Skip to Main Content
Table 3 

National Benefit-Sharing Arrangements

Country National Climate Change ProgramTypeREDD+ Benefit-Sharing ProvisionsAdditional Provisions Listed Under “Safeguards”Land Tenure Regime that Informs Benefit-Sharing/SafeguardsStrength of Tenure Regime (Strong/Weak)1Level of Ambiguity (High/Low)
India Executive Order “To encourage and incentivize local communities for their role in conservation by transferring the financial benefits accrued on account of REDD+ … based on their performance” (MoEF 2014) “Safeguarding existing traditional rights of local communities….Fair and transparent accounting and disbursement of benefits and REDD+ incentives” (MoEF 2014, 6) Refers most frequently to JFM. Weak High 
National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC) Safeguards: The progressive Forest Rights of 2006. 
Tanzania Executive Order “Provision of sufficient incentives/compensation to motivate stakeholders” (URT 2013a). “..ensure environmental safeguards and possible impacts on the environment as well as livelihoods and rights of communities” (URT 2013, p.53). The Land Act of 1999; Draft National REDD+ Strategy classifies village land as state forestland. Weak High 
National REDD+ Strategy 
Mexico Law “…the property rights relating to…carbon lie with the legal owners of land (e.g. ejidos, communities, indigenous groups, individuals, firms)… activities that generate more social benefits and support rural sustainable development” (Balderas Torres and Skutsch 2014, p.7 citing the National REDD+ Strategy 2012) Safeguards to respect “gender considerations and guaranteeing the certainty over property rights and economic competitiveness” (Balderas Torres and Skutsch 2014, p.7 citing the National REDD+ Strategy 2012) Combines the progressive aspects of Agrarian Law of 1992 and the General Law on Sustainable Forest Development 2002 (amended in 2012). Strong Low2 
Climate Change Law 2012 
Country National Climate Change ProgramTypeREDD+ Benefit-Sharing ProvisionsAdditional Provisions Listed Under “Safeguards”Land Tenure Regime that Informs Benefit-Sharing/SafeguardsStrength of Tenure Regime (Strong/Weak)1Level of Ambiguity (High/Low)
India Executive Order “To encourage and incentivize local communities for their role in conservation by transferring the financial benefits accrued on account of REDD+ … based on their performance” (MoEF 2014) “Safeguarding existing traditional rights of local communities….Fair and transparent accounting and disbursement of benefits and REDD+ incentives” (MoEF 2014, 6) Refers most frequently to JFM. Weak High 
National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC) Safeguards: The progressive Forest Rights of 2006. 
Tanzania Executive Order “Provision of sufficient incentives/compensation to motivate stakeholders” (URT 2013a). “..ensure environmental safeguards and possible impacts on the environment as well as livelihoods and rights of communities” (URT 2013, p.53). The Land Act of 1999; Draft National REDD+ Strategy classifies village land as state forestland. Weak High 
National REDD+ Strategy 
Mexico Law “…the property rights relating to…carbon lie with the legal owners of land (e.g. ejidos, communities, indigenous groups, individuals, firms)… activities that generate more social benefits and support rural sustainable development” (Balderas Torres and Skutsch 2014, p.7 citing the National REDD+ Strategy 2012) Safeguards to respect “gender considerations and guaranteeing the certainty over property rights and economic competitiveness” (Balderas Torres and Skutsch 2014, p.7 citing the National REDD+ Strategy 2012) Combines the progressive aspects of Agrarian Law of 1992 and the General Law on Sustainable Forest Development 2002 (amended in 2012). Strong Low2 
Climate Change Law 2012 
1. 

Based on the assessment presented in Table 2.

2. 

Some level of ambiguity is inherent to the nature of international REDD+ regime (see Balderas Torres and Skutsch 2014).

Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal