Advertisement

The Illusion of Participation: Tokenism in REDD+ Pilot Projects in the Democratic Republic of Congo

  • Raymond Achu Samndong
Chapter
Part of the Palgrave Studies in Natural Resource Management book series (PSNRM)

Abstract

Samndong interrogates the participation of local people in REDD+ in Equateur province of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). The chapter finds that information during the free prior and informed consent (FPIC) process was insufficient for local people to decide whether to join the REDD+ project. Additionally, local people had no say in the REDD+ projects implemented in local communities. Local participation in the REDD+ project was limited to supply of labour and attending meetings for financial rewards. Furthermore, local participation often excluded women. Samndong concludes that community participation in REDD+ in DRC is ‘tokenism’ and that strong community participation would be difficult if local power relations that perpetuate social inequalities in the DRC are not addressed.

References

  1. Adger, W. N., Benjaminsen, T. A., Brown, K., & Svarstad, H. (2001). Advancing a Political Ecology of Global Environmental Discourses. Development and Change, 32(4), 681–715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Agarwal, B. (2001). Participatory Exclusions, Community Forestry, and Gender: An Analysis for South Asia and a Conceptual Framework. World Development, 29(10), 1623–1648.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aquino, A., & Guay, B. (2013). Implementing REDD+ in the Democratic Republic of Congo: An Analysis of the Emerging National REDD+ Governance Structure. Forest Policy and Economics, 36, 71–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Arnstein, S. R. (1969). A Ladder of Citizen Participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35(4), 216–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baviskar, A. (2005). Between Micro-Politics and Administrative Imperatives: Decentralisation and the Watershed Mission in Madhya Pradesh, India. The European Journal of Development Research, 16(1), 26–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Blomley, T., Edwards, K., Kingazi, S., Lukumbuzya, K., Mäkelä, M., & Vesa, L. (2016). REDD+ Hits the Ground: Lessons Learned from Tanzania’s REDD+ Pilot Projects (Natural Resource Issues No. 32). London: IIED.Google Scholar
  7. Brosius, J. P., Tsing, A. L., & Zerner, C. (1998). Representing Communities: Histories and Politics of Community-Based Natural Resource Management. Society & Natural Resources, 11(2), 157–168. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941929809381069.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brown, K. (2002). Innovations for Conservation and Development. The Geographical Journal, 168(1), 6–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chambers, R. (1997). Whose Reality Counts?: Putting the First Last. London: Intermediate Technology Publications Ltd (ITP).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chapman, M. (Cartographer). (2016). Produced the Maps of the REDD+ Pilot Sites in Equateur Province.Google Scholar
  11. Chhatre, A., Lakhanpal, S., Larson, A., Nelson, F., Ojha, H., & Rao, J. (2012). Social Safeguards and Co-Benefits in REDD+: A Review of the Adjacent Possible. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 4(6), 654–660.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cleaver, F. (1999). Paradoxes of Participation: Questioning Participatory Approaches to Development. Journal of International Development, 11(4), 597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cleaver, F. (2001). Institutions, Agency and the Limitations of Participatory Approaches to Development. In B. Cooke & U. Kothari (Eds.), Participation: The New Tyranny? (pp. 36–55). London: Zed Books.Google Scholar
  14. Cohen, J. M., & Uphoff, N. T. (1980). Participation’s Place in Rural Development: Seeking Clarity through Specificity. World Development, 8(3), 213–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cooke, B., & Kothari, U. (2001). Participation: The New Tyranny? London: Zed Books.Google Scholar
  16. Cornwall, A. (2008). Unpacking ‘Participation’: Models, Meanings and Practices. Community Development Journal, 43(3), 269–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cornwall, A., & Gaventa, J. (2000). From Users and Choosers to Makers and Shapers Repositioning Participation in Social Policy. IDS Bulletin, 31(4), 50–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Debroux, L., Topa, G., Kaimowitz, D., Karsenty, A., Hart, T., Abdon, A.,… Bekhechi, M. (2007). Forests in Post-Conflict Democratic Republic of Congo: Analysis of a Priority Agenda (Selected Books, 1).Google Scholar
  19. Fétiveau, J., & Mpoyi, M. A. (2009). L’économie Politique Du Secteur Forestier En République Démocratique Du Congo. Kinshasa: Rapport final, Banque Mondiale.Google Scholar
  20. Fobissie, K., Alemagi, D., & Minang, P. A. (2014). REDD+ Policy Approaches in the Congo Basin: A Comparative Analysis of Cameroon and the Democratic Republic of Congo (Drc). Forests, 5(10), 2400–2424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fraser, N., & Olson, K. (2008). Adding Insult to Injury: Nancy Fraser Debates Her Critics. London: Verso.Google Scholar
