Issue

Vol. 3 No. 2 (2019): NOVEMBER

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Reducing Emissions, Forest Management and Multiactor Perspectives: Problem Representation Analysis of Laos REDD+ Programs

https://doi.org/10.24259/fs.v3i2.7604
Herlin Chien
National Pingtung University of Science and Technology
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6130-1761

Corresponding Author(s) : Herlin Chien

hchien@mail.npust.edu.tw

Forest and Society, Vol. 3 No. 2 (2019): NOVEMBER

Abstract

Every policy solution is embedded in a certain “problem representation” that is taken for granted and assumed by policymakers. This paper examines how emission reductions and forest management have been problematized for policymaking and solution implementation from multiple actors’ perspectives. Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+), particularly Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF) programs, in the Lao People’s Democratic Republic (Lao PDR) serves as a demonstrative example. By applying the ‘What is the Problem Represented to be’ (WPR) approach as a poststructuralist method, this study first comparatively analyzes the general problem as represented by multiple actors, including the government, media, academia and civil society. In particular, queries such as what and how the “problem” is represented and what is not problematized are reflected during the analyses. Next, this research further examines the corresponding problematization gap based on drivers of deforestation and forest degradation and discusses the noncarbon benefits of FCPF in the rhetoric. The objective of the study is to not to find the best policy choice but to reveal the heterogeneity in problem representations formulated by multiple actors to yield space for alternative and disruptive change for future problem solving in emission reductions and forest management

