Updates from CIFOR research on Policy Network Analysis of REDD+ (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation). Read the papers at www1.cifor.org/gcs/about-gcs/national-redd-processes-and-policies/policy-network-analysis-actors-and-power-structures.html

1. Policy network analysis
- Update and Introduction -
April 2014, Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso

2. REDD+
Policy Network
Analysis
(PNA)
• Analysis underway in 8 countries (Brazil, Cameroon, Indonesia,
Nepal, Peru, Papua New Guinea, Tanzania, Vietnam, >1000
interviews hours)
• Assesses relational and structural aspects of actors and the
REDD arena and considers implications for the 3E+ content of
REDD strategies.

3. REDD+
Policy Network
Analysis
(PNA)
Examines questions including:
Who is involved in national REDD policy making?
What are their perceptions, interests, and power relations?
What are their networks of information and finance?
Who cooperates/conflicts

4. PNA – why, how, so what..
 Policy networks  structure in which actors negotiate and
try to influence policy processes, outputs and outcomes
 Gaining importance to analyse complex environmental
policy problems (Bodin and Crona, COMPON, Brulle etc all
special issues)
 what can we see with a policy network lens in countries’
policy arenas that hinders or enables an effective, efficient and
equitable design and implementation of REDD+
THINKING beyond the canopy
4

5. THINKING beyond the canopy

6. Papua New Guinea (PNG)
Presence and influence of four advocacy coalitions:
Two promoting business as usual (BAU) and two advocating transformational
change.
Drawing on the Advocacy Coalition Framework,
we examine potential pathways to
transformation change: members of different
coalitions forming ‘coalitions of convenience’
that can enhance policy learning and may lead
to changes in beliefs about how forests should
be used and managed. Organisations may
defect from one coalition to another, bringing
their power and resources together.
Although the transformational change coalitions are less powerful than the BAU
coalitions, the former includes the organisation perceived to be most influential in
the REDD+ policy arena within the country.
Babon, A et al. 2013. Advocacy coalitions, REDD+, and forest governance in Papua New Guinea: How likely is transformational
change? (under review in Ecology & Society)

7. Cameroon
Information flow in REDD+ policy arena
Dkamela, G.P. et al. 2013. Lessons for REDD+ from Cameroon’s past forestry
law reform: a political economy analysis. (under review in Ecology & Society)
WWF International actors are central in controlling
and facilitating information flow across
organisations, while civil society organizations
are peripheral to the network. This lack of
participation indicates that national
ownership of the REDD+ process is very
limited.
MINFOF IUCN
Betweenness refers to the extent to which other actors lies on the shortest distance
between pairs of actors in the network, indicating a favorable position of a specific
actor in facilitating and controlling communication flows and high scores indicate a
position of brokerage.

8. Tanzania
Policy positions and REDD+ discourse coalitions
Coalition for nested REDD+ rewards
Protest event participants
”All REDD+ accounting and
rewards should go through
the national government.”
We demonstrate how different actors
have varying positions relating to
polarizing statements on REDD+ financial
flows and related discourse coalitions in
Tanzania. Organizations outside of the
coalition boundaries as indicated in the
figure were considered neutral.
”REDD+ schemes
should only be
financed through
funds”.
Coalition for centralized REDD+
rewards
Agreement = solid line;
Disagreement = dashed line.
The size of a node represents
the influence of the actor
(normalized in-degree
centrality of influence data).
Rantala, S. and Di Gregorio, M. 2013. Multistakeholder environmental governance in action: REDD+ discourse coalitions in Tanzania.
(under review in Ecology & Society)

9. Vietnam
Actor’s involvement in REDD+ decision making
All actors had some involvement in at least one
of the three main REDD+ policy discussions,
suggesting that the interests of different groups
were presented and participation was good.
However, only a sub-set of actors indicated that
they were actively engaged in the REDD+
decision-making processes, with many
important actors excluded.
Pham, T.T. et al. 2013. The REDD+ Policy arena in Vietnam: participation of policy actors.
(under review in Ecology & Society)

10. KEY: ORGANIZATION TYPES
Government
Civil Society Organizations
Business Associations
Education/Research
International NGOs
Multilateral/Bilateral Donors
REDD
Cell
DNPWC
WWF
RECOFTC
FECOFUN
NEFIN
NFA
DFID
DoF
WWF
degree centrality &
core/periphery status,
n=34
Nepal
Collaboration Framework
Bushley, B. 2013. REDD+ policymaking in Nepal: Toward state-centric,
polycentric, or market-oriented forest governance?
(under review in Ecology & Society)
The extent of collaboration influences the degree to which
organizations are informed about, are engaged in, and can
have direct input into REDD+ policy debates and issues.
Our research shows the extent of collaboration between
actors and highlights those who collaborate most frequently.
All other actors, including many CSOs, government actors
outside the forestry sector, and all actors from the private
and educational/research sector, are found in the periphery.
The marginalization of these important sectors and
stakeholders may limit both, equity and effectiveness ,of
future REDD+ implementation.

11. Exchange of information
very limited, actors of same
types mainly speak
together, no ‘real’ exchange
WHY?
•Organizations are not aware
of each other?
•Some are not seen as
important?
•Respect???
4 distinct clusters
Homophily strong in national government cluster
Only one bridge
Indonesia
Fragmentation in Information exchange network
Moeliono, M. et al. 2013. Information Networks and Power: Confronting the ‘wicked problem’ of REDD+ in Indonesia. (under
review in Ecology & Society).

12. Central Kalimantan, Indonesia
Inter-organisational Collaboration
This network shows all reported linkages (ie information sharing, scientific information provision and resource exchanges
between organizations in the province. The policy at the Governor’s Office is referred as the “Single Commander” for
REDD+ in the province. While the government has close ties with several organizations based abroad (A), organizations
based in Central Kalimantan (K) seem more peripheral. Notably, Indonesian NGOs are mostly found in a cluster on the left-hand
side of the network. More recently, one of these organizations, AMAN, has become increasingly influential due to its
expertise in traditional land tenure issues.
Gallemore, C. et al. 2013. Beyond the “Single Commander”?
Cross-Scale Deliberation in Central Kalimantan, Indonesia,”
(under review in Ecology & Society)
Our survey suggests that while
connections with actors from abroad
were relatively strong at the time of the
research, connections with diverse
parts of the province were less so. This
reportedly seems to have been
changing through the efforts of
environmental NGOs based in the
province.

13. Brazil
Collaboration Network
We show the importance of
intermediary organizations, that can
bridge different networks parts and
are brokers – we also demonstrate
how the private sector and many
government actors are outsiders.
The triangles represent the main actors in the network, those with the highest
in-degree centrality values.
Gebara, M.F. et al. 2013. Networks, actors and power: A case study of REDD+ in Brazil. (under review in Ecology & Society).

14. CIFOR
Min.
Envt
FAO
Menton, M. et al. 2013. Policy networks
in Peru. Unpublished project report.
IIAP
Peru
Scientific Information Network
The results from the analysis of
scientific information exchange
allow a snapshot of who is being
consulted and trusted to provide
evidence over contested issues.
It also represents a way to evaluate
the impact of organizations
carrying out research relevant to
REDD+.
A dense network with different actors (national research institutes, international
organisations, governments, national and international NGOs) are sources of REDD+
information. The most important players constitute one national research institute, Ministry
of Environment, FAO (tied with MINAM) and CIFOR.

15. Comparative PNA: Power structures
THINKING beyond the canopy
15

16. Comparative PNA: Power structures
THINKING beyond the canopy
Policy change in arenas with
complex socio-ecological
relations and high trade-offs
between development and
conservation agendas can
entail high political costs
(Bumpus and Liverman
2011).
Hypothesis: In such
circumstances, a mix of
conflict and cooperation
facilitates policy change and
progress
16

