Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
A Corruption Risk Assessment for Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Nigeria
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
A Corruption Risk Assessment for Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Nigeria
Do you wish to request the book?
A Corruption Risk Assessment for Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Nigeria
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
A Corruption Risk Assessment for Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Nigeria
2017
Overview
This study asked if the concerns about corruption in climate change in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) and, therefore, fiduciary standards, is justified or not. The study employed an explorative approach using the Nigeria REDD+ process as a case study. Using semistructured questionnaire and in-depth interviews with key informants, data were collected from 201 households from REDD+ project sites and twenty-one forestry officials from local forestry commission on the perceived extent of transparency in REDD+ implementation in the study area; how REDD+ local officials perceive the fiduciary standards and other governance standards by international climate funds; and effectiveness of anticorruption measures within the REDD+ projects. The confidence reposed in the project’s local implementing agency was generally poor. Allocation of carbon rights was the most critically perceived to be fraught with poor transparency in REDD+ processes. Only five out of eight governance measures that could help improve transparency in REDD+ processes were available locally two of which were rated as just fairly functional. This study agreed that the multilateral climate funds are justified in respect of the set fiduciary standards for climate finance flows.
Publisher
Common Ground Research Networks
Subject
