–2), 181–205.
Pereira, R.B. (2014). Using critical policy analysis in occupational science research: Exploring Bacchi’s methodology. Journal of Occupational Science, 21(4), 389–402. doi:https//doi.org/ 10.1080/14427591.2013.806207.
Stern, N.H. (2007). The Economics of Climate Change : The Stern Review. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Vongsiharath, V. (2011). Forest Cover and Land-Use Changes in Lao PDR: According to the National forest Reconnaissance Survey. Vientiane.
Vongvisouk, T., Lestrelin, G., Castella, J.C., Mertz, O, Broegaard, R. B. & Thongmanivong, S. (2016). REDD+ on hold: Lessons from an emerging institutional setup in Laos. Asia Pacific Viewpoint, 57(3), 393–405. doi:https//doi.org/10.1111/apv.12134
Yeboah, Y. (2013). Gendering the REDD+ policy process in Ghana. Master's Thesis. Swedish University of Agriculgture Sciences
Copyright (c) 2019 Forest and Society
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This is an open access journal which means that all contents is freely available without charge to the user or his/her institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles in this journal without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This is in accordance with the BOAI definition of open access.
Submission of an article implies that the work described has not been published previously (except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture or academic thesis), that it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere, that its publication is approved by all authors and tacitly or explicitly by the responsible authorities where the work was carried out, and that, if accepted, will not be published elsewhere in the same form, in English or in any other language, without the written consent of the Publisher. An article based on a section from a completed graduate dissertation may be published in Forest and Society, but only if this is allowed by author's(s') university rules. The Editors reserve the right to edit or otherwise alter all contributions, but authors will receive proofs for approval before publication.
Forest and Society operates a CC-BY 4.0 © license for journal papers. Copyright remains with the author, but Forest and Society is licensed to publish the paper, and the author agrees to make the article available with the CC-BY 4.0 license. Reproduction as another journal article in whole or in part would be plagiarism. Forest and Society reserves all rights except those granted in this copyright notice
