Page 59 - Governing Congo Basin Forests in a Changing Climate • Olufunso Somorin

quantitative surveys, participatory observation and document and literature review. The research context involves a nested approach from a regional discourse, national debates on design and implementation to local practices.
Chapter 2 studies the framing of adaptation and REDD+ by different policy actors ranging from governments, civil society, development partners, scientific community and private sector at the regional level (CAR, Cameroon and DRC).Drawing from the global discourses on climate change, the chapter theoretically combines the agency-focus of frame analysis with the structure-focus of discourse analysis, in order to analyze how different actors frame adaptation and mitigation responses in the region given their social, economic and political contexts. It further analyzes how different frames converge around dominant discourses and their discourse coalitions. The chapter reports three dominant policy discourses: mitigation only; separatist policy of adaptation and mitigation; and integratist policy of adaptation and mitigation. The mitigation-only discourse focuses on the potential of REDD+ to deliver the region’s adaptation needs; it presumes that due to the uncertainties and contestations around adaptation, a policy intervention is not necessary. The separatist discourse highlights the differences between adaptation and REDD+ in terms of their separation under the UNFCCC at the global level, and differences in financial instruments and scales of operation. It thus suggests that both adaptation and REDD+ should be separated for implementation success and effectiveness. The integratist discourse highlights opportunity for synergy due to their shared forest-based activities and development outcome of poverty reduction and biodiversity conservation. Hence, asserting that to maximize the benefits of both adaptation and REDD+, they should be integrated in one policy framework. Of the three discourses, the integratist discourse has the most diverse coalitions, including those from the scientific community, civil society and development partners. Overall, the mitigation discourse, through its mix of actors, resources and interests seems to be stronger than the adaptation discourse. Additionally, the thesis reports that underlying these three discourses are competing frames and discursive devices (shared meanings, ideas and interpretations) held by different actors and coalitions, which are not devoid of their interests and positions. Institutionalization of these discourses into policy systems has implications for the overall capacity of the Congo Basin forests to respond to the impacts of climate change.
228