In October 2017, CIFOR put out a report titled, “Rights abuse allegations in the context of REDD+ readiness and implementation: A preliminary review and proposal for moving forward”. In early November, REDD-Monitor wrote a post about the report.
In 2007, the Forest Peoples Programme put out a briefing paper about reduced emissions from deforestation, or RED, as REDD was called back then. The briefing warned of the risks of the rapid expansion of avoided deforestation schemes without due regard to rights, and social and livelihood issues.
Last year, four academics published a paper in Conservation Biology, with the title, “Questioning REDD+ and the future of market-based conservation”. The paper starts with this memorable line, “Increasingly, one hears furtive whispers in the halls of conservation: ‘REDD+ is dead; it’s time to cut our losses and move on.’”
São Félix do Xingu is a large municipality in the state of Pará, Brazil. Since 2001, it has had one of the highest rates of deforestation in the Amazon. Covering an area of 8.4 million hectares, with more than two million head of cattle and a little over 106,000 people, it easy to see what…
Earlier this week, REDD-Monitor wrote a post about a CIFOR InfoBrief on the “REDD+ Governance Landscape” in Brazil. While the brief is interesting, I was concerned that those critical of, or opposed to REDD were excluded from CIFOR’s study.