IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rjeaxx/v11y2017i3p549-570.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

When community forestry meets REDD+: has REDD+ helped address implementation barriers to participatory forest management in Tanzania?

Author

Listed:
  • Tom Blomley
  • Karen Edwards
  • Stephano Kingazi
  • Kahana Lukumbuzya
  • Merja Mäkelä
  • Lauri Vesa

Abstract

Tanzania has a progressive forest policy and legal jurisdiction for land and natural resource tenure, coupled with a strong decentralisation process that mandates village institutions with forest management responsibilities. Participatory forest management (PFM) has been a central part of government as well as a donor focus in the forest sector since the early 1990s. Numerous studies have been carried out by Tanzanian and international researchers to assess performance and synthesise experiences of PFM in recent years. The results are well documented, including the identification of a number of key bottlenecks to implementation and up-scaling. From 2009 onwards, a series of pilot projects were launched to develop and test local-level approaches to REDD+, all of which have now come to an end, and have recently been subjected to external evaluations. A central theme of many of these projects was the application of community-based approaches to forest and woodland management, building strongly on the legal framework for PFM. When REDD+ was adopted by the Tanzanian government as a new policy, feelings among civil society regarding how REDD+ might impact hard-won forest and land tenure rights were mixed. Some observers feared that REDD+ would stifle PFM and lead to a recentralisation of forest tenure by government, while others felt that REDD+ offered new opportunities for addressing long-standing bottlenecks and governance barriers to PFM implementation. Combining PFM with the specific goal of reducing forest carbon emissions has generated important lessons, some of which have the potential to strengthen the application of PFM in Tanzania and elsewhere. In some cases, we found that orienting PFM to REDD+ goals has helped address long-standing barriers to PFM implementation. In other cases, REDD+ has highlighted new weaknesses with current approaches to PFM, while elsewhere it has created problems where none existed before.

Suggested Citation

  • Tom Blomley & Karen Edwards & Stephano Kingazi & Kahana Lukumbuzya & Merja Mäkelä & Lauri Vesa, 2017. "When community forestry meets REDD+: has REDD+ helped address implementation barriers to participatory forest management in Tanzania?," Journal of Eastern African Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(3), pages 549-570, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:rjeaxx:v:11:y:2017:i:3:p:549-570
    DOI: 10.1080/17531055.2017.1356623
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/17531055.2017.1356623
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/17531055.2017.1356623?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.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Charnley, Susan, 2023. "Livelihood investments as incentives for community forestry in Africa," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:taf:rjeaxx:v:11:y:2017:i:3:p:549-570. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/rjea .

    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.