Abstract/Summary

This research is a critique of the incentive-based global mechanism for addressing drivers of deforestation and forest degradation known as REDD+. Most important is the question of whether the incentive based mechanism can actually effectively reduce deforestation and forest degradation in a country like Zambia. Using content analysis of documents and expert interview scripts, the study makes three important findings. Firstly, the study finds that despite demand for energy being the main driver of forest cover loss in most developing countries of Africa, the focus and nature of the suggested interventions are targeted more on addressing agriculture while paying little attention to the bigger problem which is, energy. Secondly the study finds that the suggested incentives in REDD+ will fail to make a standing tree more valuable than a felled one, as it is expected, and consequently fail to motivate forest dependent communities to move away from the trees and pursue other forms of livelihoods. Thirdly the study finds that REDD+ was being supported by developed states because it was perceived cheap and was accepted by developing countries because of its financial promise to them. The study argues that unless REDD+ there is a rethink in the way drivers are classified and strategies are developed and targeted, and unless actors in REDD+ are fully motivated by precautionary and normative principles, the REDD+ mechanism will most likely fail to achieve its central objective of reducing emissions from forests in developing countries.