How Are Local People Driving and Affected by Forest Cover Change? Opportunities for Local Participation in REDD+ Measurement, Reporting and Verification.

Deforestation and forest degradation are complex and dynamic processes that vary from place to place. They are driven by multiple causes. Local communities are, to some extent, driving and also affected by some of these processes. Can their knowledge aid and add to place-specific assessment and monitoring of Deforestation and forest Degradation (DD) drivers? Our research was conducted in seven villages across three provinces of Indonesia (Papua, West Kalimantan and Central Java). Household surveys and focus group discussions were used to investigate how local community knowledge of DD drivers contributes to place-specific assessment and monitoring of DD drivers. We analyzed the link between drivers and local livelihoods to see how attempts to address deforestation and forest degradation might affect local communities and how this link might influence their participation in climate change mitigation measures such as Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) and Measuring, Reporting and Verifying (MRV) activities. We found that local knowledge is fundamental to capturing the variety of drivers particularly in countries like Indonesia where forest and socio-economic conditions are diverse. Better understanding of drivers and their importance for local livelihoods will not only contribute to a more locally appropriate design of REDD+ and monitoring systems but will also foster local participation

List of livelihoods that are also drivers of deforestation and forest degradation.

<p>List of livelihoods that are also drivers of deforestation and forest degradation.</p

Map of the study sites.

<p>The map was developed by the Center for International Forestry Research under the Participatory Measurement, Reporting and Verification (CIFOR-PMRV) Research Project using administrative boundary data obtained from the Indonesian National Statistics Agency <i>(Badan Pusat Statistik Indonesia)</i> 2010.</p

Classification of PMRV publications based on publication and study types.

<p>Classification of PMRV publications based on publication and study types.</p

Assessing the Claims of Participatory Measurement, Reporting and Verification (PMRV) in Achieving REDD+ Outcomes: A Systematic Review

<div><p>Participation of local communities in the Measurement, Reporting and Verification (MRV) of forest changes has been promoted as a strategy that lowers the cost of MRV and increases their engagement with REDD+. This systematic review of literature assessed the claims of participatory MRV (PMRV) in achieving REDD+ outcomes. We identified 29 PMRV publications that consisted of 20 peer-reviewed and 9 non peer-reviewed publications, with 14 publications being empirically based studies. The evidence supporting PMRV claims was categorized into empirical finding, citation or assumption. Our analysis of the empirical studies showed that PMRV projects were conducted in 17 countries in three tropical continents and across various forest and land tenure types. Most of these projects tested the feasibility of participatory measurement or monitoring, which limited the participation of local communities to data gathering. PMRV claims of providing accurate local biomass measurements and lowering MRV cost were well-supported with empirical evidence. Claims that PMRV supports REDD+ social outcomes that affect local communities directly, such as increased environmental awareness and equity in benefit sharing, were supported with less empirical evidence than REDD+ technical outcomes. This may be due to the difficulties in measuring social outcomes and the slow progress in the development and implementation of REDD+ components outside of experimental research contexts. Although lessons from other monitoring contexts have been used to support PMRV claims, they are only applicable when the enabling conditions can be replicated in REDD+ contexts. There is a need for more empirical evidence to support PMRV claims on achieving REDD+ social outcomes, which may be addressed with more opportunities and rigorous methods for assessing REDD+ social outcomes. Integrating future PMRV studies into local REDD+ implementations may help create those opportunities, while increasing the participation of local communities as local REDD+ stakeholders. Further development and testing of participatory reporting framework are required to integrate PMRV data with the national database. Publication of empirical PMRV studies is encouraged to guide when, where and how PMRV should be implemented.</p></div

Contexts of citation supporting PMRV claims in the peer-reviewed publications.

<p>Contexts of citation supporting PMRV claims in the peer-reviewed publications.</p

Summary of PMRV claims that support, hinder and highlight a requirement to achieve REDD+ outcomes as identified in PMRV literature.

<p>Summary of PMRV claims that support, hinder and highlight a requirement to achieve REDD+ outcomes as identified in PMRV literature.</p

Number of PMRV publications categorized by study type.

<p>Number of PMRV publications categorized by study type.</p

Number of peer-reviewed and non peer-reviewed publications supporting PMRV claims with empirical finding (EFSE), citation (CSE) and assumption (AS).

<p><b>The claims are listed in descending order based on the number of empirical finding in peer-reviewed and non peer-reviewed publications.</b> Letters T and S next to PMRV claims represent technical and social aspects of REDD+ outcome respectively. Positive (+), negative (-) or asterisk (*) signs represent claims that support, hinder/challenge and highlight requirement for achieving REDD+ outcomes respectively.</p

Number and locations of PMRV projects (17 countries, 28 projects) from PMRV empirical studies analyzed in this review.

<p>Number and locations of PMRV projects (17 countries, 28 projects) from PMRV empirical studies analyzed in this review.</p