竞争策略还是互补策略?保护土著居民权利和支付保护森林费用

W. Savedoff
{"title":"竞争策略还是互补策略?保护土著居民权利和支付保护森林费用","authors":"W. Savedoff","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3310462","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In 2007, the UN General Assembly adopted the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) endorsed the Bali Action Plan to pay for reductions in tropical deforestation. While many saw these initiatives as complementary, others considered the Bali Action Plan a threat to indigenous peoples’ rights. This paper reviews the history of efforts to protect indigenous rights and to pay for conserving forests and analyzes how they might be competing or complementary strategies. It then presents country experiences that show indigenous peoples have achieved tangible political benefits in many countries and internationally by using their leverage over and participation in Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation Plus (REDD+) negotiations. Nevertheless, these experiences also show that insisting on preconditions for REDD+ national performance payments may have inadvertently harmed indigenous peoples by contributing to delays in implementation. Today, the movements for indigenous rights and for slowing deforestation are inextricably entwined. Whereas critics fear implementation of REDD+ will harm indigenous peoples, it is the failure of REDD+ programs to influence national action to slow deforestation which represents the greater risk. In this way, the two movements face a common challenge to refocus attention on the national policies and actions that must change to protect both indigenous rights and tropical forests.","PeriodicalId":280811,"journal":{"name":"Indigenous Nations & Peoples Law eJournal","volume":"40 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"21","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Competing or Complementary Strategies? Protecting Indigenous Rights and Paying to Conserve Forests\",\"authors\":\"W. Savedoff\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3310462\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In 2007, the UN General Assembly adopted the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) endorsed the Bali Action Plan to pay for reductions in tropical deforestation. While many saw these initiatives as complementary, others considered the Bali Action Plan a threat to indigenous peoples’ rights. This paper reviews the history of efforts to protect indigenous rights and to pay for conserving forests and analyzes how they might be competing or complementary strategies. It then presents country experiences that show indigenous peoples have achieved tangible political benefits in many countries and internationally by using their leverage over and participation in Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation Plus (REDD+) negotiations. Nevertheless, these experiences also show that insisting on preconditions for REDD+ national performance payments may have inadvertently harmed indigenous peoples by contributing to delays in implementation. Today, the movements for indigenous rights and for slowing deforestation are inextricably entwined. Whereas critics fear implementation of REDD+ will harm indigenous peoples, it is the failure of REDD+ programs to influence national action to slow deforestation which represents the greater risk. In this way, the two movements face a common challenge to refocus attention on the national policies and actions that must change to protect both indigenous rights and tropical forests.\",\"PeriodicalId\":280811,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Indigenous Nations & Peoples Law eJournal\",\"volume\":\"40 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-07-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"21\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Indigenous Nations & Peoples Law eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3310462\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indigenous Nations & Peoples Law eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3310462","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 21

摘要

2007年,联合国大会通过了《土著人民权利宣言》,《联合国气候变化框架公约》(UNFCCC)批准了《巴厘行动计划》,为减少热带森林砍伐提供资金。虽然许多人认为这些倡议是互补的,但其他人认为《巴厘行动计划》是对土著人民权利的威胁。本文回顾了保护土著权利和为保护森林支付费用的努力的历史,并分析了它们如何成为相互竞争或互补的战略。然后,报告介绍了一些国家的经验,表明土著人民在许多国家和国际上通过利用他们在减少森林砍伐和退化排放+ (REDD+)谈判中的影响力和参与,获得了切实的政治利益。然而,这些经验也表明,坚持REDD+国家绩效支付的先决条件可能会导致实施延迟,从而无意中伤害了土著人民。今天,争取土著权利的运动和减缓森林砍伐的运动是密不可分的。尽管批评人士担心REDD+的实施会伤害土著人民,但更大的风险在于REDD+计划未能影响减缓森林砍伐的国家行动。这样,这两个运动面临着一个共同的挑战,即重新把注意力集中在必须改变的国家政策和行动上,以保护土著权利和热带森林。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Competing or Complementary Strategies? Protecting Indigenous Rights and Paying to Conserve Forests
In 2007, the UN General Assembly adopted the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) endorsed the Bali Action Plan to pay for reductions in tropical deforestation. While many saw these initiatives as complementary, others considered the Bali Action Plan a threat to indigenous peoples’ rights. This paper reviews the history of efforts to protect indigenous rights and to pay for conserving forests and analyzes how they might be competing or complementary strategies. It then presents country experiences that show indigenous peoples have achieved tangible political benefits in many countries and internationally by using their leverage over and participation in Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation Plus (REDD+) negotiations. Nevertheless, these experiences also show that insisting on preconditions for REDD+ national performance payments may have inadvertently harmed indigenous peoples by contributing to delays in implementation. Today, the movements for indigenous rights and for slowing deforestation are inextricably entwined. Whereas critics fear implementation of REDD+ will harm indigenous peoples, it is the failure of REDD+ programs to influence national action to slow deforestation which represents the greater risk. In this way, the two movements face a common challenge to refocus attention on the national policies and actions that must change to protect both indigenous rights and tropical forests.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信