Key messages The REDD+ policy process in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) over the past decade has diverged from the initial government planning due to political changes at the international and national levels. While participation is perceived by government and international actors as one of the biggest achievements of REDD+ in the DRC, non-state actors – particularly civil society organizations and Indigenous groups – are skeptical about inclusiveness within the decision-making process. Social inequalities and local power relations may hinder the implementation of participation instruments and the involvement of local and Indigenous communities, impeding their ability to achieve reduced deforestation and poverty alleviation. The political economy and the lack of data on deforestation and forest degradation – and on the recently discovered large swamp in the DRC – make it challenging to monitor, report and verify a reduction in forest emissions within a multilevel setting. The experience of REDD+ tested at scale in the DRC through the Mai-Ndombe jurisdictional project highlights the cost challenges of generating timely and accurate data. Supporting REDD+ finance in the DRC is difficult since the country relies entirely on international funding to fight climate change. A benefits-sharing mechanism remains unclear. Consequently, there is a lack of flexibility in addressing unanticipated costs that may result from the implementation of the process. This jeopardizes the success of the process and raises uncertainty about the expected results. Emerging issues, such as community forestry and the discovery of large swamp areas, make the DRC more attractive for the REDD+ program. The first issue offers a workaround to the problem of securing communal rights, while the second issue provides additional opportunities for REDD+ activities.

REDD+ must be transformational. REDD+ requires broad institutional and governance reforms, such as tenure, decentralisation, and corruption control. These reforms will enable departures from business as usual, and involve communities and forest users in making and implementing policies that a ect them. Policies must go beyond forestry. REDD+ strategies must include policies outside the forestry sector narrowly de ned, such as agriculture and energy, and better coordinate across sectors to deal with non-forest drivers of deforestation and degradation. Performance-based payments are key, yet limited. Payments based on performance directly incentivise and compensate forest owners and users. But schemes such as payments for environmental services (PES) depend on conditions, such as secure tenure, solid carbon data and transparent governance, that are often lacking and take time to change. This constraint reinforces the need for broad institutional and policy reforms. We must learn from the past. Many approaches to REDD+ now being considered are similar to previous e orts to conserve and better manage forests, often with limited success. Taking on board lessons learned from past experience will improve the prospects of REDD+ e ectiveness. National circumstances and uncertainty must be factored in. Di erent country contexts will create a variety of REDD+ models with di erent institutional and policy mixes. Uncertainties about the shape of the future global REDD+ system, national readiness and political consensus require  exibility and a phased approach to REDD+ implementation.

DRC has committed to reduce its emissions effectively, efficiently, and equitably from deforestation and degradation (REDD+). The country experiences complex relationships between drivers, agents, and institutions of deforestation nationally. The REDD+ policy arena is influenced by both governmental and non-governmental actors whose number have increased in the policy arena over the years; however, weak coordination among these actors remains an issue. Since 2009, the DRC has announced several reforms relating to land tenure, land-use planning and agricultural policy, to create an institutional environment that motivates the implementation of REDD+ in the DRC. By 2019, none of these reforms had materialized, due to both political changes and a lack of finance, capacity, and political will. Between 2013 and 2019, little progress has been made on REDD+ in the DRC, as a result of conflicting interests among actors both at national and decentralized levels; information asymmetry; elite capture and corruption; and the pre- and post-election situation. To date, the effectiveness of REDD+ activities in the DRC remain unclear, due to the absence of rigorous impact assessment. However, efforts can be observed on the field where there is increased number of participants to forest policy process compared to REDD+ early years; and several ongoing projects are testing policy options within and across levels. If these efforts are sustained, they can contribute in putting in place conditions to achieve REDD+ objectives.

Constructive critique. This book provides a critical, evidence-based analysis of REDD+ implementation so far, without losing sight of the urgent need to reduce forest-based emissions to prevent catastrophic climate change. REDD+ as envisioned

"This volume is a product of the staff of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank."

This working paper gives an overview of Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA), a method that enables systematic cross-case comparison of an intermediate number of case studies. It presents an overview of QCA and detailed descriptions of different versions of the method. Based on the experience applying QCA to CIFOR’s Global Comparative Study on REDD+, the paper shows how QCA can help produce parsimonious and stringent research results from a multitude of in-depth case studies developed by numerous researchers. QCA can be used as a structuring tool that allows researchers to share understanding and produce coherent data, as well as a tool for making inferences usable for policy advice. REDD+ is still a young policy domain, and it is a very dynamic one. Currently, the benefits of QCA result mainly from the fact that it helps researchers to organize the evidence generated. However, with further and more differentiated case knowledge, and more countries achieving desired outcomes, QCA has the potential to deliver robust analysis that allows the provision of information, guidance and recommendations to ensure carbon-effective, cost-efficient and equitable REDD+ policy design and implementation