Evaluating land use and livelihood impacts of early forest carbon projects: Lessons for learning about REDD+ Susan Caplow a,b, *, Pamela Jagger a,b,c,e , Kathleen Lawlor a,c , Erin Sills d,e a Carolina Population Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, CB #8120, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-8120, USA b Curriculum for the Environment and Ecology, 223 E. Franklin St., 207 Coates Building, CB# 3275 University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3275, USA c Department of Public Policy, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, CB#3435 Abernethy Hall, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3435, USA d Department of Forestry and Environmental Resources, North Carolina State University, 3120 Jordan Hall Raleigh, NC 27695-8080, USA e Center for International Forestry Research, P.O. Box 0113 BOCBD, Bogor 16000, Indonesia 1. Introduction The ‘Bali Road Map’ of UNFCCC COP-13 calls for sharing lessons learned from demonstration activities that aim to reduce emissions from deforestation and degradation and enhance forest carbon stocks (now known as ‘REDD+’) (United Nations, 2008). These sentiments were echoed at COP-15, where REDD+ played a significant role in the Copenhagen Accord (UNFCCC, 2009). Many sub-national REDD+ projects have been launched since COP-13, along with concurrent environmental science & policy 14 (2011) 152–167 article info Published on line 12 November 2010 Keywords: REDD+ Deforestation Impact evaluation Forest carbon Conservation Socio-economic impacts abstract The ‘Bali Road Map’ of UNFCCC COP-13 calls for sharing lessons learned from demonstration activities that aim to reduce emissions from deforestation and degradation and enhance forest carbon stocks (now known as ‘REDD+’). To develop a feasible yet rigorous strategy for learning from these REDD+ pilots, it is critical to assess previous efforts to evaluate the impacts of ‘pre-REDD+’ avoided deforestation projects. Further, because REDD+ remains a politically volatile issue, with both critics and supporters pointing to the impacts (or lack thereof) of these pre-REDD+ projects, it is important to critically examine the methods employed to assess those impacts. We review the body of literature that makes claims about the socioeconomic and biophysical impacts of pre-REDD+ projects. We find assessments of outcomes or impacts for only five pre-REDD projects. The design, data collection, and analysis methods for understanding the impacts of pre-REDD+ projects frequently lack rigor. In particular, the counterfactual scenarios for establishing socioeconomic impacts are vague, unscientific, or omitted completely. We conclude that drawing specific lessons from pre-REDD+ projects for the design or evaluation of current REDD+ projects is tenuous. Rigorous project evaluations are challenging, expensive, and time-consuming, but because they are so critical for learning about what works for people and forests, evaluations of current REDD+ projects must use improved methods. In particular, much better care should be taken to construct credible – and where possible, consistent – counterfactuals for both biophysical and socioeconomic outcomes. # 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. * Corresponding author at: Carolina Population Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, CB #8120, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-8120, USA. Tel.: +1 612 578 8571. E-mail address: scaplow@email.unc.edu (S. Caplow). available at www.sciencedirect.com journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/envsci 1462-9011/$ – see front matter # 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2010.10.003