The issue of REDD+ benefit sharing has captured the attention of policymakers and local communities because the success of REDD+ will depend greatly on the design and implementation of its benefit?sharing mechanism. Despite a large body of literature on potential benefit?sharing mechanisms for REDD+, the field has lacked global comparative analyses of national REDD+ policies and of the political?economic influences that can either enable or impede the mechanisms. Similarly, relatively few studies have investigated the political?economic principles underlying existing benefit?sharing policies and approaches. This working paper builds on a study of REDD+ policies in 13 countries to provide a global overview and up?to?date profile of benefit?sharing mechanisms for REDD+ and of the political?economic factors affecting their design and setting. Five types of benefit?sharing models relevant to REDD+ and natural resource management are used to create an organising framework for identifying what does and does not work and to examine the structure of rights under REDD+. The authors also consider the mechanisms in light of five prominent discourses on the question of who should benefit from REDD+ and, by viewing REDD+ through a 3E (effectiveness, efficiency, equity) lens, map out some of the associated risks for REDD+ outcomes. Existing benefit?sharing models and REDD+ projects have generated initial lessons for building REDD+ benefit?sharing mechanisms. However, the relevant policies in the 13 countries studied could lead to carbon ineffectiveness, cost inefficiency and inequity because of weak linkages to performance or results, unclear tenure and carbon rights, under?representation of certain actors, technical and financial issues related to the scope and scale of REDD+, potential elite capture and the possible negative side effects of the decentralisation of authority. Furthermore, the enabling factors for achieving 3E benefit?sharing mechanisms are largely absent from the study countries. Whether REDD+ can catalyse the necessary changes will depend in part on how the costs and benefits of REDD+ are shared, and whether the benefits are sufficient to affect a shift in entrenched behaviour and policies at all levels of government. The successful design and implementation of benefit?sharing mechanisms – and hence the legitimacy and acceptance of REDD+ – depend on having clear objectives, procedural equity and an inclusive process and on engaging in a rigorous analysis of the options for benefit sharing and their potential effects on beneficiaries and climate mitigation efforts.

Biomedical research is increasingly carried out in low- and middle-income countries. International consensus has largely been achieved around the importance of valid consent and protecting research participants from harm. But what are the responsibilities of researchers and funders to share the benefits of their research with research participants and their communities? After setting out the legal, ethical and conceptual frameworks for benefit sharing, this collection analyses seven historical cases to identify the ethical and policy challenges that arise in relation to benefit sharing. A series of recommendations address possible ways forward to achieve justice for research participants in low- and middle-income countries.

Key points In the absence of robust national or subnational policies for benefit sharing, land-use change initiatives in Indonesia have developed their own approaches to distributing benefits. At the local level, support and capacity building are needed to strengthen intermediary institutions in order to improve governance and increase legitimacy when deciding how to share benefits.Nonmonetary benefits such as land tenure, capacity building, infrastructure and access to natural resources have been especially important. However, in some cases there are nonmonetary burdens associated with intended benefits.The legitimacy of benefit-sharing arrangements is determined more by the actors involved than the type of land-use change associated with them. Conservation initiatives, REDD+ projects and oil palm initiatives all exhibited both high and low levels of legitimacy in their benefit-sharing arrangements.The legitimacy of benefit-sharing arrangements can be compromised by the lack of broad consultation with local actors including customary authorities, lack of community control over access to land snd limited livelihoods options for communities.

This book provides a first-of-its-kind review and analysis of benefit sharing frameworks between extractive industries and Indigenous and local communities in different parts of the Arctic. The authors describe a wealth of case studies in order to examine predominant practices, policies, arrangements, mechanisms and impact assessment methodologies. They also discuss possible ways to improve and advance existing benefit sharing regimes, in order to attain fair and equitable benefit sharing and support sustainable development. Among the topics covered in the book are corporate social responsibility and social license to operate, principles and methodologies of determining compensation, legal and informal frameworks of benefit sharing, community response to extractive activities, and global-to-local linkages that shape benefit sharing processes. The book will be of interest to academics, industry experts, legal specialists, policymakers, community members concerned with industrial activities, and anyone interested in sustainable development in the Arctic.

As the first of its kind, this handbook presents state-of-the-art information and analysis concerning the state of affairs in bioethics in around 40 countries. The country reports point out the most important discussions as well as the emerging topics in the field. Readers can orientate themselves quickly with regard to the various relevant issues, institutional structures and expertise available in these countries. The authorship of this reference work is truly global as it involves contributions from the best authors with innate knowledge of the bioethics situation in these countries.

Fewer than 11% of CBD Parties have adopted substantive ABS law, and nearly all of these are developing countries, focusing almost entirely on the 'access' side of the equation. Most of the CBD's specific ABS obligations, however, relate to the other side of the equation-benefit sharing. This book considers the full range of ABS obligations, and how existing tools in user countries' national law can be used to achieve the CBD's third objective. It examines the laws of those user countries which have either declared that their ABS obligations are satisfied by existing national law, or have begun legislative development; the requirements, weaknesses and gaps in achieving benefit-sharing objectives; and the ways in which new or existing legal tools can be applied to these requirements.