Keywords

FCPF Lao PDR forest management problematization REDD
Chien, H. (2019). Reducing Emissions, Forest Management and Multiactor Perspectives: Problem Representation Analysis of Laos REDD+ Programs. Forest and Society, 3(2), 262-277. https://doi.org/10.24259/fs.v3i2.7604
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX
References
  1. Bacchi, C. (1999). Women, Policy, and Politics : The Construction of Policy Problems. Sage, London, UK.
  2. Bacchi, C. (2009). Analysing Policy : What’s the Problem Represented to Be? Frenchs Forest. Pearson, N.S.W, Australia.
  3. Bacchi, C. (2012). Why study problematizations? Making politics visible. Open Journal of Political Science, 2(01), 1–8. doi: https://doi.org/10.4236/ojps.2012.21001
  4. Bacchi, C. (2015). Problematizations in alcohol policy: WHO’s ‘alcohol problems’. Contemporary Drug Problems, 42(2), 130–147. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0091450915576116
  5. Bacchi, C. & Goodwin, S. (2016). Poststructural Policy Analysis : A Guide to Practice. Palgrave Macmillan, New York, US.
  6. Baird, I.G. (2014). Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD) and access and exclusion: obstacles and opportunities in Cambodia and Laos. Southeast Asian Studies, 3(3), 643–668. doi: https://doi.org/10.20495/seas.3.3_643
  7. Baledón, M. & Kosoy, N. (2018). Problematizing” carbon emissions from international aviation and the role of alternative jet fuels in meeting ICAO’s mid-century aspirational goals. Journal of Air Transport Management, 71(July), 130–137. doi: https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.jairtraman.2018.06.001
  8. Bletsas, A. & Beasley, C. (2012). Engaging with Carol Bacchi : Strategic Interventions and Exchanges. University of Adelaide Press, Adelaide, South Australia.
  9. Büscher, B., Sullivan, S., Neves, K., Igoe, J. & Brockington, D. (2012). Towards a synthesized critique of neoliberal biodiversity conservation. Capitalism Nature Socialism, 23(2), 4–30. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/10455752.2012.674149
  10. Cavanagh, C.J., Vedeld, P.O. & Trædal, L.T. (2015). Securitizing REDD+? Problematizing the emerging illegal timber trade and forest carbon interface in East Africa. Geoforum 60,72–82. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2015.01.011
  11. Christie, N. & Bruun, K. (1969). Alcohol Problems: The Conceptual Framework. In: Keller, M. & Coffey, T,G. (eds) Proceedings of the 28th International Congress on Alcohol and Alcoholism. Hillhouse Press, Highland Park, New Jersey. pp. 65–73.
  12. Corbera, E. (2012). Problematizing REDD+ as an experiment in payments for ecosystem services. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 4(6), 612–619. doi: https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.cosust.2012.09.010
  13. Deacon, R. (2000). Theory as Practice: Foucault’s Concept of Problematization. Telos 118, 127–142.
  14. Dijk, T.A. van (1984). Prejudice in Discourse : An Analysis of Ethnic Prejudice in Cognition and Conversation. J. Benjamins Pub. Co, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
  15. FCPF (2015). Readiness Fund REDD+ Country Participants Progress Report Lao PDR.
  16. FCPF (2016). Carbon Fund Methodological Framework.
  17. FCPF (2018a). Forest Carbon Partnersbhip Facility 2018 Annual Report.
  18. FCPF (2018b). Lao PDR FCPF Readiness Package Self-Assessment Report: Readiness for Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD+).
  19. FCPF (2018c). Promoting REDD+ through Governance, Forest landscapes & Livelihood in Northern Lao PDR.
  20. Federici, S., Tubiello, F.N., Salvatore, M., Jacobs, H. & Schmidhuber, J. (2015). New estimates of CO2 forest emissions and removals: 1990–2015. Forest Ecology and Management, 352, 89–98. doi: https://doi.org/ 10.1016/J.FORECO.2015.04.022
  21. Flynn, T.R. (2005). Foucault’s mapping of history. In: Gutting, G. (ed.) The Cambridge Companion to Foucault. 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp. 29–48.
  22. Foley, J.A., Defries, R., Asner, G.P., et al. (2005) Global consequences of land use. Science, 309(5734), 570–574. doi: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1111772
  23. Forsyth, T. (2009). Multilevel, multiactor governance in REDD+: Participation, Integration and Coordinatio. In: Angelsen, A., Brockhaus, M., Kanninen, M.N., Sills, E., et al. (eds) Realising REDD+: Natonal Strategy and Policy Options. Bogor: Center for International Forestry Research, pp. 113–122.
  24. Foucault, M. (1980). The History of Sexuality, Vol. I. An Introduction. Vintage Books, New York, USA.
  25. Harcourt, B. (2007). An answer to the question: ‘What Is Poststructuralism?’ University of Chicago, Public Law Working Paper No. 156.
  26. Hutchinson, J. & Eveline, J. (2010). Workplace bullying policy in the Australian public sector: Why has gender been ignored? Australian Journal of Public Administration, 69(1), 47–60. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8500.2010.00669.x
  27. Keeley, J.E. (2001). Influencing Policy Processes for Sustainable Livelihoods: strategies for change. Brighton. Institute of Development Studies.
  28. Lang, D.J., Wiek, A., Bergmann, M., Stauffacher, M. Martens, P. Moll, P. Swilling, M. & Thomas, C. J. (2012). Transdisciplinary research in sustainability science: practice, principles, and challenges. Sustainability Science, 7(S1), 25–43. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-011-0149-x
  29. Lepers, E., Lambin, E.F., Janetos, A.C., DeFries, R. Achard, F., Ramankutty, N. & Scholes, R. J. (2005). A synthesis of information on rapid land-cover change for the period 1981–2000. BioScience, (55), 115–124. doi:https://doi.org/10.1641/00063568(2005)055[0115:ASOIOR]2.0.CO;2
  30. Mcgregor, A., Weaver, S., Challies, E., Howson, P., Astuti, R. & Haalboom, B. (2014). Practical critique: Bridging the gap between critical and practice-oriented REDD+ research communities. Asia Pacific Viewpoint, 55(3), 277–291. doi:https//doi.org/10.1111/apv.12064
  31. McGregor, A. (2010). Green and REDD: Towards a political ecology of deforestation in Aceh, Indonesia. Human Geography, 3(2), 21–34.
  32. Moore, C., Ferrand, J. & Khiewvongphachan, X. (2011). Investigation of the Drivers of Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Nam Phui National Protected Area, Lao PDR. Climate Protection through Avoided Deforestation Programme, GIZ.
  33. Pachauri, R., Allen, M., Barros, V., et al. (2014). Climate change 2014: synthesis report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the fifth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate.
  34. PDR Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry (2018). Lao PDR’s Forest Reference Emission Level and Forest Reference Level for REDD+ Results Payment under the UNFCCC.
  35. Pearse, R. (2012). Mapping REDD in the Asia-Pacific: Governance, marketisation and contention. Ephemera: Theory & politics in organization, 12(1–2), 181–205.
  36. Pereira, R.B. (2014). Using critical policy analysis in occupational science research: Exploring Bacchi’s methodology. Journal of Occupational Science, 21(4), 389–402. doi:https//doi.org/ 10.1080/14427591.2013.806207.
  37. Stern, N.H. (2007). The Economics of Climate Change : The Stern Review. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
  38. Vongsiharath, V. (2011). Forest Cover and Land-Use Changes in Lao PDR: According to the National forest Reconnaissance Survey. Vientiane.
  39. Vongvisouk, T., Lestrelin, G., Castella, J.C., Mertz, O, Broegaard, R. B. & Thongmanivong, S. (2016). REDD+ on hold: Lessons from an emerging institutional setup in Laos. Asia Pacific Viewpoint, 57(3), 393–405. doi:https//doi.org/10.1111/apv.12134
  40. Yeboah, Y. (2013). Gendering the REDD+ policy process in Ghana. Master's Thesis. Swedish University of Agriculgture Sciences
Read More

Author Biography

Herlin Chien, National Pingtung University of Science and Technology
Associate Professor (PhD in Political Science), Center of General Education, National PingTung University of Science and Technology Pingtung, TaiwanUnited Nations University, Institute for the Study of Sustainability (UNU-IAS), Tokyo, Japan, PhD Candidate
Download this PDF file
PDF