  22. Hickey, S., & Mohan, G. (2004). Participation: From Tyranny to Transformation?: Exploring New Approaches to Participation in Development. London: Zed Books.Google Scholar
  23. Hulme, D., & Adams, W. (2001). Conservation and Community. Changing Narratives, Policies and Practices in African Conservation. In D. Hulme & M. Murphree (Eds.), African Wildlife & Livelihoods. The Promise & Performance of Community Conservation. Oxford: James Currey Publishers Ltd.Google Scholar
  24. Jagger, P., Lawlor, K., Brockhaus, M., Gebara, M. F., Sonwa, D. J., & Resosudarmo, I. A. P. (2012). REDD+ Safeguards in National Policy Discourse and Pilot Projects. In A. Angelsen, M. Brockhaus, W. D. Sunderlin, & L. V. Verchot (Eds.), Analysing REDD+: Challenges and Choices (pp. 301–316). Indonesia: CIFOR.Google Scholar
  25. Kipalu, P., Koné, L., Bouchra, S., Vig, S., & Loyombo, W. (2016). Securing Forest Peoples’ Rights and Tackling Deforestation in the Democratic Republic of Congo: Deforestation Drivers, Local Impacts and Rights-Based Solutions. London: Forest Peoples Programmes.Google Scholar
  26. Kipalu, P., & Mukungu, J. (2013). The Status of the REDD+ Process in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Kinshasa: Forest Peoples Programme.Google Scholar
  27. Lawlor, K., Madeira, E. M., Blockhus, J., & Ganz, D. J. (2013). Community Participation and Benefits in REDD+: A Review of Initial Outcomes and Lessons. Forests, 4(2), 296–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mahanty, S., & McDermott, C. L. (2013). How Does ‘Free, Prior and Informed Consent’ (Fpic) Impact Social Equity? Lessons from Mining and Forestry and Their Implications for REDD+. Land Use Policy, 35, 406–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mohanty, R. (2004). Institutional Dynamics and Participatory Spaces: The Making and Unmaking of Participation in Local Forest Management in India. IDS Bulletin, 35(2), 26–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mpoyi, A. M., Nyamwoga, F. B., Kabamba, F. M., & Assembe-Mvondo, S. (2013). The Context of REDD+ in the Democratic Republic of Congo: Drivers, Agents and Institutions (Vol. 94). Bogor: CIFOR.Google Scholar
  31. Mustalahti, I., & Rakotonarivo, O. S. (2014). REDD+ and Empowered Deliberative Democracy: Learning from Tanzania. World Development, 59, 199–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Nuesiri, E. (2012). The Re-emergence of Customary Authority and Its Relation with Local Democratic Government. Responsive Forest Governance Initiative (RFGI), Working Pa per (Vol. 6, p. 72). Dakar: CODESRIA.Google Scholar
  33. Oyono, P. R., & Nzuzi, F. L. (2006). Au Sortir D’une Longue «Nuit» Institutionnelle», Perspectives De Gestion Décentralisée Des Forêts Et Des Bénéfices En Rd Congo Post-Conflit. Afrique et Développement, 31(2), 185–216.Google Scholar
  34. Penderis, S. (2012). Theorizing Participation: From Tyranny to Emancipation. Journal of African & Asian Local Government Studies, 1(3), 1–28.Google Scholar
  35. Pretty, J. N. (1995). Participatory Learning for Sustainable Agriculture. World Development, 23(8), 1247–1263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Ribot, J., & Larson, A. (2012). Reducing REDD Risks: Affirmative Policy on an Uneven Playing Field. International Journal of the Commons, 6(2), 233–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Samndong, R. A. (2015). Institutional Choice and Fragmented Citizenship in Forestry and Development Interventions in Bikoro Territory of the Democratic Republic of Congo. Forum for Development Studies, 43(2), 1–29.Google Scholar
  38. Samndong, R. A., & Nhantumbo, I. (2015). Natural Resources Governance in the Democratic Republic of Congo: Breaking Sector Walls for Sustainable Land Use Investments. IIED Country Report (Vol. Natural Resource). London: IIED.Google Scholar
  39. Sandbrook, C., Nelson, F., Adams, W. M., & Agrawal, A. (2010). Carbon, Forests and the REDD Paradox. Oryx, 44(03), 330–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sen, A. (1999). Development as Freedom. New York: Oxford Paperbacks.Google Scholar
  41. Sunderlin, W. D., Larson, A., Duchelle, A. E., Resosudarmo, I. A. P., Huynh, T. B., Awono, A., & Dokken, T. (2014). How Are REDD+ Proponents Addressing Tenure Problems? Evidence from Brazil, Cameroon, Tanzania, Indonesia, and Vietnam. World Development, 55, 37–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. UNFCCC. (2010). The Cancun Agreements: Outcome of the Work of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-Term Cooperative Action under the Convention. Decision 1/Cp.16. Bonn: UNFCCC.Google Scholar
  43. White, S. C. (1996). Depoliticising Development: The Uses and Abuses of Participation. Development in Practice, 6(1), 6–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Williams, G. (2004). The Case for an Australian Bill of Rights: Freedom in the War on Terror. Kensington: UNSW Press.Google Scholar
  45. Yamba, P. K. (2009). Congo Basin-Drc: Case Study on the Ngiri-Tumba-Maindombe Wetland Landscape (Vol. Environmental Security). The Hague: Institute for Environmental Security.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Raymond Achu Samndong
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of International Environment and Development StudiesNorwegian University of Life SciencesÅsNorway

Personalised recommendations