TY - JOUR

T1 - Practical critique: Bridging the gap between critical and practice oriented REDD+ research communities’

AU - McGregor, Andrew

AU - Weaver, Sean

AU - Challies, Ed

AU - Howson, Peter

AU - Astuti, Rini

AU - Haalboom, Bethany

PY - 2014/12/1

Y1 - 2014/12/1

N2 - Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) is an ambitious global programme oriented towards improving forest carbon management. It aims to attract new sources of ‘green’ capital to fund emissions reductions from avoided deforestation and sustainable forest management. REDD+ is transforming forest conservation, as a diverse array of new stakeholders become involved. Not surprisingly, REDD+ has proved divisive, as critics concern themselves with issues of power, justice, and commodification, while practice-oriented researchers tackle similar issues from different perspectives, focusing on benefit sharing, safeguards, additionality, measuring and verification. In this paper we explore the different roles of critical and practical research, and argue that there is a need for greater sharing of knowledge across current divides. We draw on our own experiences of conducting a research project on REDD+ in Indonesia that involved critical and practice-oriented researchers. We argue that critical research disconnected from practical matters can have perverse outcomes for practitioners who are ultimately working towards similar goals; while uncritical practice-oriented research has the potential to lead to a dilution of core values of environmental justice and conservation. In contrast, forms of practical critique provide ways of researching REDD+ that have practical value while maintaining critical insights.

AB - Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) is an ambitious global programme oriented towards improving forest carbon management. It aims to attract new sources of ‘green’ capital to fund emissions reductions from avoided deforestation and sustainable forest management. REDD+ is transforming forest conservation, as a diverse array of new stakeholders become involved. Not surprisingly, REDD+ has proved divisive, as critics concern themselves with issues of power, justice, and commodification, while practice-oriented researchers tackle similar issues from different perspectives, focusing on benefit sharing, safeguards, additionality, measuring and verification. In this paper we explore the different roles of critical and practical research, and argue that there is a need for greater sharing of knowledge across current divides. We draw on our own experiences of conducting a research project on REDD+ in Indonesia that involved critical and practice-oriented researchers. We argue that critical research disconnected from practical matters can have perverse outcomes for practitioners who are ultimately working towards similar goals; while uncritical practice-oriented research has the potential to lead to a dilution of core values of environmental justice and conservation. In contrast, forms of practical critique provide ways of researching REDD+ that have practical value while maintaining critical insights.

KW - Geography

KW - Political ecology

KW - REDD+

KW - Forest governance

KW - critique

KW - indonesia

KW - practice

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84917689237&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/apv.12064

DO - 10.1111/apv.12064

M3 - Journal articles

VL - 55

SP - 277

EP - 291

JO - Asia Pacific Viewpoint

JF - Asia Pacific Viewpoint

SN - 1467-8373

IS - 3

ER -