IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v7y2018i4p119-d175654.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Market-Based Conservation for Better Livelihoods? The Promises and Fallacies of REDD+ in Tanzania

Author

Listed:
  • Andreas Scheba

    (Economic Performance and Development, Human Sciences Research Council, 116-118 Buitengracht Street, City of Cape Town 8001, South Africa)

Abstract

Governments, multilateral organisations, and international conservation NGOs increasingly frame nature conservation in terms that emphasise the importance of technically managing and economically valuing nature, and introducing markets for ecosystem services. New mechanisms, such as REDD+, have been incorporated in national-level policy reforms, and have been piloted and implemented in rural project settings across the Global South. By reflecting on my research on REDD+ implementation in two case study villages in Tanzania, the paper argues that the emergence and nature of market-based conservation are multi-faceted, complex, and more profoundly shaped by structural challenges than is commonly acknowledged. The paper identifies three particularly important challenges: the politics surrounding the establishment of community-based forest management; the mismatch between formal governance institutions and actual practices on the ground; and the fickleness of income from carbon sales and alternative livelihood opportunities. I argue that these challenges are not merely teething troubles, but they question fundamental assumptions of market-based conservation, more generally. I end with reference to better ideas for achieving sustainable development.

Suggested Citation

  • Andreas Scheba, 2018. "Market-Based Conservation for Better Livelihoods? The Promises and Fallacies of REDD+ in Tanzania," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-18, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:7:y:2018:i:4:p:119-:d:175654
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/7/4/119/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/7/4/119/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jayachandran, Seema & de Laat, Joost & Lambin, Eric F. & Stanton, Charlotte, 2016. "Cash for Carbon: A Randomized Controlled Trial of Payments for Ecosystem Services to Reduce Deforestation," CEPR Discussion Papers 11349, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    2. Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & de Groot, Rudolf & Lomas, Pedro L. & Montes, Carlos, 2010. "The history of ecosystem services in economic theory and practice: From early notions to markets and payment schemes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1209-1218, April.
    3. 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.
    4. Noel Castree, 2008. "Neoliberalising Nature: The Logics of Deregulation and Reregulation," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 40(1), pages 131-152, January.
    5. Katia Covarrubias & Longin Nsiima & Alberto Zezza, 2012. "Livestock and Livelihoods in Rural Tanzania : A Descriptive Analysis of the 2009 National Panel Survey," World Bank Publications - Reports 17886, The World Bank Group.
    6. Scheba, Andreas & Mustalahti, Irmeli, 2015. "Rethinking ‘expert’ knowledge in community forest management in Tanzania," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 7-18.
    7. Hofstad, Ole & Araya, Meley Mekonen, 2015. "Optimal wood harvest in miombo woodland considering REDD+payments — A case study at Kitulangalo Forest Reserve, Tanzania," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 9-16.
    8. Sébastien Costedoat & Esteve Corbera & Driss Ezzine-de-Blas & Jordi Honey-Rosés & Kathy Baylis & Miguel Angel Castillo-Santiago, 2015. "How Effective Are Biodiversity Conservation Payments in Mexico?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(3), pages 1-20, March.
    9. Thales A. P. West, 2016. "Indigenous community benefits from a de-centralized approach to REDD+ in Brazil," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(7), pages 924-939, October.
    10. Dan Brockington, 2008. "Corruption, Taxation and Natural Resource Management in Tanzania," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(1), pages 103-126.
    11. Robert Fletcher, 2012. "Using the Master's Tools? Neoliberal Conservation and the Evasion of Inequality," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 43(1), pages 295-317, January.
    12. Kathleen McAfee, 2012. "The Contradictory Logic of Global Ecosystem Services Markets," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 43(1), pages 105-131, January.
    13. Sarah Milne & Bill Adams, 2012. "Market Masquerades: Uncovering the Politics of Community-level Payments for Environmental Services in Cambodia," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 43(1), pages 133-158, January.
    14. Noel Castree, 2008. "Neoliberalising Nature: Processes, Effects, and Evaluations," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 40(1), pages 153-173, January.
    15. Lund, Jens Friis & Sungusia, Eliezeri & Mabele, Mathew Bukhi & Scheba, Andreas, 2017. "Promising Change, Delivering Continuity: REDD+ as Conservation Fad," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 124-139.
    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. Killian, Bernadeta & Hyle, Maija, 2020. "Women's marginalization in participatory forest management: Impacts of responsibilization in Tanzania," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    2. Sheona Shackleton & Vanessa Masterson & Paul Hebinck & Chinwe Ifejika Speranza & Dian Spear & Maria Tengö, 2019. "Editorial for Special Issue: “Livelihood and Landscape Change in Africa: Future Trajectories for Improved Well-Being under a Changing Climate”," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-8, July.

