More equal than others? A comparative analysis of state and non-state perceptions of interest representation and decision-making in REDD+ negotiations
MetadataShow full item record
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.
© 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.