Your browser has javascript turned off or blocked. This will lead to some parts of our website to not work properly or at all. Turn on javascript for best performance.

The browser you are using is not supported by this website. All versions of Internet Explorer are no longer supported, either by us or Microsoft (read more here: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/windows/end-of-ie-support).

Please use a modern browser to fully experience our website, such as the newest versions of Edge, Chrome, Firefox or Safari etc.

Kimberly Nicholas

Kimberly Nicholas

Senior Lecturer, Docent, Director of Studies PhD school

Kimberly Nicholas

Evaluating safeguards in a conservation incentive program : participation, consent, and benefit sharing in indigenous communities of the Ecuadorian Amazon

Author

  • Torsten Krause
  • Wain Collen
  • Kimberly Nicholas

Summary, in English

Critics suggest that Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD+) may not generate improvements in well-being for participating stakeholders, and may in fact undermine indigenous rights. To ensure positive social benefits from REDD+ projects, the United Nations REDD Programme has proposed core safeguards, including local stakeholder participation; free, prior, and informed consent; and equitable distribution of benefits. However, there is little

experience to date in implementing and evaluating these safeguards. We apply these core safeguards as a framework to study

how people in indigenous communities in the Ecuadorian Amazon perceive and benefit from Programa Socio Bosque, a

conservation incentive program in Ecuador’s national REDD+ Programme portfolio. We interviewed 101 individuals in five

communities that had participated in the Programa Socio Bosque for at least 18 months. Close to 80% of respondents reported

that the decision to join Socio Bosque was made democratically, that they were familiar with the conservation goals of Socio

Bosque, and that they were aware which area their community had selected for conservation. However, only 17% were familiar

with the overall terms of the conservation agreement, implying that they were either not fully informed of or did not fully

understand what they were consenting to in joining the program. Although the terms of the program require a community

investment plan to be democratically developed by community members, less than half of respondents were aware of the existence

of the investment plan, and fewer than 20% had participated in its development. The majority of respondents (61%) reported

that they did not know the amount of incentives that their community currently receives, and only 44% stated that incentives

were managed democratically in communal assemblies. Moreover, although a slight majority (53%) said they had noticed

benefits to the community from participating in Socio Bosque, the majority (57%) said their family had not received any benefits.

These results demonstrate a need to strengthen inclusive participation, better inform participants about program design, and

improve the management of incentives within communities if incentive-based conservation programs are to achieve their social

development and environmental goals.

Department/s

  • LUCSUS (Lund University Centre for Sustainability Studies)

Publishing year

2013

Language

English

Pages

1-16

Publication/Series

Ecology & Society

Volume

18

Issue

4

Document type

Journal article

Publisher

The Resilience Alliance

Topic

  • Social Sciences Interdisciplinary

Status

Published

ISBN/ISSN/Other

  • ISSN: 1708-3087