Deforestation and the Paris climate agreement: An assessment of REDD + in the national climate action plans
Open accessAbstract
More than ten years after REDD + (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation) entered the UN climate negotiations, its current state and future direction are a matter of contention. This paper analyses 162 INDCs (Intended National Determined Contributions), or climate action plans, to assess whether and how countries plan to use REDD + in their implementation the Paris Agreement. Our analysis suggests that REDD + continues to have political traction. Many tropical countries still have expectations of REDD +, and hope that public and private donors will support chronically underfunded domestic conservation programs. However, the expectations are not formulated in detail. We argue that until the questions of how to finance REDD + and how to deal with the drivers of deforestation are resolved, REDD is unlikely to move quickly from formulated INDCs plans to implementation on the ground.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
REDD+ has a poor track record in achieving its intended purpose of emissions reduction.
“Hein et al. present a number of arguments around the programme's poor track record in achieving its intended purpose of emissions reduction.”
From Strategies for mitigation of climate change: a review (2020) · cites this paper as Hein et al. 2018
REDD+ implementation intentions have been indicated by 56 countries in their INDC submissions under the Paris agreement.
“However, despite the uncertainty and weaknesses discussed, REDD+ implementation intentions have been indicated by 56 countries in their INDC submissions under the Paris agreement (Hein et al. 2018).”
From Strategies for mitigation of climate change: a review (2020) · cites this paper as Hein et al. 2018
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
(2007) · London School of Economics and Political Science Research Online (London School of Economics and Political Science) · Cited by 9,690 · see citing works
Global Forest Resources Assessment 2020
(2020) · FAO eBooks · doi:10.4060/ca8753en · Cited by 1,978 · see citing works
A role for tropical forests in stabilizing atmospheric CO2
Houghton, R. A., Byers, B., & Nassikas, A. A. (2015) · Nature Climate Change · doi:10.1038/nclimate2869 · Cited by 323 · see citing works
Land tenure and REDD+: The good, the bad and the ugly
Larson, A., Brockhaus, M., Sunderlin, W. D., Duchelle, A. E., Babon, A., Dokken, T., Phạm, T. T., Resosudarmo, I. A. P., Garvizu, G. S., Awono, A., et al. (2013) · Global Environmental Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.02.014 · Cited by 305 · see citing works
Karsenty, A., & Ongolo, S. (2011) · Forest Policy and Economics · doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2011.05.006 · Cited by 239 · see citing works
Questioning REDD+ and the future of market‐based conservation
Fletcher, R., Dressler, W., Büscher, B., & Anderson, Z. R. (2016) · Conservation Biology · doi:10.1111/cobi.12680 · Cited by 211 · see citing works
Governing the design of national REDD+: An analysis of the power of agency
Brockhaus, M., Gregorio, M. D., & Mardiah, S. (2013) · Forest Policy and Economics · doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2013.07.003 · Cited by 178 · see citing works
Pauw, P., Klein, R. J. T., Mbeva, K., et al. (2017) · Climatic Change · doi:10.1007/s10584-017-2122-x · Cited by 135 · see citing works
Self-citationResosudarmo, I. A. P., Atmadja, S., Ekaputri, A. D., Intarini, D. Y., Indriatmoko, Y., & Astri, P. (2013) · World Development · doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2013.01.015 · Cited by 134 · see citing works
Biodiversity, Governance, and the Allocation of International Aid for Conservation
Miller, D. C., Agrawal, A., & Roberts, J. T. (2012) · Conservation Letters · doi:10.1111/j.1755-263x.2012.00270.x · Cited by 133 · see citing works
Routledge Handbook of the Climate Change Movement
Dietz, M., & Garrelts, H. (2014) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203773536 · Cited by 131 · see citing works
Tenure and participation in local REDD+ projects: Insights from southern Cameroon
Awono, A., Somorin, O. A., Atyi, R. E. '., & Levang, P. (2013) · Environmental Science & Policy · doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2013.01.017 · Cited by 117 · see citing works
Learning from REDD+: a response to Fletcher et al.
Angelsen, A., Brockhaus, M., Duchelle, A. E., Larson, A., Martius, C., Sunderlin, W. D., Verchot, L. V., Wong, G., & Wunder, S. (2017) · Conservation Biology · doi:10.1111/cobi.12933 · Cited by 93 · see citing works
Drivers of deforestation and REDD+ benefit-sharing: A meta-analysis of the (missing) link
Weatherley‐Singh, J., & Gupta, A. (2015) · Environmental Science & Policy · doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2015.06.017 · Cited by 85 · see citing works
Land Tenure and Tropical Forest Carbon Management
Naughton‐Treves, L., & Wendland, K. J. (2013) · World Development · doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2013.01.010 · Cited by 85 · see citing works
Cadman, T., Maraseni, T., Ma, H. O., et al. (2016) · Forest Policy and Economics · doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2016.03.008 · Cited by 78 · see citing works
A reality check on the landscape approach to REDD+: Lessons from Latin America
Lima, M. G. B., Visseren-Hamakers, I. J., Braña-Varela, J., & Gupta, A. (2017) · Forest Policy and Economics · doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2016.12.013 · Cited by 78 · see citing works
The State of REDD+ FinancePreprint
Norman, M., & Nakhooda, S. (2015) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.2622743 · Cited by 75 · see citing works
Enrici, A., & Hubacek, K. (2016) · Energy Ecology and Environment · doi:10.1007/s40974-016-0037-4 · Cited by 49 · see citing works
Ecosystem services from agriculture and agroforestry: measurement and payment
Coq, J.-F. L., Rapidel, B., Beer, J., & DeClerck, F. (2011) · HAL · Cited by 45 · see citing works
The role of government in operationalising markets for REDD + in Indonesia
Boer, H. (2017) · Forest Policy and Economics · doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2017.10.004 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
Analyzing the transformations of forest PES in Vietnam: Implications for REDD+
Trædal, L. T., Vedeld, P., & Pétursson, J. G. (2015) · Forest Policy and Economics · doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2015.11.001 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
Bhan, M., Sharma, D., Ashwin, A. S., & Mehra, S. (2017) · Forest Policy and Economics · doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2017.09.013 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
REDD credits in a global carbon market
Angelsen, A., Gierløff, C. W., Beltrán, A. M., et al. (2014) · doi:10.6027/tn2014-541 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- Eliasch, J., 2008. The Eliasch Review-Climate Change: Financing Global Forests. Commissioned by the Office of Climate Change, UK, Richmond, UK, the Stationery Office Limited on Behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office.
- Hein, J.I., 2016. Rescaling conflictive access and property relations in the context of REDD+ in Jambi, Indonesia (Doctoral dissertation, Dissertation, Göttingen, Georg- August Universität, 2016).
- Pauw, W.P., Cassanmagnano, D., Mbeva, K., Hein, J., Guarin, A., Brandi, C., Dzebo, A., Canales, N., Adams, K.M., Atteridge, A., Bock, T., Helms, J., Zalewski, A., Frommé, E., Lindener, A., Muhammad, D., 2016. NDC Explorer. German Development Institute/ Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik (DIE). African Centre for Technology Studies (ACTS), Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI)https://doi.org/10.23661/ ndc_explorer_2017_2. · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Strategies for mitigation of climate change: a review
Fawzy, S., Osman, A. I., Doran, J., & Rooney, D. W. (2020) · Environmental Chemistry Letters · doi:10.1007/s10311-020-01059-w · Cited by 1,522 · see citing works
- Authors
- Hein, J., Guarin, A., Frommé, E., & Pauw, P.
- Affiliations
- German Institute of Development and Sustainability (DE)
- United Nations University (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Hein, Jonas
- Venue
- Forest Policy and Economics
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2018-05
- Volume
- 90
- Pages
- 7-11
- ISSN
- 1389-9341 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2788438180
- Cited by
- 98
- References
- 24
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 6
- FWCI
- 8.34
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Forest Policy and Economics (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Forest Management and Policy
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Climate Change Policy and Economics
- Keywords
- REDD+, deforestation, Paris Agreement, Intended Nationally Determined Contributions, climate action plans, climate finance, deforestation drivers, tropical forests, forest conservation, UN climate negotiations
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
