Vietnam is acknowledged to be REDD+ pioneer country, having adopted REDD+ in 2009. This paper is an updated version of Vietnam’s REDD+ Country Profile which was first published by CIFOR in 2012. Our findings show that forest cover has increased since 2012, but enhancing, or even maintaining, forest quality remains a challenge. Drivers of deforestation and degradation in Vietnam, including legal and illegal logging, conversion of forest for national development goals and commercial agriculture, weak law enforcement and weak governance, have persisted since 2012 up to 2017. However, with strong political commitment, the government has made significant progress in addressing major drivers, such as the expansion of hydropower plants and rubber plantations.Since 2012, Vietnam has also signed important international treaties and agreements on trade, such as Voluntary Partnership Agreements (VPAs) through the European Union’s (EU) Forest Law Enforcement. These new policies have enhanced the role of the forestry sector within the overall national economy and provided a strong legal framework and incentives for forestuser groups and government agencies to take part in forest protection and development. Nevertheless, new market rules and international trade patterns also pose significant challenges for Vietnam, where the domestic forestry sector is characterized by state-owned companies and a large number of domestic firms that struggle to comply with these new rules.The climate change policies, national REDD+ strategy and REDD+ institutional setting has been refined and revised over time. However, uncertain and complex international requirements on REDD+ and limited funding have weakened the government’s interest in and political commitment to REDD+. REDD+ policies in Vietnam have shown significant progress in terms of its monitoring, reporting and verification (MRV) systems, forest reference emission levels (FREL), and performance-based and benefit-sharing mechanisms by taking into account lessons learnt from its national Payment for Forest Environmental Services (PFES) Scheme. Evidence also shows increasing efforts of government and international communities to ground forestry policies in a participatory decision-making processes and the progress on developing safeguarding policies in Vietnam between 2012 and 2017 affirms the government’s interest in pursuing an equitable REDD+ implementation. Policy documents have fully recognized the need to give civil society organizations (CSOs) and ethnic groups political space and include them in decision making. Yet, participation remains token. Government provision for tenure security and carbon rights for local households are still being developed, with little progress since 2012.The effectiveness of REDD+ policies in addressing drivers of deforestation and degradation has not be proven, even though the revised NRAP has recently been approved. However, the fact that drivers of deforestation and degradation are outside of the forestry sector and have a strong link to national economic development goals points to an uneasy pathway for REDD+. The business case for REDD+ in Vietnam has not been proven, due to an uncertain carbon market, increasing requirements from donors and developed countries, and high transaction and implementation costs. Current efforts toward 3Es outcomes of REDD+ could be enhanced by stronger political commitment to addressing the drivers of deforestation from all sectors, broader changes in policy framework that create both incentives and disincentives for avoiding deforestation and degradation, cross-sectoral collaboration, and committed funding from both the government and developed countries.

REDD+ is one of the leading near-term options for global climate change mitigation. More than 300 subnational REDD+ initiatives have been launched across the tropics, responding to both the call for demonstration activities in the Bali Action Plan and the market for voluntary carbon offset credits.

REDD+ must be transformational. REDD+ requires broad institutional and governance reforms, such as tenure, decentralisation, and corruption control. These reforms will enable departures from business as usual, and involve communities and forest users in making and implementing policies that a ect them. Policies must go beyond forestry. REDD+ strategies must include policies outside the forestry sector narrowly de ned, such as agriculture and energy, and better coordinate across sectors to deal with non-forest drivers of deforestation and degradation. Performance-based payments are key, yet limited. Payments based on performance directly incentivise and compensate forest owners and users. But schemes such as payments for environmental services (PES) depend on conditions, such as secure tenure, solid carbon data and transparent governance, that are often lacking and take time to change. This constraint reinforces the need for broad institutional and policy reforms. We must learn from the past. Many approaches to REDD+ now being considered are similar to previous e orts to conserve and better manage forests, often with limited success. Taking on board lessons learned from past experience will improve the prospects of REDD+ e ectiveness. National circumstances and uncertainty must be factored in. Di erent country contexts will create a variety of REDD+ models with di erent institutional and policy mixes. Uncertainties about the shape of the future global REDD+ system, national readiness and political consensus require  exibility and a phased approach to REDD+ implementation.

Constructive critique. This book provides a critical, evidence-based analysis of REDD+ implementation so far, without losing sight of the urgent need to reduce forest-based emissions to prevent catastrophic climate change. REDD+ as envisioned

This publication offers an overview of REDD+ strategy in Mozambique through a synthesis of the current knowledge about the causes of forest carbon changes, a review of the legal and institutional context, and a description of the current political process of REDD+. The objective of the study is to collate data and relevant information, and to offer a preliminary analysis of the fundamental aspects that can help promote efficiency, efficacy, and equity in REDD+ policy. Specifically, this study concludes that some of the major problems for REDD+ in Mozambique are the lack of data about deforestation and forest degradation, institutional weakness (regarding monitoring and propriety rights), and gaps in human and technical capacity to fulfil demands associated with REDD+. Therefore, efficient results will depend on the degree to which REDD+ policies are oriented toward real mitigation of the sources of forest carbon changes. In Mozambique, REDD+ policy tends to originate outside the timber sector. The cost-effectiveness of the results will depend on identifying and addressing the fundamental causes of forest carbon changes through more viable REDD+ policy options; government capacity to respond to REDD+ demands, especially at the sub-national level; the capacity of civil society and other institutions; and the strength of the institutional framework. The degree of success of equitable outcomes and the generation of co-benefits will depend on the inclusion and appropriateness of the processes at the national level; if those who support REDD+ costs are also being compensated; and on the general definition of carbon rights and environmental services.

