• Energy Research

From its advent in 2005 within global climate change negotiations, reducing carbon emissions from deforestation and other forest‐related activities (so‐called REDD+) has been experimented with in developing country contexts for over a decade now, with a wide array of expectations coming to be associated with it. Three consecutive conceptualizations are identifiable: carbon‐centered, where REDD+ is primarily a climate mitigation strategy; co‐benefits‐centered, where REDD+ becomes a triple win solution for climate, biodiversity and communities; and landscape‐centered, where REDD+ activities are embedded in integrated sustainable land‐use approaches. In assessing such evolving expectations against existing REDD+ experiences, a mixed picture emerges. Some expectations, specifically relating to forest carbon financing, are not being adequately met, while others, notably the delivery of co‐benefits, hold out more promise. Yet this also highlights a potential paradox facing REDD+. While there is growing recognition that co‐benefit generation is key, and that piece‐meal, forest‐carbon focused REDD+ interventions are unlikely to address the complex causes of tropical forest loss, forest carbon is still being foregrounded in measuring and reporting on REDD+ performance, and in generating results‐based payments (even as these aspects remain challenging). This implies, however, that the future of REDD+ may lie not in one conceptualization coming to dominate, but rather in co‐existence of heterogeneous practices. REDD+ may end up as a patchwork of projects and practices with different foci and financing mechanisms. Although this cannot prevent trade‐offs, such a heterodox REDD+ may provide building blocks for the polycentric governance of the world's remaining tropical forests. WIREs Clim Change 2017, 8:e425. doi: 10.1002/wcc.425This article is categorized under: Climate and Development > Social Justice and the Politics of Development Policy and Governance > Multilevel and Transnational Climate Change Governance

The data was collected and formed part of a project called Water-Energy-Food Nexus: Multi-Actor Governance for Social Justice which is co-funded by the Dutch Research Council (NWO) in the Netherlands and the National Research Foundation (NRF) in South Africa. The objective of the project was to highlight how social justice is enhanced by conditions of WEF nexus governance. This was achieved through a transdisciplinary approach to how a conceptual “WEF community” can be an agent of change through empowerment in WEF nexus governance by providing legal instruments that can be used and encouraging decision-making synergies from household to national levels. This was envisioned by deciphering how WEF resources and decision-making are produced, used, and distributed, their linkages, and the representation of marginal groups across scales. The opportunities and challenges of incorporating WEF community initiatives in South Africa’s legal framework were also evaluated by comparing them to the EU legislation to increase legal certainty and social justice The data set referred herein concerns part of the project which collected quantitative data through a questionnaire of 1184 household in South Africa. The household were purposively selected from Matatiele, Magareng and Greater Taung Local Municipalities.