17. THINKING beyond the canopy
PNA Results
Honeymoon phase: Nepal, Tanzania and Cameroon:
 Countries in the early stages of national REDD+ policy
debates, display dominance of cooperation
Bargaining for change: Indonesia, Brazil, PNG:
 Power struggles intensify: bargaining (conflictual
cooperation) becomes dominant when the national
REDD+ policy process starts to address specific policies
and measures, particularly on controversial issues such
as benefit sharing
State driven: Vietnam: dominance of cooperation indicates
lack of inclusion, underreporting of conflict (latent)
17

18. THINKING beyond the canopy
Outlook
Repeated over time, this method can assess, for
example,
- dynamics in power relations,
- the who is in and out, who takes part, who is no longer part,
- which actors and actor coalitions can realize their interests in
particular policy events, etc..
Deeper insights in REDD+ performance - policy
outcomes - (carbon trajectories, livelihoods
changes, other co-benefits, non-carbon benefits)
will allow us to assess policy effectiveness

19. Acknowledgements
This work is part of the policy component of CIFOR’s global comparative study on REDD (GCS). The methods and guidelines used in
this research component were designed by Maria Brockhaus, Monica Di Gregorio and Sheila Wertz-Kanounnikoff. Parts of the
methodology are adapted from the research protocol for media and network analysis designed by COMPON (‘Comparing Climate
Change Policy Networks’).
Case leaders: Thuy Thu Pham (Nepal), Thuy Thu Pham & Moira Moeliono (Vietnam), Thuy Thu Pham and Guillaume Lestrelin
(Laos), Daju Resosudarmo & Moira Moeliono (Indonesia), Andrea Babon (PNG), Peter Cronkleton, Kaisa Korhonen-Kurki, Pablo
Pacheco (Bolivia), Mary Menton (Peru), Sven Wunder & Peter May (Brazil), Samuel Assembe & Jolien Schure (Cameroon), Samuel
Assembe (DRC), Salla Rantala (Tanzania), Sheila Wertz-Kanounnikoff (Mozambique), Suwadu Sakho-Jimbira & Houria Djoudi (Burkina
Faso), Arild Angelsen (Norway). Special thanks to our national partners from REDES, CEDLA, Libelula and DAR, REPOA, UEM, CODELT,
ICEL, ForestAction, CIEM, CERDA, Son La FD, UPNG, NRI-PNG, and UMB.
Thanks to contributors to case studies, analysis and review : Levania Santoso, Tim Cronin, Giorgio Indrarto, Prayekti Murharjanti, Josi
Khatarina, Irvan Pulungan, Feby Ivalerina, Justitia Rahman, Muhar Nala Prana, Caleb Gallemore (Indonesia), Nguyen Thi Hien,
Nguyen Huu Tho, Vu Thi Hien, Bui Thi Minh Nguyet, Nguyen Tuan Viet and Huynh Thu Ba (Vietnam), Dil Badhur, Rahul Karki, Bryan
Bushley, Naya Paudel (Nepal), Daniel McIntyre, Gae Gowae, Nidatha Martin, Nalau Bingeding, Ronald Sofe, Abel Simon (PNG), Walter
Arteaga, Bernado Peredo, Jesinka Pastor (Bolivia), Maria Fernanda Gebara, Brent Millikan, Bruno Calixto, Shaozeng Zhang (Brazil),
Hugo Piu, Javier Perla, Daniela Freundt, Eduardo Burga Barrantes, Talía Postigo Takahashi (Peru), Guy Patrice Dkamela, Felicien
Kengoum (Cameroon), Felicien Kabamba, Augustin Mpoyi, Angelique Mbelu (DRC), Demetrius Kweka, Therese Dokken, Rehema
Tukai, George Jambiya, Riziki Shemdoe, (Tanzania), Almeida Sitoe, Alda Salomão (Mozambique), Mathurin Zida, Michael Balinga
(Burkina Faso), Laila Borge (Norway).
Special thanks to Efrian Muharrom, Sofi Mardiah, Christine Wairata, Ria Widjaja-Adhi, Cecilia Luttrell, Frances Seymour, Lou Verchot,
Markku Kanninen, Elena Petkova, Arild Angelsen, Jan Boerner, Anne Larson, Martin Herold, Rachel Carmenta, Juniarta Tjajadi,
Cynthia Maharani