This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
In the context of the International Bar Association report, Achieving Justice and Human Rights in an Era of Climate Disruption, this commentary highlights the challenges in adopting a human rights framework for the REDD+ programme which is designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. It identifies the potential inequities involved in mitigation efforts directed toward reducing emissions from avoided deforestation, forest degradation and associated forestry activities in terms of the potential impacts upon indigenous peoples and local forest-dependent communities. The potential impacts upon these communities are now well recognised, and issues of climate justice have been raised. The introduction of safeguards under the REDD+ model, is an important step towards incorporating human rights into the REDD+ framework. Yet even given the emphasis on securing tenure and participatory rights, such as free, prior and informed consent, REDD+ may still entrench inequalities for some indigenous and local communities, in areas such as the utilisation of traditional knowledge in fire management.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Godden et al. (2016) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: