IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v133y2021ics1389934121002045.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What motivates communities to participate in forest conservation? A study of REDD+ pilot sites in Cross River, Nigeria

Author

Listed:
  • Isyaku, Usman

Abstract

Market-based forest governance mechanisms such as reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation (REDD+) are implemented in many forests rich countries to conserve biodiversity and mitigate against global climate change. The assumption is that communities will be better motivated to participate in forest conservation if monetary payments are provided to compensate for past efforts or future improvements against pre-defined carbon reference levels. In this paper, I utilized Q methodology to identify discourses of forest values and motivations for forest conservation in selected REDD+ pilot communities in Cross River State, Nigeria. Data from interviews and focus group discussions are also used to support the analysis. The aim is to examine communities' motivations for practicing conservation initiatives and the extent to which such motivations are shaping their participation in the REDD+ program. The analysis uncovers five main discourses namely: forest for survival, forest is beautiful, no pay no care, conservation volunteers, and we care but pay us. I discussed these discourses around three themes: livelihoods dependence, financial incentives, and place attachment and social norms. Results indicate that the reasons why communities practice conservation are complex and subjective, and payment of monetary incentives or lack thereof will not necessarily motivate them to participate in the REDD+ program. I suggest that values such as place attachment, nature connectedness and social norms matter in the success of REDD+ particularly in communities that have long history of practicing voluntary conservation initiatives.

