Ecuador

REDD+ Working Group

City/State/Region
Begin – End: 2010 – 2011
Name of organization in charge: Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores y Movilidad Humana
Type of organization in charge: government
Level: national

Impact

?

Implementation: was the innovation effectively, partially or not put into practice at all?

Fulfillment of Aims: were the goals of the innovation completely, partially or not achieved at all?

Output: has the innovation generated recommendations, initiatives, decisions or policies?

Outcome: if there were a policy output, was it enacted or implemented?

Implementation: yes
Fulfillment of Democratic Innovation’s aim: yes
Output: yes
Policy Outcome: unknown

The REDD+ Working Group?s Forests for Good Living is an initiative promoted by the Ecuadorian environmental authority based on the positive results obtained in a previous preparation stage that was attended by civil society representatives and indigenous peoples in 16 meetings during the years 2013 and 2015. This Working Group led by the Ministry of the Environment of Ecuador (Span. MAE) through the Undersecretariat of Climate Change, is supported by the Targeted Support UN-REDD+ project. The initiative has opened a formal space for dialogue and consultation, which seeks to empower civil society to express its ideas and opinions, while also establishing itself as an optimal mechanism for the stakeholders involved in having access to information on the progress of REDD+ in an open and transparent manner. This new Bureau is comprised of strategic actors directly or indirectly linked to REDD+, such as social organizations representing academia, the private sector, national NGOs, rural poor sectors, youth, women and Afro-Ecuadorians, among others. Among the topics to be discussed within the Bureau are the deforestation of forests, sustainable production and the fight against climate change.

Institutional design

?

Formalization: is the innovation embedded in the constitution or legislation, in an administrative act, or not formalized at all?

Frequency: how often does the innovation take place: only once, sporadically, or is it permanent or regular?

Mode of Selection of Participants: is the innovation open to all participants, access is restricted to some kind of condition, or both methods apply?

Type of participants: those who participate are individual citizens, civil society organizations, private stakeholders or a combination of those?

Decisiveness: does the innovation takes binding, non-binding or no decision at all?

Co-governance: is there involvement of the government in the process or not?

Formalization: only backed by a governmental program or policy
Frequency: single
Mode of selection of participants: restricted
Type of participants: citizens civil society
Decisiveness: democratic innovation yields a non-binding decision
Co-Governance: yes

Means

Deliberation
Direct Voting
E-Participation
Citizen Representation

Ends

Accountability
Responsiveness
Rule of Law
Political Inclusion
Social Equality

Policy cycle

Agenda setting

Formulation and decision-making

Implementation

Policy Evaluation