    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. Fletcher, Robert & Büscher, Bram, 2017. "The PES Conceit: Revisiting the Relationship between Payments for Environmental Services and Neoliberal Conservation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 224-231.
    2. Eero Palmujoki & Pekka Virtanen, 2016. "Global, National, or Market? Emerging REDD+ Governance Practices in Mozambique and Tanzania," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 16(1), pages 59-78, February.
    3. Ma, Zhao & Bauchet, Jonathan & Steele, Diana & Godoy, Ricardo & Radel, Claudia & Zanotti, Laura, 2017. "Comparison of Direct Transfers for Human Capital Development and Environmental Conservation," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 498-517.
    4. Rodrigo Muniz & Maria João Cruz, 2015. "Making Nature Valuable, Not Profitable: Are Payments for Ecosystem Services Suitable for Degrowth?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(8), pages 1-27, August.
    5. Van Hecken, Gert & Bastiaensen, Johan & Windey, Catherine, 2015. "The frontiers of the debate on Payments for Ecosystem Services: a proposal for innovative future research," IOB Discussion Papers 2015.05, Universiteit Antwerpen, Institute of Development Policy (IOB).
    6. Lund, Jens Friis & Sungusia, Eliezeri & Mabele, Mathew Bukhi & Scheba, Andreas, 2017. "Promising Change, Delivering Continuity: REDD+ as Conservation Fad," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 124-139.
    7. Tim Forsyth, 2015. "Ecological Functions and Functionings: Towards a Senian Analysis of Ecosystem Services," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 46(2), pages 225-246, March.
    8. Van Hecken, Gert & Bastiaensen, Johan & Windey, Catherine, 2015. "Towards a power-sensitive and socially-informed analysis of payments for ecosystem services (PES): Addressing the gaps in the current debate," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 117-125.
    9. To, Phuc & Dressler, Wolfram, 2019. "Rethinking ‘Success’: The politics of payment for forest ecosystem services in Vietnam," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 582-593.
    10. Hejnowicz, Adam P. & Raffaelli, David G. & Rudd, Murray A. & White, Piran C.L., 2014. "Evaluating the outcomes of payments for ecosystem services programmes using a capital asset framework," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 9(C), pages 83-97.
    11. Stefano Ponte & Christine Noe & Asubisye Mwamfupe, 2021. "Private and public authority interactions and the functional quality of sustainability governance: Lessons from conservation and development initiatives in Tanzania," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(4), pages 1270-1285, October.
    12. David M. Lansing, 2014. "Unequal Access to Payments for Ecosystem Services: The Case of Costa Rica," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 45(6), pages 1310-1331, November.
    13. Andrew, Jane & Cortese, Corinne, 2013. "Free market environmentalism and the neoliberal project: The case of the Climate Disclosure Standards Board," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 24(6), pages 397-409.
    14. Skutsch, Margaret & Turnhout, Esther, 2020. "REDD+: If communities are the solution, what is the problem?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    15. Alix-Garcia, Jennifer M. & Sims, Katharine R.E. & Phaneuf, Daniel J., 2019. "Using referenda to improve targeting and decrease costs of conditional cash transfers," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 179-194.
    16. Kolinjivadi, Vijay & Adamowski, Jan & Kosoy, Nicolás, 2014. "Recasting payments for ecosystem services (PES) in water resource management: A novel institutional approach," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 10(C), pages 144-154.
    17. Adeniyi P Asiyanbi, 2018. "Financialisation in the green economy: Material connections, markets-in-the-making and Foucauldian organising actions," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 50(3), pages 531-548, May.
    18. Lapeyre, Renaud & Froger, Géraldine & Hrabanski, Marie, 2015. "Biodiversity offsets as market-based instruments for ecosystem services? From discourses to practices," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 125-133.
    19. Lukas Giessen & Pradip Kumar Sarker & Md Saifur Rahman, 2016. "International and Domestic Sustainable Forest Management Policies: Distributive Effects on Power among State Agencies in Bangladesh," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-28, April.
    20. Bottazzi, Patrick & Cattaneo, Andrea & Rocha, David Crespo & Rist, Stephan, 2013. "Assessing sustainable forest management under REDD+: A community-based labour perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 94-103.

    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:jlands:v:7:y:2018:i:4:p:119-:d:175654. 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.