Suggested Citation

  • Isyaku, Usman, 2021. "What motivates communities to participate in forest conservation? A study of REDD+ pilot sites in Cross River, Nigeria," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:133:y:2021:i:c:s1389934121002045
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2021.102598
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934121002045
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2021.102598?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Agrawal, Arun & Gibson, Clark C., 1999. "Enchantment and Disenchantment: The Role of Community in Natural Resource Conservation," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 629-649, April.
    2. Moros, Lina & Vélez, María Alejandra & Corbera, Esteve, 2019. "Payments for Ecosystem Services and Motivational Crowding in Colombia's Amazon Piedmont," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 468-488.
    3. Authelet, Manon & Subervie, Julie & Meyfroidt, Patrick & Asquith, Nigel & Ezzine-de-Blas, Driss, 2021. "Economic, pro-social and pro-environmental factors influencing participation in an incentive-based conservation program in Bolivia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    4. Chervier, Colas & Le Velly, Gwenolé & Ezzine-de-Blas, Driss, 2019. "When the Implementation of Payments for Biodiversity Conservation Leads to Motivation Crowding-out: A Case Study From the Cardamoms Forests, Cambodia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 499-510.
    5. Bose, Arshiya & Garcia, Claude & Vira, Bhaskar, 2019. "Mottled motivations and narrow incentives: Exploring limitations of direct incentive policies in the Western Ghats, India," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 511-518.
    6. Till Neeff & Daniela G�hler & Francisco Ascui, 2014. "Finding a path for REDD+ between ODA and the CDM," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(2), pages 149-166, March.
    7. Toddi A. Steelman & Lynn A. Maguire, 1999. "Understanding participant perspectives: Q-methodology in national forest management," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(3), pages 361-388.
    8. Stern,Nicholas, 2007. "The Economics of Climate Change," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521700801.
    9. Handberg, Øyvind Nystad & Angelsen, Arild, 2019. "Pay little, get little; pay more, get a little more: A framed forest experiment in Tanzania," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 454-467.
    10. Zabala, Aiora & Pascual, Unai & García-Barrios, Luis, 2017. "Payments for Pioneers? Revisiting the Role of External Rewards for Sustainable Innovation under Heterogeneous Motivations," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 234-245.
    11. Babulo, Bedru & Muys, Bart & Nega, Fredu & Tollens, Eric & Nyssen, Jan & Deckers, Jozef & Mathijs, Erik, 2009. "The economic contribution of forest resource use to rural livelihoods in Tigray, Northern Ethiopia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 123-131, March.
    12. Nerfa, Lauren & Rhemtulla, Jeanine M. & Zerriffi, Hisham, 2020. "Forest dependence is more than forest income: Development of a new index of forest product collection and livelihood resources," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    13. Dryzek, John S. & Niemeyer, Simon, 2008. "Discursive Representation," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 102(4), pages 481-493, November.
    14. Kaczan, David J. & Swallow, Brent M. & Adamowicz, W.L. (Vic), 2019. "Forest conservation policy and motivational crowding: Experimental evidence from Tanzania," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 444-453.
    15. Jean Huge & Katherine Vande Velde & Francisco Javier Benitez Capistros & Jan Harold Japay & Behara Satyanarayana & Mohammad Nazrin Ishak & Melissa Quispe Zuniga & Bin Husain Mohd Lokman & Sulong Ibrah, 2016. "Mapping discourses using Q methodology in Matang Mangrove Forest, Malaysia," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/246478, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    16. Grillos, Tara & Bottazzi, Patrick & Crespo, David & Asquith, Nigel & Jones, Julia P.G., 2019. "In-kind conservation payments crowd in environmental values and increase support for government intervention: A randomized trial in Bolivia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 1-1.
    17. Bluffstone, Randy & Robinson, Elizabeth & Guthiga, Paul, 2013. "REDD+and community-controlled forests in low-income countries: Any hope for a linkage?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 43-52.
    18. Hajjar, Reem, 2015. "Advancing small-scale forestry under FLEGT and REDD in Ghana," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 12-20.
    19. Nhem, Sareth & Lee, Young Jin, 2019. "Using Q methodology to investigate the views of local experts on the sustainability of community-based forestry in Oddar Meanchey province, Cambodia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 1-1.
    20. Paudel, Naya S. & Vedeld, Paul O. & Khatri, Dil B., 2015. "Prospects and challenges of tenure and forest governance reform in the context of REDD+ initiatives in Nepal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 1-8.
    21. Ushuki A. Amuyou & Yi Wang & Francis Bisong & Alexander S. Antonarakis, 2021. "Livelihood Impacts of Forest Carbon Protection in the Context of Redd+ in Cross River State, Southeast Nigeria," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-18, April.
    22. Neuteleers, Stijn & Engelen, Bart, 2015. "Talking money: How market-based valuation can undermine environmental protection," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 253-260.
    23. Jarl Kampen & Peter Tamás, 2014. "Overly ambitious: contributions and current status of Q methodology," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 48(6), pages 3109-3126, November.
    24. Giefer, Madeline M. & An, Li & Chen, Xiaodong, 2021. "Normative, livelihood, and demographic influences on enrollment in a payment for ecosystem services program," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    25. Massarella, Kate & Sallu, Susannah M. & Ensor, Jonathan E. & Marchant, Rob, 2018. "REDD+, hype, hope and disappointment: The dynamics of expectations in conservation and development pilot projects," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 375-385.
    26. Andrew Dobson, 2007. "Environmental citizenship: towards sustainable development," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(5), pages 276-285.
    27. Neil M. Dawson & Michael Mason & Janet A. Fisher & David Mujasi Mwayafu & Hari Dhungana & Heike Schroeder & Mark Zeitoun, 2018. "Norm Entrepreneurs Sidestep REDD+ in Pursuit of Just and Sustainable Forest Governance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-19, May.
    28. García-Amado, Luis Rico & Pérez, Manuel Ruiz & Escutia, Felipe Reyes & García, Sara Barrasa & Mejía, Elsa Contreras, 2011. "Efficiency of Payments for Environmental Services: Equity and additionality in a case study from a Biosphere Reserve in Chiapas, Mexico," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2361-2368.
    29. Narloch, Ulf & Pascual, Unai & Drucker, Adam G., 2012. "Collective Action Dynamics under External Rewards: Experimental Insights from Andean Farming Communities," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(10), pages 2096-2107.
    30. Barry, John & Proops, John, 1999. "Seeking sustainability discourses with Q methodology," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 337-345, March.
    31. Van Hecken, Gert & Merlet, Pierre & Lindtner, Mara & Bastiaensen, Johan, 2019. "Can Financial Incentives Change Farmers' Motivations? An Agrarian System Approach to Development Pathways at the Nicaraguan Agricultural Frontier," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 519-529.
