Presented by CIFOR Principal Scientist and team leader Esther Mwangi at the IUFRO 125th World Congress on 18 September 2017 in Freiburg, Germany.

1. Esther Mwangi
IUFRO 125th World Congress
18th September 2017
Freiburg, Germany
Are there differences between men and women in
REDD+ benefit sharing schemes?

2. PARTNERS
 Sokoine University of Agricultural Sciences, Faculty of
Forestry (Josia Katani, Tanzania)
 Universidad Nasional La Molina (Zoila Cruz, Peru)
 Sanata Dharma University, Faculty of Economics (Titus
Kusumajati, Indonesia)
 University of Colorado, Boulder (Krister Andersson)
 University of Michigan (Maria Claudia Lopez)

3. OUTLINE
 Research questions & justification
 Methods
 Findings
o Description
o Determinants
 Conclusions and possible meanings

4. RESEARCH QUESTIONS
• Are there differences between men and women’s
preferences for benefit sharing arrangements in REDD+
schemes?
• How can policies and/or implementation practices be
modified, in light of existing and emerging complexities,
to ensure equitable benefit sharing between and women
in REDD+ schemes?
WHY?
Benefit sharing= distribution of gains from REDD+
implementation (reward for conserving, aligning
incentives)
Rewards and incentives are available for all contributors in
ways that they deem to be fair
Heterogeneity among forest resource users

5. METHOD: INTRA-HOUSEHOLD SURVEYS
 Individuals responsible for most household
decisions (Husband and Wife)
 Randomly selected in each village
 Indonesia, Peru, Tanzania
 1656 individuals distributed in equal proportion
between males and females
 The sample distribution is 49% for Tanzania, 29%
for Peru and 28% for Indonesia.
--------------
Key questions in survey included
 • Awareness of REDD Benefits distribution and
decision making
 •Satisfaction with benefit arrangements/distribution
 •Forest use & attitudes towards forest
conservation

7. Women Men Total
Mean N
Std
Dev Mean N
Std
dev Mean N
Std
Dev
Age of respondent 39.8 821 12.656 46.4 824 17.758 43.1 1645 15.762
years completed in school 5.4 819 3.563 6.3 823 3.457 5.8 1642 3.540
Access units hectares 2.2 716 2.736 3.6 719 5.079 2.9 1435 4.143
hectares of land belong to
you 1.8 780 2.267 2.6 789 3.679 2.2 1569 3.084
years have you lived in this
village 27.0 822 16.421 31.9 825 17.396 29.5 1647 17.085
large animals, such as Cattle,
Oxen, owned 1.3 731 5.183 1.6 726 6.164 1.4 1457 5.693

8. A. Knowledge of REDD+ and involvement in
related decisions
 41% of the total sample had no knowledge
(Indonesia 17%, Tanzania 50%, Peru 50% )
 Of those with knowledge: women= 33% and men=
50%
Deciding whether or not REDD plus should be
implemented:
– proportions involved: 33% in Tanzania, 26%
in Peru and 23% in Indonesia
– 32% of women indicated some involvement
and 68% of men.
– Those not involved in decision:
I. did not know: 71% in Indonesia; 58% in
Peru
II. not invited: 51% in Tanzania; 25% in
Tanzania; 25% in Indonesia; 19% in
Peru
III. not in village during meeting: 28% in
Tanzania

9. B. Actual benefits distribution
Whether or not they participated in deciding on benefits they will receive
73% did not know who decided…..most of these were women compared to men (79%
to 66%)
Whether or not satisfied with the way in which REDD benefits are distributed
50% satisfied with type of benefit….48% of women and 52% of men
48% satisfied with amount of benefit received….52% women and 45% men
Cash benefits (Tanzania & Indonesia)
- (50%) of respondents who received cash benefits are satisfied with the type of benefit
-48% satisfied with the amount of benefit received
-52% women satisfied with the amount and 48% are satisfied by the type of benefit.
- 45% men satisfied with the amount received and 52% satisfied with the type of benefit
-60% and 29% are satisfied by the type of benefit in Tanzania and Indonesia respectively
-40% and 65% are satisfied by the amount of benefit in Tanzania and Indonesia respectively
(+ side)…….individual decisions on how to spend the cash…..(- side some receive more
cash than others; unfair)

10. B. Actual benefits distribution (contd)
satisfaction with non cash benefits
majority of respondents (87%) who received non cash benefits are satisfied by the
type of benefit
(84% and 98%) in Tanzania and Peru respectively,
83% of women are satisfied by this type of benefit and 90% of males
-Money does not solve all problems
-Acquire knowledge
-Solves problems of many people at once
•Those who didn’t like it thought:
-Benefits that touch individual so that each can recognize the value of the
payments

11. DETERMINANTS OF SATISFACTION WITH RED BENEFITS
DISTRIBUTION
Satisfaction with REDD benefits distribution
Robust
coefficient Std Error Z P>|z| 95% Conf. Interval
Country (1=Tanzania 2=Peru 3=Indonesia) -1.2723 0.3931 -3.24 0.001 -2.0428 -0.5018
Sex (1=Men 0=Female) 0.6736 0.1638 4.11 0.000 0.3527 0.9946
Sample (1=Treatment or 0=Control) 0.3724 0.2014 1.85 0.064 -0.0222 0.7671
NGO encouraged conservation (1=Yes 0=NO) 0.3142 0.2060 1.53 0.127 -0.0896 0.7179
Age of respondent -0.0195 0.0067 -2.92 0.003 -0.0326 -0.0064
Number of years in school -0.0386 0.0245 -1.58 0.115 -0.0865 0.0094
Number of hectares respondent can access 0.0023 0.0178 0.13 0.896 -0.0325 0.0372
Number of hectares owned 1.1223 0.1758 6.38 0.000 0.7777 1.4669
Satisfaction with ways of REDD benefits distribution (1=Yes 0=No) -0.1169 0.0669 -1.75 0.081 -0.2481 0.0143
Satisfied with receiving non cash benefits (1=Yes 0=No) -0.8025 0.0541 -14.84 0.000 -0.9085 -0.6965
Heard of REDD before interview (Yes=1 No=0) -0.3249 0.1776 -1.83 0.067 -0.6730 0.0232
Involved in decision for REDD implementation (1=Yes 0=No) 0.4324 0.0668 6.47 0.000 0.3015 0.5633
Involved in design and/or REDD implementation (1=Yes 0=No) -0.2256 0.0517 -4.37 0.000 -0.3269 -0.1243
Noncash benefits received in the last 5 years (1=Yes 0=No) 0.6207 0.1717 3.62 0.000 0.2842 0.9571
Participation in kind of benefits to be received 0.1635 0.0620 2.64 0.008 0.0420 0.2851
Satisfied with receiving cash benefits -0.0456 0.0517 -0.88 0.377 -0.1469 0.0557
Number of years living in the area 0.0120 0.0052 2.3 0.021 0.0018 0.0221
Number of medium animals owned -0.0223 0.0197 -1.13 0.258 -0.0609 0.0163
Constant -0.0668 0.4686 -0.14 0.887 -0.9853 0.8517
Log pseudo-likelihood -553.11674
Number of observations 1345
Wald chi2(18) 418.71
Probability > chi2 0.000
Pseudo R2 0.4048

12. DETERMINANTS
 Men more likely than women to be
satisfied with the distribution of benefits
 People involved in the decision of
whether or not to implement REDD+
more likely to be satisfied with the
distribution of benefits
 People living in the area longer tend to be
satisfied with the distribution of benefits
 People with larger land sizes more likely
to be satisfied with the distribution of
benefits

13. CONCLUDING THOUGHTS
• There doesn’t seem to be clear gender
differences—most men and women seem to
prefer non-cash based and few prefer cash
• The gender difference lies in asymmetry of
information about REDD+ and especially in
involvement in making decisions about
which benefits will be distributed and how
• The gender difference also lies in
satisfaction with distribution—men are more
likely than women to be satisfied. Other
factors in satisfaction with distribution
include amount of land owned, participation
in REDD+ decision making and living in the
area longer all of which are higher for men
than for women.
•

14. WHAT DOES THIS MEAN?
 Mixed portfolios of benefits targeting
both men and women’s preferences,
rather than only one type
 If people don’t know what exactly
REDD+ is and why it’s being
implemented, (i.e. the connection
between REDD benefits and forest
conservation) it’s unlikely that these
schemes will achieve their goals
 Lack of involvement—legitimacy and
sustainability of the schemes

15. Thank you!
E.mwangi@cgiar.org
http://www1.cifor.org/redd-benefit-sharing/home.html