The REDD+ scheme, designed as a global mechanism to combat climate change through forest conservation, has ignited considerable debate. While its effectiveness in reducing emissions is a primary concern,its potential impacts on local communities where it is implemented are equally critical. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Conference of the Parties (COP) addressed these concerns in the Cancun Agreements, mandating that REDD+ projects contribute to forest conservation while enhancing social and environmental co-benefits for forest-dwelling populations. however, defining, measuring, and assessing these co-benefits in complex landscapes like the Amazon presents a meaningful challenge.

Improving the effectiveness of these safeguards hinges on understanding how local communities perceive benefits, taking into account their unique perspectives on well-being. these perceptions vary widely by territory, necessitating REDD+ approaches tailored to local realities.

Understanding Well-being: A Community-Centric Approach

A recent study delved into the perceived impacts of two REDD+ projects in Peru’s Amazonian regions of Madre de Dios and Ucayali. The research emphasized capturing the notion of well-being from the communities’ outlook.

For me, working with this data reaffirmed that well-being is a diverse and context-dependent concept.
ana Cubas-Báez,Lead Co-Author

The data,part of the Center for International Forestry Research and World Agroforestry (CIFOR-ICRAF)’s Global Comparative Study on REDD+,aimed to generate robust evidence and practical tools for more effective,equitable REDD+ initiatives. The study selected several countries in Latin America, Asia, and Africa implementing REDD+ initiatives, including Peru. Researchers identified areas with REDD+ implementation and comparable sites without interventions to assess the initiatives’ impacts.

Data collection involved three types of surveys:

• Focus group discussions with community leaders (mostly men)
• Focus group discussions with women
• Individual household surveys

These surveys were conducted in three research phases: prior to REDD+ implementation and in two follow-up phases in 2014 and 2018.

This research design captured local well-being priorities from different perspectives at each site-REDD+ vs. non-REDD+-and compared them across varied territorial contexts: rural mestizo communities of Brazil nut harvesters in Madre de Dios and the Indigenous Shipibo-Conibo and kakataibo communities in Ucayali.This approach revealed how the distinct histories, cultures, and experiences of each region shape understanding of well-being.

Dimensions of Well-being: Varied Priorities

The study found that well-being is a multidimensional concept, varying by territory and local experience. Focus group interviews identified a broad range of dimensions communities associate with well-being, from access to basic services to intangible aspects like personal development and community ties.

Despite these differences,access to education and quality health services consistently emerged as essential elements of local well-being across both sites.

Territorial Differences in Priorities

While education and health were shared priorities, territorial differences were evident. In Madre de Dios, communities associated well-being with better access to markets, business opportunities, improved housing, and transportation. In Ucayali, priorities focused more on meeting basic needs such as food, safe water, employment, and technical assistance for production.

The significant differences observed were primarily between the two regions, not between men and women, highlighting the need to tailor REDD+ initiatives to the specific realities of each territory, rather than applying a one-size-fits-all strategy.

The Impact of REDD+ Participation on Well-being

In madre de Dios, the study found positive effects in certain dimensions of well-being, such as an increase in families owning homes outside the community. However, it also observed a significant negative effect on subjective well-being: many families in REDD+ communities felt that their overall well-being had declined over time.

This negative perception could be related to frustration over unmet expectations, such as delayed payments from carbon credit sales or the absence of promised infrastructure projects, and also potential communication issues and a lack of transparency in project implementation.

In Ucayali, there were no negative effects on people’s perceptions of well-being, possibly because the REDD+ project there sold carbon credits more quickly and reinvested the earnings into visible community initiatives-like nurseries, agroforestry plantations, and training workshops in forest monitoring and sustainable production.

the impact of REDD+ on well-being was not uniform, depending on factors such as how expectations were managed, the level of transparency in management, and how benefits were distributed within each community.

Lessons for Evaluating REDD+ Impacts

one key lesson is that local well-being is a multidimensional and heterogeneous concept, with interpretations varying according to sociocultural context. While the study analyzed indicators built from priorities expressed by communities in both sites, the results showed significant differences.

This reaffirms that well-being is a contextual concept and that any impact assessment must consider not only standardized indicators but also the perceptions, expectations, and priorities of the people directly involved. The most notable differences were between regions, reinforcing the need to adapt REDD+ initiatives to the sociocultural realities of each territory.

Meaningful community participation, transparent communication, and fair distribution of benefits are essential for the success of these projects. It is not enough for REDD+ to function from a technical or financial standpoint; if communities do not perceive real improvements in their well-being, or feel that promises were not kept, the impact can even be negative.

No technical indicator can replace the voice of those who live the day-to-day reality of these territories. If we want REDD+ and other climate initiatives to be sustainable, fair and truly effective, they must be built from the ground up-with communities, not just for them.

The lessons learned are key to improving REDD+ and designing and implementing structures that are truly efficient, equitable, and sustainable.