    32. Vedeld, Paul & Angelsen, Arild & Bojo, Jan & Sjaastad, Espen & Kobugabe Berg, Gertrude, 2007. "Forest environmental incomes and the rural poor," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(7), pages 869-879, April.
    33. Kits, Gerda J. & Adamowicz, Wiktor L. & Boxall, Peter C., 2014. "Do conservation auctions crowd out voluntary environmentally friendly activities?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 118-123.
    34. Frances Cleaver, 1999. "Paradoxes of participation: questioning participatory approaches to development," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(4), pages 597-612.
    35. Gilani, Haris R. & Yoshida, Tomoko & Innes, John L., 2017. "A Collaborative Forest Management user group's perceptions and expectations on REDD+ in Nepal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 27-33.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Adams, Marshall Alhassan & Carodenuto, Sophia, 2023. "Stakeholder perspectives on cocoa’s living income differential and sustainability trade-offs in Ghana," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    2. Riyadh Mundher & Shamsul Abu Bakar & Suhardi Maulan & Mohd Johari Mohd Yusof & Syuhaily Osman & Ammar Al-Sharaa & Hangyu Gao, 2022. "Exploring Awareness and Public Perception towards the Importance of Visual Aesthetics for Preservation of Permanent Forest Reserve (PFR) in Malaysia," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-14, August.
    3. Manda, Simon & Mukanda, Nyambe, 2023. "Can REDD+ projects deliver livelihood benefits in private tenure arrangements? Experiences from rural Zambia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    4. Morgan, Edward A. & Buckwell, Andrew & Guidi, Caterina & Garcia, Beatriz & Rimmer, Lawrence & Cadman, Tim & Mackey, Brendan, 2022. "Capturing multiple forest ecosystem services for just benefit sharing: The Basket of Benefits Approach," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 55(C).
    5. Oniki, Shunji & Berhe, Melaku & Negash, Teklay & Etsay, Haftu, 2023. "Do economic incentives crowd out motivation for communal land conservation in Ethiopia?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Grillos, Tara & Bottazzi, Patrick & Crespo, David & Asquith, Nigel & Jones, Julia P.G., 2019. "In-kind conservation payments crowd in environmental values and increase support for government intervention: A randomized trial in Bolivia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 1-1.
    2. Maca-Millán, Stefany & Arias-Arévalo, Paola & Restrepo-Plaza, Lina, 2021. "Payment for ecosystem services and motivational crowding: Experimental insights regarding the integration of plural values via non-monetary incentives," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    3. Lina Moros & Maria Alejandra Vélez & Alexander Pfaff & Daniela Quintero, 2020. "Effects of Ending Payments for Ecosystem Services: removal does not crowd prior conservation out," Documentos CEDE 18590, Universidad de los Andes, Facultad de Economía, CEDE.
    4. Moros, Lina & Vélez, María Alejandra & Quintero, Daniela & Tobin, Danny & Pfaff, Alexander, 2023. "Temporary PES do not crowd-out and may crowd-in lab-in-the-field forest conservation in Colombia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(PA).
    5. Oniki, Shunji & Berhe, Melaku & Negash, Teklay & Etsay, Haftu, 2023. "Do economic incentives crowd out motivation for communal land conservation in Ethiopia?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    6. Authelet, Manon & Subervie, Julie & Meyfroidt, Patrick & Asquith, Nigel & Ezzine-de-Blas, Driss, 2021. "Economic, pro-social and pro-environmental factors influencing participation in an incentive-based conservation program in Bolivia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    7. Blanco, Esther & Moros, Lina & Pfaff, Alexander & Steimanis, Ivo & Velez, Maria Alejandra & Vollan, Björn, 2023. "No crowding out among those terminated from an ongoing PES program in Colombia," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    8. Sneegas, Gretchen & Beckner, Sydney & Brannstrom, Christian & Jepson, Wendy & Lee, Kyungsun & Seghezzo, Lucas, 2021. "Using Q-methodology in environmental sustainability research: A bibliometric analysis and systematic review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    9. Kanittha Tambunlertchai & Sittidaj Pongkijvorasin, 2020. "The impacts of collective threshold requirements for rewards in a CPR experiment," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 22(4), pages 537-554, October.
    10. Duong, Ngoc T.B. & De Groot, Wouter T., 2020. "The impact of payment for forest environmental services (PFES) on community-level forest management in Vietnam," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    11. Rode, Julian & Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & Krause, Torsten, 2015. "Motivation crowding by economic incentives in conservation policy: A review of the empirical evidence," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 270-282.
    12. Huaranca, Laura Liliana & Iribarnegaray, Martín Alejandro & Albesa, Federico & Volante, José Norberto & Brannstrom, Christian & Seghezzo, Lucas, 2019. "Social Perspectives on Deforestation, Land Use Change, and Economic Development in an Expanding Agricultural Frontier in Northern Argentina," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 1-1.
    13. Chang, Ruidong & Cao, Yuan & Lu, Yujie & Shabunko, Veronika, 2019. "Should BIPV technologies be empowered by innovation policy mix to facilitate energy transitions? - Revealing stakeholders' different perspectives using Q methodology," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 307-318.
    14. Tiesta Thakur & Terrance Hurley, 2023. "Do farmers need to be paid to grow milkweed for monarchs or will they volunteer if it is easy enough?," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 45(2), pages 1008-1024, June.
    15. Bottazzi, Patrick & Wiik, Emma & Crespo, David & Jones, Julia P.G., 2018. "Payment for Environmental “Self-Service”: Exploring the Links Between Farmers' Motivation and Additionality in a Conservation Incentive Programme in the Bolivian Andes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 11-23.
    16. Christine Corlet Walker & Angela Druckman & Claudio Cattaneo, 2020. "Understanding the (non-)Use of Societal Wellbeing Indicators in National Policy Development: What Can We Learn from Civil Servants? A UK Case Study," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 150(3), pages 911-953, August.
    17. Yehouenou, Lauriane & Morgan, Stephen N. & Grogan, Kelly A., 2020. "Management of timber and non-timber forest products: Evidence from a framed field experiment in Benin, West Africa," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304627, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    18. McWherter, Brooke & Bauchet, Jonathan & Ma, Zhao & Grillos, Tara & Asquith, Nigel & Rathjen, Meagan & Markos, Andrea, 2022. "Compliance under control: Insights from an incentive-based conservation program in rural Bolivia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    19. Skutsch, Margaret & Turnhout, Esther, 2020. "REDD+: If communities are the solution, what is the problem?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    20. Mugido, Worship & Shackleton, Charlie M., 2019. "The contribution of NTFPS to rural livelihoods in different agro-ecological zones of South Africa," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:133:y:2021:i:c:s1389934121002045. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.