최소 단어 이상 선택하여야 합니다.
최대 10 단어까지만 선택 가능합니다.
다음과 같은 기능을 한번의 로그인으로 사용 할 수 있습니다.
NTIS 바로가기농업과학연구 = CNU Journal of agricultural science, v.38 no.4, 2011년, pp.775 - 783
윤준영 (충남대학교 산림자원학과) , 박관수 (충남대학교 산림자원학과) , 강호덕 (동국대학교 바이오환경과학과) , 김세빈 (충남대학교 산림자원학과) , 이준우 (충남대학교 산림자원학과) , 성용주 (충남대학교 환경소재공학과) , 이승우 (국립산림과학원) , 이상진 (충남대학교 산림자원학과) , 박범환 (충남대학교 산림자원학과)
The purpose of this study was to investigate if an community forestry programme (HKm) could be one of the main tool for REDD+ in Indonesia. Recently, considerable numbers of countries including Norway, England, Korea and etc. have invested 69 million US$ in total to Indonesia for implementation of R...
* AI 자동 식별 결과로 적합하지 않은 문장이 있을 수 있으니, 이용에 유의하시기 바랍니다.
핵심어 | 질문 | 논문에서 추출한 답변 |
---|---|---|
CFM의 특징은 무엇인가? | CFM 특징은 1) 자원 시스템 2) 사용자 단체 3) 제도적 협약으로 분류 될 수 있다(Angelsen 등, 2009). 다음의 Table 3은 세계 각국에서 CFM의 성공적인 일반적 특징들과 하까엠을 비교한 것이다. | |
하까엠이 가진 REDD+실행에 적합한 성공적인 CFM의 환경조건은 무엇인가? | 하까엠은 안정된 산림보유권, 탄소축적강화, 생물다양성 보존, 빈민구제, 현존하는 지역기구, 자체규율보유, REDD+ 시행 시 들어가는 초기비용 및 거래비용 감축 가능성 등의 REDD+실행에 적합한 성공적인 CFM의 환경조건들을 지니고 있다. 하까엠을 기반으로 한 REDD+프로젝트는 기후 변화대응정책에 지역주민들의 참여를 적극적으로 유도시키고 산림거버넌스를 향상 시키며 Equity, Effectiveness, Effective를 성취 할 수 있는 적합한 모델이 될 수 있다. | |
인도네시아에서 하까엠이 2007년 기준 70,000ha만 승인되고 확산되지 못한 이유는 무엇인가? | 인도네시아에서 REDD+이행 시 산림에 의존하는 지역 주민들과 원주민들의 적극적인 참여를 유도하기 위해서는 하까엠과 같은 일시적인 산림보유권을 보장해주는 방법이 현재로선 유일한 방법이다. 그러나 장기간의 승인절차 및 산림분권화에 대한 정부의 의지부족 때문에 2007년까지 오직 200,000 ha의 하까엠 지역만이 배정되고 70,000 ha만 승인이 되었다(Fey, 2007). |
Akiefnawati R, Villamor GB, Zulfikar F, Budisetiawan I, Mulyoutami E, Ayat A, Noordwijk MV. 2010. Stewardship agreement to reduce emissions from deforestation and degradation (REDD): Lubuk Beringin's hutan desa as the first village forest in Indonesia. 3 pp.
Angelsen A, Brockhaus M, Kanninen M, Sills E, Sunderlin WD, Kanounnikoff SW(eds). 2009. Realising REDD: national strategy and policy options. Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor. pp. 201-211.
Barr C, Dermawan A, Purnomo H, Komarudin H. 2010. Financial governance and Indonesia Reforestation Fund during the Soeharto and post-Soeharto periods, 1989-2009: A political economic analysis of lessons for REDD+. Occasional paper 52. Bogor, Indonesia: CIFOR.
Boccucci M, Holopainen J, Wit M. 2008. RED and investment. Financing sustainable forest management. European Tropical Forest Research Network (ETFRN) News Issue No. 49, September 2008. Wageningen: Tropenbos International.
Chhatte A, Agrawal A. 2009. Trade-offs and synergies between carbon storage and livelihood benefits from forest commons. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Vol 106(42): 17667-17670.
CIFOR. 2010. Table of Subnational REDD+ projects in Indonesia accessed n http://www.forestsclimate change.org /global-comparative-study-on-redd/redd-project-sites/redd-projectsites- in-indonesia.html#detail on 5 December 2011.
Cotula L, Mayers J. 2009. Tenure in REDD - Start-point or afterthought? Natural Resources Issues No. 15. London, UK: International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED).
