{"title":"REDD+在非洲的实施:REDD+冲突管理案例","authors":"Richard Mbatu, Filemon Eliamini","doi":"10.1016/j.jnc.2025.127088","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>It has been eighteen years since the Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD+) program was first introduced by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) as a mechanism to fight against global warming and climate change. During this time, many REDD+ projects have emerged in forest-rich countries throughout the developing world, many in Africa. Equally, a large amount of literature has examined how REDD+ projects are managed in Africa and the challenges they present. Specifically, there is a growing body of scientific literature on conflicts linked to the REDD+ framework in Africa, albeit fragmented. This incomplete information base hinders the development of a comprehensive research agenda on REDD+ conflict management in Africa and dampens efforts towards the design of adaptive REDD+ policies that address actual and potential conflicts for African nations. This paper contributes to bridging this knowledge gap by systematically reviewing REDD+ conflict-related issues in Africa using the automated content analysis (ACA) tool, Leximancer (edition 5.0), and employing the resource conflict, collective action, and social-ecological resilience (RCCASER) framework for categorization to improve the current body of knowledge on REDD+ conflict management in Africa. Our findings suggest that REDD+ conflicts in Africa manifest around issues related to forest access, land tenure, community participation, benefit sharing, and structural adjustment. To enhance the smooth implementation of projects that ensure win–win outcomes for all stakeholders while ensuring that REDD+ objectives are met, future research should consider field research on the REDD+ conflict-related themes identified in this study.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":54898,"journal":{"name":"Journal for Nature Conservation","volume":"89 ","pages":"Article 127088"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The implementation of REDD+ in Africa: The case of REDD+ conflict management\",\"authors\":\"Richard Mbatu, Filemon Eliamini\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jnc.2025.127088\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>It has been eighteen years since the Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD+) program was first introduced by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) as a mechanism to fight against global warming and climate change. During this time, many REDD+ projects have emerged in forest-rich countries throughout the developing world, many in Africa. Equally, a large amount of literature has examined how REDD+ projects are managed in Africa and the challenges they present. Specifically, there is a growing body of scientific literature on conflicts linked to the REDD+ framework in Africa, albeit fragmented. This incomplete information base hinders the development of a comprehensive research agenda on REDD+ conflict management in Africa and dampens efforts towards the design of adaptive REDD+ policies that address actual and potential conflicts for African nations. This paper contributes to bridging this knowledge gap by systematically reviewing REDD+ conflict-related issues in Africa using the automated content analysis (ACA) tool, Leximancer (edition 5.0), and employing the resource conflict, collective action, and social-ecological resilience (RCCASER) framework for categorization to improve the current body of knowledge on REDD+ conflict management in Africa. Our findings suggest that REDD+ conflicts in Africa manifest around issues related to forest access, land tenure, community participation, benefit sharing, and structural adjustment. To enhance the smooth implementation of projects that ensure win–win outcomes for all stakeholders while ensuring that REDD+ objectives are met, future research should consider field research on the REDD+ conflict-related themes identified in this study.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54898,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal for Nature Conservation\",\"volume\":\"89 \",\"pages\":\"Article 127088\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal for Nature Conservation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1617138125002651\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal for Nature Conservation","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1617138125002651","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
The implementation of REDD+ in Africa: The case of REDD+ conflict management
It has been eighteen years since the Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD+) program was first introduced by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) as a mechanism to fight against global warming and climate change. During this time, many REDD+ projects have emerged in forest-rich countries throughout the developing world, many in Africa. Equally, a large amount of literature has examined how REDD+ projects are managed in Africa and the challenges they present. Specifically, there is a growing body of scientific literature on conflicts linked to the REDD+ framework in Africa, albeit fragmented. This incomplete information base hinders the development of a comprehensive research agenda on REDD+ conflict management in Africa and dampens efforts towards the design of adaptive REDD+ policies that address actual and potential conflicts for African nations. This paper contributes to bridging this knowledge gap by systematically reviewing REDD+ conflict-related issues in Africa using the automated content analysis (ACA) tool, Leximancer (edition 5.0), and employing the resource conflict, collective action, and social-ecological resilience (RCCASER) framework for categorization to improve the current body of knowledge on REDD+ conflict management in Africa. Our findings suggest that REDD+ conflicts in Africa manifest around issues related to forest access, land tenure, community participation, benefit sharing, and structural adjustment. To enhance the smooth implementation of projects that ensure win–win outcomes for all stakeholders while ensuring that REDD+ objectives are met, future research should consider field research on the REDD+ conflict-related themes identified in this study.
期刊介绍:
The Journal for Nature Conservation addresses concepts, methods and techniques for nature conservation. This international and interdisciplinary journal encourages collaboration between scientists and practitioners, including the integration of biodiversity issues with social and economic concepts. Therefore, conceptual, technical and methodological papers, as well as reviews, research papers, and short communications are welcomed from a wide range of disciplines, including theoretical ecology, landscape ecology, restoration ecology, ecological modelling, and others, provided that there is a clear connection and immediate relevance to nature conservation.
Manuscripts without any immediate conservation context, such as inventories, distribution modelling, genetic studies, animal behaviour, plant physiology, will not be considered for this journal; though such data may be useful for conservationists and managers in the future, this is outside of the current scope of the journal.