Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Leventon, J; Kalaba, FK; Dyer, JC; Stringer, LC; Dougill, AJ (2014)
Publisher: Elsevier
Languages: English
Types: Article
In implementing reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation (REDD), significant attention is being paid to ensuring that communities stand to benefit. Safeguards to protect local people's rights and interests have been formulated in response concerns over the potential negative impact on communities of forest preservation. To fulfil safeguards, many sub-Saharan African countries are looking to community-based natural resource management (CBNRM). Current critiques of CBNRM projects outline the importance of project design and policy context in shaping whether or not communities actually stand to benefit. This paper explores these aspects in a case study of Joint Forest Management (JFM) in Zambia, and examines the role of Zambia's REDD preparedness programme in shaping them. The case study was evaluated using stakeholder and policy document analyses, informed by interviews, and tied into the broader forest governance network. The findings highlight the way in which the politics and policies of forest governance in Zambia shape the on-the-ground JFM project and influence community benefits. In the case studied, even with careful local-level project design, JFM would be hindered in its delivery of REDD safeguards. Therefore, for REDD to deliver community safeguards, it must be considered as a broader process of political and governance change.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Adger, W.N., Benjaminsen, T.A., Brown, K., Svarstad, H., 2001. Advancing a Political Ecology of Global Environmental Discourses. Development and Change 32, 681-715.
    • Axberg, G.N., Makano, A., Matakala, P., Kokwe, G.M., 2012. A Decentralised Innovative Programme on Integrated Forest and other Natural Resources Management in Zambia. FINNIDA, Lusaka.
    • Balooni, K., Lund Friis, J., Kumar, C., Inoue, M., 2010. Curse or blessing? Local elites in Joint Forest Management in India's Shiwaliks. Igitur.
    • Beymer-Farris, B.A., Bassett, T.J., 2012. The REDD menace: Resurgent protectionism in Tanzania's mangrove forests. Global Environmental Change 22, 332-341.
    • Blaikie, P., 2006. Is Small Really Beautiful? Community-based Natural Resource Management in Malawi and Botswana. World Development 34, 1942-1957.
    • Blom, B., Sunderland, T., Murdiyarso, D., 2010. Getting REDD to work locally: lessons learned from integrated conservation and development projects. Environmental Science & Policy 13, 164-172.
    • Chambers, R., 1981. Rapid rural appraisal: Rationale and repertoire. Public Administration and Development 1, 95-106.
    • Chidumayo, E.N., Mbata, K.J., 2002. Shifting Cultivations, Edible Caterpillars and Livelihoods in the Kopa Area of Northern Zambia. Forests, Trees and Livelihoods 12, 175-193.
    • Chirwa, P.W., Akinnifesi, F.K., Sileshi, G., Syampungani, S., Kalaba, F.K., Ajayi, O.C., 2008. Opportunity for conserving and utilizing agrobiodiversity through agroforestry in Southern Africa. Biodiversity 9, 45-48.
    • Dolsak, N., Ostrom, E., 2003. The Challenges of the Commons, in: Dolsak, N., Ostrom, E. (Eds.), The Commons in the New Millennium: challenges and adaptation. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Massachusetts, pp.
    • Dougill, A.J., Stringer, L.C., Leventon, J., Riddell, M., Rueff, H., Spracklen, D.V., Butt, E., 2012. Lessons from community-based payment for ecosystem service schemes: from forests to rangelands. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 367, 3178-3190.
    • Forest Department (Zambia), 2005. Joint Forest Management Guidelines. Forest Department, Lusaka.
    • Harvey, C.A., Dickson, B., Kormos, C., 2010. Opportunities for achieving biodiversity conservation through REDD. Conservation Letters 3, 53-61.
    • Hutton, J., Adams, W.M., Murombedzi, J.C., 2005. Back to the Barriers? Changing Narratives in Biodiversity Conservation. Forum for Development Studies 32, 341-370.
    • IDLO, FAO, 2011. Legal preparedness for REDD+ in Zambia. UN REDD Programme.
    • Idrissou, L., van Paassen, A., Aarts, N., Vodouhè, S., Leeuwis, C., 2013. Trust and hidden conflict in participatory natural resources management: The case of the Pendjari national park (PNP) in Benin. Forest Policy and Economics 27, 65-74.
    • Reed, M.S., Graves, A., Dandy, N., Posthumus, H., Hubacek, K., Morris, J., Prell, C., Quinn, C.H., Stringer, L.C., 2009. Who's in and why? A typology of stakeholder analysis methods for natural resource management.
    • Journal of Environmental Management 90, 1933-1949.
    • Reynolds, T.W., 2012. Institutional Determinants of Success Among Forestry-Based Carbon Sequestration Projects in Sub-Saharan Africa. World Development 40, 542-554.
    • Shackleton, C., Campbell, B., Wllenberg, E., Edmunds, D., 2002. Devolution and community-based management: creating space for local people to participate and benefit? , Natural Resource Perspectives.
    • Shackleton, S., Delang, C.O., Angelsen, A., 2011. From Subsistence to Safety Nets and Cash Income: Exploring the Diverse Values of Non-timber Forest Products for Livelihoods and Poverty Alleviation Non-Timber Forest
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article