IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i3p757-d135532.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multiple Wins, Multiple Organizations—How to Manage Institutional Interaction in Financing Forest Landscape Restoration (FLR)

Author

Listed:
  • Astrid Carrapatoso

    (Department of Political Science, University of Freiburg, 79085 Freiburg, Germany)

  • Angela Geck

    (Department of Political Science, University of Freiburg, 79085 Freiburg, Germany)

Abstract

By restoring forest ecosystems and fostering resilient and sustainable land use practices, Forest Landscape Restoration (FLR) contributes to climate change mitigation, adaptation and sustainable development as well as the protection of biological diversity and combating desertification. This integrative approach provides the opportunity for multiple wins, but it necessitates the management of complex institutional interactions arising from the involvement of multiple international organizations. Focusing on the pivotal aspect of financing, this article surveys the landscape of public international institutions supporting FLR and analyzes the effectiveness of existing mechanisms of inter-institutional coordination and harmonization. Methodologically, our research is based on a document analysis, complemented by participant observation of the two Bonn Climate Change Conferences in May and November 2017 as well as the Global Landscapes Forum in December 2017. We find that financial institutions have established fairly effective rules for the management of positive and negative externalities through the introduction of co-benefits and safeguards. The fact that each institution has their own safeguards provisions, however, leads to significant transaction costs for recipient countries. In the discussion, we thus recommend that institutions should refrain from an unnecessary duplication of standards and focus on best practice.