This working paper gives an overview of Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA), a method that enables systematic cross-case comparison of an intermediate number of case studies. It presents an overview of QCA and detailed descriptions of different versions of the method. Based on the experience applying QCA to CIFOR’s Global Comparative Study on REDD+, the paper shows how QCA can help produce parsimonious and stringent research results from a multitude of in-depth case studies developed by numerous researchers. QCA can be used as a structuring tool that allows researchers to share understanding and produce coherent data, as well as a tool for making inferences usable for policy advice. REDD+ is still a young policy domain, and it is a very dynamic one. Currently, the benefits of QCA result mainly from the fact that it helps researchers to organize the evidence generated. However, with further and more differentiated case knowledge, and more countries achieving desired outcomes, QCA has the potential to deliver robust analysis that allows the provision of information, guidance and recommendations to ensure carbon-effective, cost-efficient and equitable REDD+ policy design and implementation

The Vietnam Forestry Development Strategy (VFDS) is one of the country’s most important plans for the forestry sector. The strategic directions, objectives and solutions within it differ from time to time, depending on the political goals and perspectives of the moment, as well as the role that the forestry sector plays in Vietnam’s overall socio-economic development. Regardless of such changes, inheriting lessons learned, developing the next strategy off the back of the experience gained from solving previous challenges, and taking advantage of opportunities, are always the top priorities of the Government of Vietnam. This report is the result of a collaboration between the Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) and the Vietnam Administration of Forestry (VNFOREST); it is intended to provide VNFOREST with input as they develop the new strategy. Based on secondary document research and stakeholder interviews, the report reviews achievements and challenges in the implementation of VFDS 2006–2020, as well as provides recommendations for policy makers to consider in the process of developing the new strategy. Research results show that, by 2020, Vietnam had exceeded a number of the goals set out in VFDS 2006–2020, including: (i) accelerating the growth of production value in the sector; (ii) increasing the export value of wood and forest products; (iii) increasing domestic wood production; and (iv) planting protection forest (PTF) and special-use forests (SUF). However, the forestry sector still faces many challenges when it comes to other key performance indicators, such as: (i) increasing the area of production forests (PDF) with certification of sustainable forest management (SFM); (ii) increasing large-diameter timber production; (iii) increasing revenue for forest environmental services (FES); (iv) securing forest and forest land for the purposes of allocation and leases; (v) reducing the number of poor households in forestry areas; and (vi) increasing the rate at which forestry workers are trained. Although some anticipated targets were not achieved, others were exceeded, for example: forest cover; reforestation after logging; reduction of forest protection violations; and scattered tree planting. That these goals were achieved or exceeded is the result of strong political commitment, policies trend-matching the market, improvements in central and local management capacity, the active support of international donors, and the involvement of civil society and the private sector. That some targets were not achieved is due to the challenges of implementing policy effectively, efficiently and equitably at grassroots level, lack of resources and funding, and some ambitious goals and targets not being realistic in the current economic, political and market contexts. Addressing these challenges requires a new approach and more effective economic, social and technical solutions. Development of VFDS 2021–2030 and the 2050 vision needs to consider the implementation achievements and challenges of the previous policy, as well as how to align with global trends, and balance these with the current political, economic and social development context in Vietnam. The direction of the new strategy must also be considered in the context of international requirements, to facilitate the mobilization of domestic and foreign financial resources to help modernize the industry, as well as enhance the forestry sector’s role and value in terms of poverty reduction, sustainable economic development and ensuring sustainable forest ecosystems.

Experiences from incentive-based forest management are examined for their effects on the livelihoods of local communities. In the second section, country case studies provide a snapshot of REDD developments to date and identify design features for REDD that would support benefits for forest communities.

Key messages This review reveals multiple allegations of abuses of the rights of Indigenous Peoples in the context of Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD+) readiness and implementation.Findings from the review should be transformed into opportunities for REDD+ to promote and strengthen the rights of Indigenous Peoples. A rights-based approach to REDD+ requires engagement with indigenous men and women as rights-holders, rather than as project beneficiaries.Parties should be pressed to investigate abuse allegations, enable access to justice, and develop grievance mechanisms within REDD+ processes.REDD+ risks exacerbating issues of unsecured rights and pre-existing conflicts over land in the contexts in which it is being readied and implemented, unless it is re-oriented to enhance the rights of Indigenous Peoples. Evidence suggests Indigenous Peoples' undefined tenure rights will negatively impact REDD+ targets. Ensuring the consistent participation of indigenous men and women throughout REDD+ processes is imperative, following clear guidelines for Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC), and with capacity-building efforts for their effective participation.Rather than being seen as a tool to discourage negative impacts, REDD+ safeguards must be reframed to recognise, inter alia, the key role of Indigenous Peoples in climate change initiatives and protecting forests..