1. Effectiveness of REDD+:
meta-study results
Sven Wunder
European Forest Institute (EFI)
CIFOR Senior Associate

2. Figure 1: Stylized theory of change: the impact of REDD+ interventions on the ground
REDD+ finance
from donors and
carbon markets
Enabling measures:
(FPIC, land tenure
clarified)
Incentives:
(conditional and
non-conditional)
Disincentives:
(enforcing laws
& rules)
Input Treatment
Ownership of
forestland clear
and uncontested
Outputs
REDD+
interventions
understood by
beneficiaries
Incentives
delivered to
households in an
equitable manner
Violations of forest
and land use rules
identified and
sanctioned
Outcomes
Goal: Contribute to
mitigating global
greenhouse gas
emissions
Improved income,
consumption, assets,
security, equality etc.
in intervention area
Funding flows
Cost-effective
design (e.g. spatial
targeting, differential
payments)
REDD beneficiaries
key for LUC decisions
Leakage
Rebound and
magnet effects
on local incomes
Impacts
REDD+ beneficiaries
reduce deforestation
& forest degradation
in intervention area
Side objectives:
- Biodiversity saved
- Wellbeing improved
- Secure land tenure
- Equity strengthened
- Indigenous rights
Permanence
Baseline scenarios
for carbon stocks,
land use, trends
Threat
Theory of change for REDD+

3. # Dimension Filtering factor Observation/ justification
1 REDD+ label Self-labelled and ‘REDD+ like’ Incl. multipurpose C-focused national
PES (separate category)
2 Actions Forest carbon conservation element Excl. pure A/R projects
3 Scale National and subnational REDD+ No filter: projects and programmes alike
4 Starting time Implementation start not before 2007 COP13 initiated REDD process in 2007
A Literature Peer-reviewed + Grey Filtering instead on evaluation quality
B Impacts Forest carbon + human wellbeing Incl., as main bottom lines for REDD+
C Outcomes Forest cover/loss + socio-economic Incl., as shorter-term bottom lines.
D Outputs Excluded Excl. all middle-part ToC (intermediary)
E Objectivity Subjective wellbeing, self-reporting Included
F Evaluation (Quasi-)experimental methods Counterfactual approach always needed
Our REDD+ impact meta- study: delimitations

4. Mapping REDD+: projects, programmes, and location of study sample
=> Overlapping subnational, regional and national REDD+
=> variable implementation & research densities across tropics

5. Results,
forests:
REDD+ small and
variable, but
significant forest
cover impacts
0.08 [0.04; 0.11]

6. Permanence
=> Continuing pre-
REDD+ trends (S2)
most likely?

7. Results,
welfare:
REDD+ small
positive outcomes
(income, assets,
consumption); self-
perceptions mixed
0.06 [-0.01; 0.14]

8. Moderation analysis
Effect size
boosters:
1. High pre-threat (at
lower scales)
2. Spatial targeting
3. Benefit
differentiation
(welfare effects)

9. Conservation impacts: REDD+ compared
 REDD+ performs as
least as ‘well’ (or as
poorly…) as other
conservation tools
 …but little analysis of
cost effectiveness

10. REDD+ credit
additionality:
Project impacts
vs. its baselines
Tan ania 9 Tan ania 9
eru eru 9 eru 95 Tan ania 5
59 eru eru eru
olombia 95 olombia 9 olombia olombia 5
ambodia 5 ambodia 9 olombia 9 olombia 9
9 9
9 9 9 9
9 9 9 9
9 9 9 9
9 9 9 9
5
5
5
5
e
5e
e 5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
e
5e
e 5
ear
umulative
deforestation
(ha)
……… De facto observed deforestation
_____ Ex-ante deforestation baselines
_____ Deforestation synthetic control sites
West et al. (2023), Science (resubmitted)
=> Much of REDD+
credit non-performance
(West et al.: 90+%) is
due to project non-
conservative ex-ante
baselines (Verra)

11. Five take-away messages
1. REDD+ has remained under-financed, especially national
REDD+ (the original target) – projects a drop in the sea…
2. REDD+ is to carbon, what ICDP has been to biodiversity: a
heterogenous mix of on-the-ground interventions
3. Forest impacts are: stat. significant, modestly sized, in part
permanent: about same record as other conservation tools
4. REDD+ could have more impact if more spatially targeted
to high-threat, forest carbon-dense areas
5. For carbon credit integrity, REDD+ impact performance
also needs to be paired with realistic ex ante baselines

12. Thank you!
Acknowledged contributors:
Dario Schulz, Javier Montoya-Zumaeta,
Jan Börner, Gabriel Frey, Thales West