Ekadinata A, Dewi S, Hadi DP, Nugroho DK. 2007. Can secure tenure help reduce deforestation? Lessons learnt from Sumberiaya watershed, Lampung, Indonesia. World Agroforestry Centre.
Elliott V, Lambert F, Phalla T, Sothea H. 2011. Biodiversity Assesment of the REDD Community forest project in Oddar Meanchey Cambodia, Elliott International in Indochina. 8 pp.
FAO. 2010. Global Forest Resources Assessment. FAO Forestry Paper 163. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy.
Fey C. 2007. Review of Legal Frameworks for Community based Natural Resource Management in Selected Asian Countries. Bogor(Draft): World Agroforestry Centre.
FCPF. 2010. Charter Establishing the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility. World Bank, Washington DC, USA.
GACF. 2009. Community-based forest management: a key element of effective REDD methodologies A submission in response to Draft SBSTA 29 agenda item 5: Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries: Paragraph 11: issues relating to indigenous people and local communities for the development and application of methodologies.
Hoare AL. 2010. Community-based forest management in the democratic republic of congo: A fairy tale of a viable REDD strategy?. Forest monitor. 6 pp.
Holck MH. 2008. Participatory forest monitoring: an assessment of the accuracy of simple cost-effective methods. Biodivers Conserv. 17: 2023-2036.
IPCC. 2007. IPCC fouth asessment report. Report by Working Group I: The physical science basis. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
KFRI(Korea forest research institute). 2010. Forest and forestry in Indonesia. [in Korean]
Khususiyah N, Rahayu S, Buana Y, Asmawan T, Suyanto. 2010. Carbon and watershed functions as conditionality for community forest.
Lawrence A, Paudel K, Barnes R, Malla Y. 2006. Adaptive value of participatory biodiversity monitoring in community forestry, Nepal. Environmental Conservation. Vol 33(4): 325-334.
Luttrell C, Schreckenberg K, Peskett L. 2007. The implications of carbon financing for pro-poor community forestry, ODI Forestry Briefing 14. London. ODI.
Masterarbeit AAD. 2010. Possible implications of REDD on land and forest tenure-exemplified by the Indonesian case. pp. 14-35
Ministry of Forestry. 2001. Forestry ministerial decree (HKm) Number: 31/Kpts-II/2001.
Ministry of Forestry. 2007. Forestry ministerial decree (HKm) Number: P.37/Menhut-II/2007.
Ministry of Forestry. 2009. (Draft) National Strategy: Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Indonesia. August 2009. MoF, Jakarta. 55 pp.
Norad. 2010. Real-time Evaluation of Norway's International Climate and Forest Initiative: Contributions to National REDD+ Processes 2007-2010 Country Report: Indonesia. 22 pp.
Pender J, Suyanto, Kerr J, Kato A. 2008. Impacts of the Hutan Kamasyarakatan Social Forestry Program in the Sumberjaya Watershed, West Lampung District of Sumatra, Indonesia. International Food Policy Research Institute. 1 pp.
Peter C, David BB, Gabriel M. 2011. Community Forest Management and the Emergence of Multi-scale Governance Institutions: Lessons for REDD+ Development from Mexico, Brazil and Bolivia. Forests. pp. 451-453.
Phelps, J, Webb EL, Agrawal A. 2010. Does REDD+ threaten to recentralize forest governance, Science. Vol. (328): 313-312.
Poffenberger M. 2006. People in the forest: community forestry experiences from Southeast Asia. Int. J. Environment and Sustainable Development 5(1): 1-66.
Rain forest foundation Norway(RFN). 2010. Recommendations regarding a bilateral cooperation between Norway and Indonesia on REDD. 02/16/2010, Oslo, Norway. 4 pp.
Readiness-plan(R-PLAN) FOREST CARBON PARTNERSHIP FACILITY (FCPF). 2009. Forestry Research and Development Agency (FORDA). Ministry of Forestry of the Republic of Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia. 4 pp.
Republic of Indonesia. 2009. Reducing Carbon Emissions from Indonesia''s Peat Lands Interim Report of a Multidisciplinary Study. 4 pp.
Skutsch M. 2004. Reducing carbon transaction costs in community based forest management.
Skutsch M, Solis S. 2010. How much carbon does community forest management save? The results of K:TGAL's field measurements. 3 pp.
*원문 PDF 파일 및 링크정보가 존재하지 않을 경우 KISTI DDS 시스템에서 제공하는 원문복사서비스를 사용할 수 있습니다.
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.