The 2015 United Nations Paris Agreement on Climate reinforces actions to conserve and enhance forests as carbon reservoirs. A decade after sub-national demonstration projects to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+) commenced, we examine why many REDD+ schemes appear to have fuelled social conflict while having limited success in addressing the drivers of forest loss and degradation. Our analysis is two-tiered: first we synthesise findings from a set of ethnographic case studies of REDD+ in Mainland Southeast Asia, conducted by the authors; second, we explore whether the insights from our regional synthesis apply globally, through a comparative review of published qualitative research on REDD+ field experiences. Our results reveal three major implementation dynamics that can undermine REDD+ in practice, which we conceptualise from science and technology studies and critical political ecology as follows: 1) problems with the enrolment of governments, civil society, and local forest users in REDD+ governance; 2) the prevalence of overly simplified codification systems for REDD+ implementation that mismatch targeted societies and landscapes; and 3) the consequent dissonance between REDD+ objectives and outcomes. Together, these problematic dynamics reveal how and why REDD+ so often misses its targets of reducing deforestation and delivering community benefits. In effect, it appears that REDD+ in the course of implementation maps onto local power structures and political economies, rendering it blunt as tool for change. The potential of REDD+ as a 'solution' in the global climate regime must therefore be scrutinized, along with other similar mechanisms espoused by the green economy.

中文翻译：

---

向“实际存在”的REDD +学习：民族志研究结果的综合

2015年《联合国巴黎气候协定》加强了保护和加强森林作为碳库的行动。在为减少森林砍伐和森林退化（REDD +）排放而开展的地方示范项目启动十年之后，我们研究了为什么许多REDD +计划似乎在加剧社会冲突的同时却未能成功解决森林退化和退化的驱动因素。我们的分析分为两个阶段：首先，我们综合了作者在东南亚大陆上进行的一系列民族志案例研究得出的结论；第二，我们通过对已发表的有关REDD +领域经验的定性研究进行比较审查，探讨我们区域综合的见解是否在全球范围内适用。我们的结果揭示了在实践中可能会破坏REDD +的三个主要实施动态，我们从科学技术研究和重要的政治生态学中将其概念化如下：1）政府，公民社会和当地森林使用者参与REDD +治理存在的问题；2）对于REDD +实施而言，过度简化的编纂系统的普遍性与目标社会和地貌不匹配；3）REDD +目标与结果之间的不一致。这些有问题的动态共同揭示了REDD +如何以及为什么常常错过减少砍伐森林和带来社区利益的目标。实际上，REDD +在实施过程中似乎映射到了当地的权力结构和政治经济体，使其作为变革工具变得直率。因此，必须仔细研究REDD +作为全球气候体制中“解决方案”的潜力，