The effects of policy discourse on the governance of deforestation and forest degradation reduction in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC)

IF 3 3区 社会学 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
Eliezer Majambu, Moise Tsayem Demaze, Richard Sufo-Kankeu, Denis Jean Sonwa, Symphorien Ongolo
{"title":"The effects of policy discourse on the governance of deforestation and forest degradation reduction in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC)","authors":"Eliezer Majambu,&nbsp;Moise Tsayem Demaze,&nbsp;Richard Sufo-Kankeu,&nbsp;Denis Jean Sonwa,&nbsp;Symphorien Ongolo","doi":"10.1002/eet.2077","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The international initiative to combat deforestation and forest degradation, known as REDD+, was put on the DRC agenda following actors' policy discourse aimed at convincing policy-makers of its effectiveness. This paper uses discursive institutionalism (DI) as a theoretical and analytical framework to analyse a set of selected policy documents on REDD+ issue and to assess the effects of policy discourse on deforestation reduction governance in DRC. From an empirical standpoint, interviews with key actors involved in the DRC REDD+ processes and field observations show that four main types of discourse accompanied the adoption of REDD+ in the DRC: a discourse promoting REDD+ through its forest conservation component, as a policy instrument that would bring in significant financial resources to the DRC forest-related state bureaucracies, a discourse that considers REDD+ as an efficient mean of reducing poverty while promoting sustainability through “green development”, a discourse presenting REDD+ as a way of reducing marginalisation of local communities and indigenous peoples by recognising their customary rights, and finally, a discourse promoting REDD+ as a tool for territorial planning and governance. In addition, the paper points out strong links between DRC REDD+ policy discourse and three types of governance approaches: organisational and fiduciary governance, territorial governance, local development and benefit sharing governance. Our analysis also shows that political discourse has played a significant role in the adoption of substantial policies aimed at reducing deforestation in DRC.</p>","PeriodicalId":47396,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Policy and Governance","volume":"34 3","pages":"307-320"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Policy and Governance","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/eet.2077","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The international initiative to combat deforestation and forest degradation, known as REDD+, was put on the DRC agenda following actors' policy discourse aimed at convincing policy-makers of its effectiveness. This paper uses discursive institutionalism (DI) as a theoretical and analytical framework to analyse a set of selected policy documents on REDD+ issue and to assess the effects of policy discourse on deforestation reduction governance in DRC. From an empirical standpoint, interviews with key actors involved in the DRC REDD+ processes and field observations show that four main types of discourse accompanied the adoption of REDD+ in the DRC: a discourse promoting REDD+ through its forest conservation component, as a policy instrument that would bring in significant financial resources to the DRC forest-related state bureaucracies, a discourse that considers REDD+ as an efficient mean of reducing poverty while promoting sustainability through “green development”, a discourse presenting REDD+ as a way of reducing marginalisation of local communities and indigenous peoples by recognising their customary rights, and finally, a discourse promoting REDD+ as a tool for territorial planning and governance. In addition, the paper points out strong links between DRC REDD+ policy discourse and three types of governance approaches: organisational and fiduciary governance, territorial governance, local development and benefit sharing governance. Our analysis also shows that political discourse has played a significant role in the adoption of substantial policies aimed at reducing deforestation in DRC.

政策讨论对刚果民主共和国(DRC)减少毁林和森林退化治理的影响
在行为者开展了旨在说服决策者相信其有效性的政策讨论之后,被称为 "REDD+"的遏制森林砍伐和退化的国际倡议被提上了刚果民主共和国的议事日程。本文以话语制度主义(DI)为理论和分析框架,分析了一系列有关 REDD+ 问题的政策文件,并评估了政策话语对刚果(金)减少毁林治理的影响。从实证的角度来看,对参与刚果民主共和国 REDD+ 进程的主要参与者的访谈和实地观察表明,刚果民主共和国在采用 REDD+ 的过程中主要有四种类型的论述:通过其森林保护部分推广 REDD+,将其作为一种政策工具,为刚果(金)与森林相关的国家官僚机构带来大量财政资源;将 REDD+视为一种有效的减贫手段,同时通过 "绿色发展 "促进可持续发展;通过承认当地社区和原住民的传统权利,将 REDD+作为减少其边缘化的一种方式;最后,将 REDD+作为一种领土规划和治理工具。此外,本文还指出了刚果民主共和国 REDD+ 政策论述与三类治理方法之间的紧密联系:组织和信托治理、领土治理、地方发展和利益分享治理。我们的分析还表明,政治话语在通过旨在减少刚果民主共和国森林砍伐的实质性政策方面发挥了重要作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Environmental Policy and Governance
Environmental Policy and Governance ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES-
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
13.30%
发文量
67
期刊介绍: Environmental Policy and Governance is an international, inter-disciplinary journal affiliated with the European Society for Ecological Economics (ESEE). The journal seeks to advance interdisciplinary environmental research and its use to support novel solutions in environmental policy and governance. The journal publishes innovative, high quality articles which examine, or are relevant to, the environmental policies that are introduced by governments or the diverse forms of environmental governance that emerge in markets and civil society. The journal includes papers that examine how different forms of policy and governance emerge and exert influence at scales ranging from local to global and in diverse developmental and environmental contexts.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信