Abstract
Fundamental trade-offs exist between different land uses for carbon, livelihoods, economic development, biodiversity, agriculture and energy (especially biofuels). This article analyses the scientific debates on REDD+ trade-offs, co-benefits and safeguards, and shows how the development and expanded scope of REDD+ mechanisms have shaped these debates over time. We find substantial evidence that the non-carbon values of biodiversity conservation, equity and sustainable livelihoods are critical to both the legitimacy and effectiveness of REDD+, and argue that they therefore are better viewed as prerequisites than as values to be safeguarded. Scientists can contribute to the development of a more integrative REDD+ through interdisciplinary research and through a 'learning architecture' that supports the REDD+ policy development process with research dedicated to finding durable solutions.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 646-653 |
| Number of pages | 8 |
| Journal | Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability |
| Volume | 4 |
| Issue number | 6 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Dec 2012 |
| Externally published | Yes |
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 8 Decent Work and Economic Growth
-
SDG 15 Life on Land
Keywords
- Biodiversity
- Biofuel
- Carbon
- Conservation management
- Economic development
- Emissions Trading
- Interdisciplinary approach
- Policy Development
- Research work
- sustainable development
- trade-off
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Trade-offs, co-benefits and safeguards: Current debates on the breadth of REDD+'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver