• myGriffith
    • Staff portal
    • Contact Us⌄
      • Future student enquiries 1800 677 728
      • Current student enquiries 1800 154 055
      • International enquiries +61 7 3735 6425
      • General enquiries 07 3735 7111
      • Online enquiries
      • Staff phonebook
    View Item 
    •   Home
    • Griffith Research Online
    • Journal articles
    • View Item
    • Home
    • Griffith Research Online
    • Journal articles
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

  • All of Griffith Research Online
    • Communities & Collections
    • Authors
    • By Issue Date
    • Titles
  • This Collection
    • Authors
    • By Issue Date
    • Titles
  • Statistics

  • Most Popular Items
  • Statistics by Country
  • Most Popular Authors
  • Support

  • Contact us
  • FAQs
  • Admin login

  • Login
  • More equal than others? A comparative analysis of state and non-state perceptions of interest representation and decision-making in REDD+ negotiations

    Thumbnail
    View/Open
    86478_1.pdf (272.2Kb)
    Author(s)
    Cadman, Tim
    Maraseni, Tek
    Griffith University Author(s)
    Cadman, Timothy M.
    Year published
    2013
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    This paper provides a quantitative analysis of stakeholder perceptions regarding the governance of the UN climate change negotiations on reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries (REDD+). Governance quality and legitimacy were evaluated by means of an online survey conducted in 2011, using a normative framework of principles, criteria and indicators. The paper concentrates on national-level stakeholders active in REDD+ in Nepal, and their perceptions of governance quality, with a discussion, given the focus of this special volume, that emphasizes inclusiveness, equality and resources ...
    View more >
    This paper provides a quantitative analysis of stakeholder perceptions regarding the governance of the UN climate change negotiations on reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries (REDD+). Governance quality and legitimacy were evaluated by means of an online survey conducted in 2011, using a normative framework of principles, criteria and indicators. The paper concentrates on national-level stakeholders active in REDD+ in Nepal, and their perceptions of governance quality, with a discussion, given the focus of this special volume, that emphasizes inclusiveness, equality and resources (indicators of interest representation) and democracy, agreement and dispute settlement (indicators of decision-making). Respondents were selected from state (i.e. governmental) and non-state (i.e. civil society) interests from a range of sectors active in REDD+ at the national level. The results show that survey respondents generally found REDD+ to be inclusive, but did not consider that there was the necessary capacity, or resources, for meaningful participation. A concluding section reviews the framework applied, and comments on the nature of multi-stakeholder relations in contemporary global governance, and REDD+ specifically.
    View less >
    Journal Title
    Innovation
    Volume
    26
    Issue
    3
    DOI
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13511610.2013.771880
    Copyright Statement
    © 2013 Taylor & Francis. This is the author-manuscript version of the paper. Reproduced in accordance with the copyright policy of the publisher.Please refer to the journal link for access to the definitive, published version.
    Subject
    Human society
    Environment policy
    Publication URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/10072/55502
    Collection
    • Journal articles

    Footer

    Disclaimer

    • Privacy policy
    • Copyright matters
    • CRICOS Provider - 00233E

    Tagline

    • Gold Coast
    • Logan
    • Brisbane - Queensland, Australia
    First Peoples of Australia
    • Aboriginal
    • Torres Strait Islander