CIFOR-ICRAF s’attaque aux défis et aux opportunités locales tout en apportant des solutions aux problèmes mondiaux concernant les forêts, les paysages, les populations et la planète.

Nous fournissons des preuves et des solutions concrètes pour transformer l’utilisation des terres et la production alimentaire : conserver et restaurer les écosystèmes, répondre aux crises mondiales du climat, de la malnutrition, de la biodiversité et de la désertification. En bref, nous améliorons la vie des populations.

CIFOR-ICRAF publie chaque année plus de 750 publications sur l’agroforesterie, les forêts et le changement climatique, la restauration des paysages, les droits, la politique forestière et bien d’autres sujets encore, et ce dans plusieurs langues. .

CIFOR-ICRAF s’attaque aux défis et aux opportunités locales tout en apportant des solutions aux problèmes mondiaux concernant les forêts, les paysages, les populations et la planète.

Nous fournissons des preuves et des solutions concrètes pour transformer l’utilisation des terres et la production alimentaire : conserver et restaurer les écosystèmes, répondre aux crises mondiales du climat, de la malnutrition, de la biodiversité et de la désertification. En bref, nous améliorons la vie des populations.

CIFOR–ICRAF publishes over 750 publications every year on agroforestry, forests and climate change, landscape restoration, rights, forest policy and much more – in multiple languages.

CIFOR–ICRAF addresses local challenges and opportunities while providing solutions to global problems for forests, landscapes, people and the planet.

We deliver actionable evidence and solutions to transform how land is used and how food is produced: conserving and restoring ecosystems, responding to the global climate, malnutrition, biodiversity and desertification crises. In short, improving people’s lives.

REDD+ and equity outcomes: Two cases from Cameroon

Exporter la citation

One reason for recent opposition to REDD+ stems from concerns about possible welfare impacts on forest-dependent, especially indigenous peoples. We assess how two projects with community payments (PES / REDD+) impacted indigenous peoples (Baka) relative to the locally dominant ethnic group (Bantu) in south-eastern Cameroon, trying to understand to which extent the projects addressed equity concerns. We gathered empirical data through a household questionnaire survey, indepth interviews, and focus group discussions in six villages. Overall, we found little support for the hypothesis that indigenous peoples were disadvantaged by the projects, absolutely and relative to the locally dominant ethnic group, along procedural and distributive equity dimensions. Yet, upfront contextual inequities with respect to technical capabilities, power, gender, level of education, and wealth are key to determining an individual’s likelihood of participating in and benefiting from the projects. Our analysis also revealed that more complex and time-consuming free prior informed consent processes could actually come to reinforce power imbalances and inequities. Hence, we call attention to the key role contextual factors play for equity and social safeguards when implementing REDD+ and associated interventions.

DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2021.07.003
Score Altmetric:
Dimensions Nombre de citations:

Publications connexes