Gender lessons for climate initiatives: A comparative study of REDD+ impacts on subjective wellbeing", World Development

dc.contributor.authorLarson, Anne M
dc.contributor.authorSolis, David
dc.contributor.authorDuchelle, Amy E
dc.contributor.authorAtmadja, Stibniati
dc.contributor.authorResosudarmo, Daju
dc.contributor.authorDokken, Therese
dc.contributor.authorKomalasari, Mella
dc.date.accessioned2019-11-25T23:54:06Z
dc.date.available2019-11-25T23:54:06Z
dc.date.issued2018-08
dc.date.updated2019-05-19T08:23:06Z
dc.description.abstractAlthough REDD+ is primarily a mechanism for reducing carbon emissions from forests, concerns regarding social benefits, wellbeing and gender are increasingly part of its mandate. This is consistent with the Paris Declaration as well as SDG 5 on gender equality and women’s empowerment. Critics have argued, however, that REDD+ design, both in policy and projects, does not take gender into account effectively, rather marginalizing women from decision making processes and exacerbating inequalities. Most of that research has been site specific or on single countries. This article uses data from a longitudinal study of subnational REDD+ initiatives in six countries to analyze their gendered impact on perceived wellbeing. Comparative research on subjective wellbeing was conducted at 62 villages participating in 16 REDD+ initiatives and 61 control villages at two periods in time, using a before-after-control-intervention (BACI) design. Focus groups with villagers (68% male) and women (100% female) permit a gendered comparison of definitions of wellbeing and outcomes of initiatives. The results highlight that while definitions of wellbeing overlapped between the two groups, almost half of the women’s focus groups thought that having their own source of income was important. Outcomes regarding wellbeing change suggest that perceived wellbeing decreased in REDD+ villages both for villagers as a whole and for women, relative to control villages, but the decrease was much worse for women – a decrease that is significantly associated with living in a REDD+ village. These declines may be due to unrealized expectations for REDD+, combined with little attention to gender in REDD+ initiatives, in spite of an important portion (46%) of specific interventions that women view positively. These interventions provide insights into potential ways forward. Overall, however, REDD+ initiatives appear to be repeating past mistakes, with insufficient attention to gender equality and safeguarding women’s rights. More effort needs to be paid to ensuring that gender is an integral part of future initiatives to combat climate change in rural communities.en_AU
dc.description.sponsorshipThe funding partners that supported this research include the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (Norad), the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT), the European Union (EU), the International Climate Initiative (IKI) of the German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety (BMUB), the Department for International Development (UKAID), and the CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry (CRP-FTA), with financial support from the donors contributing to the CGIAR Fund.en_AU
dc.format.extent17 pagesen_AU
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdfen_AU
dc.identifier.issn0305-750Xen_AU
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1885/186635
dc.language.isoen_AUen_AU
dc.publisherPergamon-Elsevier Ltden_AU
dc.rights© 2018 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltden_AU
dc.rights.licenseThis is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).en_AU
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/en_AU
dc.sourceWorld Developmenten_AU
dc.subjectClimate changeen_AU
dc.subjectMitigationen_AU
dc.subjectTropical forestsen_AU
dc.subjectLivelihoodsen_AU
dc.subjectCommunity forest managementen_AU
dc.titleGender lessons for climate initiatives: A comparative study of REDD+ impacts on subjective wellbeing", World Developmenten_AU
dc.typeJournal articleen_AU
dcterms.accessRightsOpen Accessen_AU
dcterms.dateAccepted2018-02-28
local.bibliographicCitation.lastpage102en_AU
local.bibliographicCitation.startpage86en_AU
local.contributor.affiliationLarson, Anne M, CIFORen_AU
local.contributor.affiliationSolis, David, Center for International Forestry Researchen_AU
local.contributor.affiliationDuchelle, Amy, Center for International Forestry Researchen_AU
local.contributor.affiliationAtmadja, Stibniati, Center for International Forestry Researchen_AU
local.contributor.affiliationResosudarmo, Ida Aju, College of Asia and the Pacific, The Australian National Universityen_AU
local.contributor.affiliationDokken, T, School of Economics and Business, Norwegian University of Life Scienceen_AU
local.contributor.affiliationKomalasari, Mella, CIFORen_AU
local.contributor.authoremailrepository.admin@anu.edu.auen_AU
local.contributor.authoruidResosudarmo, Ida (Daju), u2512008en_AU
local.description.notesImported from ARIESen_AU
local.identifier.absfor160507 - Environment Policyen_AU
local.identifier.absfor169901 - Gender Specific Studiesen_AU
local.identifier.ariespublicationu4734594xPUB58en_AU
local.identifier.citationvolume108en_AU
local.identifier.doi10.1016/j.worlddev.2018.02.027en_AU
local.identifier.uidSubmittedByu4734594en_AU
local.publisher.urlhttps://www.elsevier.com/en-auen_AU
local.type.statusPublished Versionen_AU

Downloads

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
01 Larson A M et al Gender lessons for 2018.pdf
Size:
1.63 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description: