Practical critique: Bridging the gap between critical and practice-oriented REDD+ research communities Andrew McGregor,*† Sean Weaver,*‡ Edward Challies,§ Peter Howson,* Rini Astuti* and Bethany Haalboom* *School of Geography, Environment and Earth Sciences, Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington 6140, New Zealand / Aotearoa. Email: sean.weaver@carbon-partnership.com; peter.howson@vuw.ac.nz; rini.astuti@vuw.ac.nz; bethany.haalboom@vuw.ac.nz †Department of Environment and Geography, Macquarie University, Sydney 2109, Australia. Email: andrew.mcgregor@mq.edu.au ‡Carbon Partnership, Takaka 7142, New Zealand / Aotearoa §Institute for Environmental and Sustainability Communication, Leuphana University Lüneburg. Email: challis@leuphana.de Abstract: Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) is an ambitious global programme oriented towards improving forest carbon management. It aims to attract new sources of ‘green’ capital to fund emissions reductions from avoided deforestation and sustainable forest management. REDD+ is transforming forest conservation, as a diverse array of new stakehold- ers become involved. Not surprisingly, REDD+ has proved divisive, as critics concern themselves with issues of power, justice, and commodification, while practice-oriented researchers tackle similar issues from different perspectives, focusing on benefit sharing, safeguards, additionality, measuring and verification. In this paper we explore the different roles of critical and practical research, and argue that there is a need for greater sharing of knowledge across current divides. We draw on our own experiences of conducting a research project on REDD+ in Indonesia that involved critical and practice-oriented researchers. We argue that critical research disconnected from practical matters can have perverse outcomes for practitioners who are ultimately working towards similar goals; while uncritical practice-oriented research has the potential to lead to a dilution of core values of environmental justice and conservation. In contrast, forms of practical critique provide ways of researching REDD+ that have practical value while maintaining critical insights. Keywords: Indonesia, political ecology, critique, practice, REDD Introduction What is the role of critical academic research and how can it contribute to meaningful social– ecological change? We explore this question in the context of the Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) programme in Indonesia. REDD+ is a controver- sial global programme that is transforming forest governance by financially rewarding countries that measurably improve their forest carbon management. For some, REDD+ is the latest expression of neoliberal exploitation as market logics dominate and distort local agency, alien- ating local people and leading to accusations of ‘green grabbing’, eco-colonialism and a dilu- tion of Northern responsibility for emission reductions. For others, REDD+ represents the latest, and possibly last, hope for the world’s forests, being an imperfect but innovative attempt to counter some of the economic drivers of global deforestation. This paper explores the contrasting roles of critical aca- demics and practice-focused researchers within these debates, by reflecting on our experiences as a multidisciplinary team working on a three- year research project exploring REDD+ in Indo- nesia. We outline practical forms of critique, exploring how critical research can actively engage practice-oriented research themes and processes. The paper draws on recent debates question- ing the role of critical research, and concerns that critique has become distanced from effec- tive change. Hardt (2011: 19) maintains that ‘contemporary modes of critique are ... Asia Pacific Viewpoint, Vol. 55, No. 3, December 2014 ISSN 1360-7456, pp277–291 © 2014 Victoria University of Wellington and Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd doi: 10.1111/apv.12064