Who should be governed to reduce deforestation and how Multiple governmentalities at the REDD+ negotiations/ (Record no. 14460)
[ view plain ]
| 000 -LEADER | |
|---|---|
| fixed length control field | 02003nab a2200181 4500 |
| 005 - DATE & TIME | |
| control field | 20230904150805.0 |
| 008 - FIXED-LENGTH DATA ELEMENTS--GENERAL INFORMATION | |
| fixed length control field | 230904b |||||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d |
| 100 ## - MAIN ENTRY--PERSONAL NAME | |
| Personal name | Hjort, Mattias |
| 245 ## - TITLE STATEMENT | |
| Title | Who should be governed to reduce deforestation and how Multiple governmentalities at the REDD+ negotiations/ |
| 260 ## - PUBLICATION, DISTRIBUTION, ETC. (IMPRINT) | |
| Name of publisher, distributor, etc | Sage, |
| Date of publication, distribution, etc | 2020. |
| 300 ## - PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION | |
| Pages | Vol 38, Issue 1, 2020 (134–152 p.) |
| 520 ## - SUMMARY, ETC. | |
| Summary, etc | Drawing on recent multiple governmentality literature, this article analyses the REDD+ negotiations to interrogate who the scheme is likely to govern and how. Two arguments are advanced. First, REDD+ is likely to target local forest users at the expense of both corporate and international drivers of deforestation. This will reduce the effectiveness of the scheme and invite leakage issues. In elucidating the ultimately rejected strategies for addressing international drivers now hidden in neat negotiation outcomes, this article opens a space for considering how the scheme could move beyond a predominant focus on local forest users. Second, targeted forest users are likely to be governed by a combination of neoliberal and disciplinary technologies. REDD+ will seek to ‘improve’ their conduct through a three-staged process involving education, self-reflection and rewards for carbon sequestration. An alternative governmentality associated with local forest users’ claims to decide on REDD+ implementation and governance, on the other hand, met with resistance and ultimately received no protection in the adopted REDD+ safeguards. Moreover, the formulation of the safeguards could undermine legitimacy and forest stewardship in REDD+ projects. By linking the possibility of such issues to the negotiation outcomes, this article demonstrates necessary changes to the scheme.<br/> |
| 773 0# - HOST ITEM ENTRY | |
| Host Biblionumber | 8872 |
| Host Itemnumber | 17105 |
| Place, publisher, and date of publication | London Pion Ltd. 2010 |
| Title | Environment and planning C: |
| International Standard Serial Number | 1472-3425 |
| 856 ## - ELECTRONIC LOCATION AND ACCESS | |
| Uniform Resource Identifier | https://doi.org/10.1177/2399654419837298 |
| 942 ## - ADDED ENTRY ELEMENTS (KOHA) | |
| Koha item type | E-Journal |
| 100 ## - MAIN ENTRY--PERSONAL NAME | |
| -- | 57444 |
| 942 ## - ADDED ENTRY ELEMENTS (KOHA) | |
| -- | ddc |
No items available.