Suggested Citation

  • Astrid Carrapatoso & Angela Geck, 2018. "Multiple Wins, Multiple Organizations—How to Manage Institutional Interaction in Financing Forest Landscape Restoration (FLR)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-19, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:3:p:757-:d:135532
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/3/757/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/3/757/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tegegne, Yitagesu T. & Ramcilovic-Suominen, Sabaheta & FOBISSIE, KALAME & Visseren-Hamakers, Ingrid J. & Lindner, Marcus & Kanninen, Markku, 2017. "Synergies among social safeguards in FLEGT and REDD+ in Cameroon," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 1-11.
    2. Jean-Michel Severino & Olivier Ray, 2010. "The End of ODA (II): The Birth of Hypercollective Action," Working Papers id:2639, eSocialSciences.
    3. Thomas Gehring & Benjamin Faude, 2014. "A theory of emerging order within institutional complexes: How competition among regulatory international institutions leads to institutional adaptation and division of labor," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 9(4), pages 471-498, December.
    4. Jean-Michel Severino and Olivier Ray, 2010. "The End of ODA (II): The Birth of Hypercollective Action," Working Papers 218, Center for Global Development.
    5. Arhin, Albert Abraham, 2014. "Safeguards and Dangerguards: A Framework for Unpacking the Black Box of Safeguards for REDD+," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 24-31.
    6. Harro Asselt & Fariborz Zelli, 2014. "Connect the dots: managing the fragmentation of global climate governance," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 16(2), pages 137-155, April.
    7. Raustiala, Kal & Victor, David G., 2004. "The Regime Complex for Plant Genetic Resources," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 58(2), pages 277-309, April.
    8. Frank Biermann & Philipp Pattberg & Harro van Asselt & Fariborz Zelli, 2009. "The Fragmentation of Global Governance Architectures: A Framework for Analysis," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 9(4), pages 14-40, November.
    9. Pistorius, Till & Reinecke, Sabine, 2013. "The interim REDD+ Partnership: Boost for biodiversity safeguards?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 80-86.
    10. Busch, Marc L., 2007. "Overlapping Institutions, Forum Shopping, and Dispute Settlement in International Trade," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 61(4), pages 735-761, October.
    11. United Nations UN, 2015. "Transforming our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development," Working Papers id:7559, eSocialSciences.
    12. Michael Zürn & Benjamin Faude, 2013. "Commentary: On Fragmentation, Differentiation, and Coordination," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 13(3), pages 119-130, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Holzscheiter, Anna, 2015. "Interorganisationale Harmonisierung als sine qua non für die Effektivität von Global Governance? Eine soziologisch-institutionalistische Analyse interorganisationaler Strukturen in der globalen Gesund," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 56(SH 49), pages 322-348.
    2. Bernhard Reinsberg & Oliver Westerwinter, 2021. "The global governance of international development: Documenting the rise of multi-stakeholder partnerships and identifying underlying theoretical explanations," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 59-94, January.
    3. Chaewoon Oh, 2020. "Contestations over the financial linkages between the UNFCCC’s Technology and Financial Mechanism: using the lens of institutional interaction," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 559-575, September.
    4. Philipp Pattberg & Cille Kaiser & Oscar Widerberg & Johannes Stripple, 2022. "20 Years of global climate change governance research: taking stock and moving forward," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 295-315, June.
    5. Mette Eilstrup-Sangiovanni & Oliver Westerwinter, 2022. "The global governance complexity cube: Varieties of institutional complexity in global governance," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 233-262, April.
    6. Fuß, Julia & Kreuder-Sonnen, Christian & Saravia, Andrés & Zürn, Michael, 2021. "Managing regime complexity: Introducing the interface conflicts 1.0 dataset," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Global Governance SP IV 2021-101, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    7. Ingrid J Visseren-Hamakers, 2018. "Integrative governance: The relationships between governance instruments taking center stage," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 36(8), pages 1341-1354, December.
    8. Jonathan Pickering & Carola Betzold & Jakob Skovgaard, 2017. "Special issue: managing fragmentation and complexity in the emerging system of international climate finance," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 1-16, February.
    9. Thomas Gehring & Benjamin Faude, 2014. "A theory of emerging order within institutional complexes: How competition among regulatory international institutions leads to institutional adaptation and division of labor," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 9(4), pages 471-498, December.
    10. Stephen, Matthew D., 2021. "China's New Multilateral Institutions: A Framework and Research Agenda," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 23(3), pages 807-834.
    11. Mairon G. Bastos Lima & Gabrielle Kissinger & Ingrid J. Visseren-Hamakers & Josefina Braña-Varela & Aarti Gupta, 2017. "The Sustainable Development Goals and REDD+: assessing institutional interactions and the pursuit of synergies," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 17(4), pages 589-606, August.
    12. Stephan Hoch & Axel Michaelowa & Aglaja Espelage & Anne-Kathrin Weber, 2019. "Governing complexity: How can the interplay of multilateral environmental agreements be harnessed for effective international market-based climate policy instruments?," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 19(6), pages 595-613, December.
    13. Benjamin Faude & Michal Parizek, 2021. "Contested multilateralism as credible signaling: how strategic inconsistency can induce cooperation among states," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 16(4), pages 843-870, October.
    14. Daniel Verdier, 2022. "Bargaining strategies for governance complex games," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 349-371, April.
    15. Justus Dreyling, 2021. "Institutional Complexity and Opportunity Structures: Weaker Actor Influence in International Intellectual Property Regulation," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 12(S4), pages 37-46, May.
    16. Zürn, Michael & Faude, Benjamin & Kreuder-Sonnen, Christian, 2018. "Overlapping spheres of authority and interface conflicts in the global order: Introducing a DFG research group," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Global Governance SP IV 2018-103, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    17. Susanne Lütz, 2021. "Global–Regional Realignments in Trade, Finance and Development: Introduction to the Special Issue," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 12(S4), pages 5-13, May.
    18. Reinsberg,Bernhard Wilfried & Michaelowa,Katharina & Knack,Stephen, 2015. "Which donors, which funds ? the choice of multilateral funds by bilateral donors at the World Bank," Policy Research Working Paper Series 7441, The World Bank.
    19. Joyeeta Gupta & Louis Lebel, 0. "Access and allocation in earth system governance: lessons learnt in the context of the Sustainable Development Goals," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-18.
    20. Nathan, Iben & Chen, Jie & Hansen, Christian Pilegaard & Xu, Bin & Li, Yan, 2018. "Facing the complexities of the global timber trade regime: How do Chinese wood enterprises respond to international legality verification requirements, and what are the implications for regime effecti," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 169-180.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:3:p:757-:d:135532. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.