We apply self-determination theory (SDT) to explain how psychological outcomes on participants in ‘Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation’ (REDD +) projects can provide lessons for other forest landscape management programmes. Evidence from REDD + case studies suggests that negative outcomes may result from three design factors. Payment for environmental services (PES) may reduce participants’ motivation and competence in livelihood activities. A large-scale landscape approach to REDD + increases stakeholder heterogeneity which may reduce participants’ ability to liaise and cooperate. Trade-offs between traditional forest uses and conservation goals may reduce participants’ autonomy to develop their livelihoods. By inference, replicating these design factors in comparable forest landscape management programmes or projects may also result in similar negative outcomes. Replacing PES with additional—not substitute—livelihood-based capacity building and reducing the physical landscape to the social landscape which encompasses stakeholders’ capacity to work together may mitigate these outcomes.
|Journal||Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change|
|Publication status||Published - 1 May 2021|
- Locus of causality
- Payments for environmental services
- Psychosocial autonomy
- Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation
- Self-determination theory