Search

The jurisdictional approach concept emerged in response to the widespread failure of sectoral forest conservation projects. Despite its increasing popularity, understanding jurisdictional approach outcomes is challenging, given that many remain in either the formation or implementation stage. Furthermore, diverse stakeholders hold different perspectives on what exactly a jurisdictional approach is intended to pursue. These different perspectives are important to unravel, as having a shared understanding of the outcomes is important to build the critical support needed for it. This study aims to add to the limited evidence with a case study in Sabah, Malaysia, which is committed to addressing a leading deforestation driver (palm oil) through sustainability certification in a jurisdiction. We used Q-methodology to explore stakeholder perceptions, revealing three distinct perspectives regarding what outcomes jurisdictional approaches should pursue. We asked about outcomes achievable within ten years (2022–2032) and considering real-world constraints. We found different perspectives regarding economic, environmental, governance, and smallholders’ welfare outcomes. However, we found consensus among stakeholders about some outcomes: (i) that achieving zero-deforestation is untenable, (ii) that issuing compensation or incentives to private land owners to not convert forests into plantations is unrealistic, (iii) that the human well-being of plantation workers could improve through better welfare, and (iv) the free, prior and informed consent given by local communities being required legally. The findings offer insights into key stakeholders’ perceptions of the deliverables of jurisdictional approaches and the difficulty of achieving its objectives under real-world constraints.

The jurisdictional approach concept emerged in response to the widespread failure of sectoral forest conservation projects. Despite its increasing popularity, understanding jurisdictional approach outcomes is challenging, given that many remain in either the formation or implementation stage. Furthermore, diverse stakeholders hold different perspectives on what exactly a jurisdictional approach is intended to pursue. These different perspectives are important to unravel, as having a shared understanding of the outcomes is important to build the critical support needed for it. This study aims to add to the limited evidence with a case study in Sabah, Malaysia, which is committed to addressing a leading deforestation driver (palm oil) through sustainability certification in a jurisdiction. We used Q-methodology to explore stakeholder perceptions, revealing three distinct perspectives regarding what outcomes jurisdictional approaches should pursue. We asked about outcomes achievable within ten years (2022–2032) and considering real-world constraints. We found different perspectives regarding economic, environmental, governance, and smallholders’ welfare outcomes. However, we found consensus among stakeholders about some outcomes: (i) that achieving zero-deforestation is untenable, (ii) that issuing compensation or incentives to private land owners to not convert forests into plantations is unrealistic, (iii) that the human well-being of plantation workers could improve through better welfare, and (iv) the free, prior and informed consent given by local communities being required legally. The findings offer insights into key stakeholders’ perceptions of the deliverables of jurisdictional approaches and the difficulty of achieving its objectives under real-world constraints.

This paper analyses the policy changes occurring in the forest and palm oil sectors of Sabah, Malaysian Borneo, through the lens of the transformational change concept. The aim is to first examine whether Sabah is trans- forming and, if so, to identify the determinants enabling or hindering the change. To determine if Sabah is transforming, we used two criteria: - (i) an ambitious change in the policy framework, that promotes forest conservation and sustainable use, and is moving away from business-as-usual activities; and (ii) the level of implementation of the policies that we identified as supporting transformational change. We found that Sabah very likely did intend to transform. We made this conclusion based on comparing changes in policies occurring in Sabah, and we decided if it is ambitious by primarily comparing Sabah's policies with other Malaysian states, the federal government, and internationally. We showed that: (i) Sabah decided to use voluntary international certification standards (private market instruments) like FSC and RSPO, while the other Malaysian states did not; (ii) they decided to protect more forest compared to national and international targets; and (iii) Sabah is an early mover as the state is one of the first in the world to adopt the RSPO Jurisdictional Approach. But intention needs to be followed by implementation, and this is where the state falls short. The policies in Sabah were not fully implemented because of the patronage system where the more powerful actors used their power to continue with business-as-usual activities, there is frequent political turnover in Sabah, and the state faced difficulty in meeting international standards. Our research shows that local leadership and a local transformational change coalition (civil society actively working in Sabah) mainly prompted the transformational change, although the promises of economic gains and better reputation also played a role. We conclude by emphasising the change must b

This paper analyses the policy changes occurring in the forest and palm oil sectors of Sabah, Malaysian Borneo, through the lens of the transformational change concept. The aim is to first examine whether Sabah is trans- forming and, if so, to identify the determinants enabling or hindering the change. To determine if Sabah is transforming, we used two criteria: - (i) an ambitious change in the policy framework, that promotes forest conservation and sustainable use, and is moving away from business-as-usual activities; and (ii) the level of implementation of the policies that we identified as supporting transformational change. We found that Sabah very likely did intend to transform. We made this conclusion based on comparing changes in policies occurring in Sabah, and we decided if it is ambitious by primarily comparing Sabah's policies with other Malaysian states, the federal government, and internationally. We showed that: (i) Sabah decided to use voluntary international certification standards (private market instruments) like FSC and RSPO, while the other Malaysian states did not; (ii) they decided to protect more forest compared to national and international targets; and (iii) Sabah is an early mover as the state is one of the first in the world to adopt the RSPO Jurisdictional Approach. But intention needs to be followed by implementation, and this is where the state falls short. The policies in Sabah were not fully implemented because of the patronage system where the more powerful actors used their power to continue with business-as-usual activities, there is frequent political turnover in Sabah, and the state faced difficulty in meeting international standards. Our research shows that local leadership and a local transformational change coalition (civil society actively working in Sabah) mainly prompted the transformational change, although the promises of economic gains and better reputation also played a role. We conclude by emphasising the change must b

The jurisdictional approach concept emerged in response to the widespread failure of sectoral forest conservation projects. Despite its increasing popularity, understanding jurisdictional approach outcomes is challenging, given that many remain in either the formation or implementation stage. Furthermore, diverse stakeholders hold different perspectives on what exactly a jurisdictional approach is intended to pursue. These different perspectives are important to unravel, as having a shared understanding of the outcomes is important to build the critical support needed for it. This study aims to add to the limited evidence with a case study in Sabah, Malaysia, which is committed to addressing a leading deforestation driver (palm oil) through sustainability certification in a jurisdiction. We used Q-methodology to explore stakeholder perceptions, revealing three distinct perspectives regarding what outcomes jurisdictional approaches should pursue. We asked about outcomes achievable within ten years (2022“2032) and considering real-world constraints. We found different perspectives regarding economic, environmental, governance, and smallholders welfare outcomes. However, we found consensus among stakeholders about some outcomes: (i) that achieving zero-deforestation is untenable, (ii) that issuing compensation or incentives to private land owners to not convert forests into plantations is unrealistic, (iii) that the human well-being of plantation workers could improve through better welfare, and (iv) the free, prior and informed consent given by local communities being required legally. The findings offer insights into key stakeholders perceptions of the deliverables of jurisdictional approaches and the difficulty of achieving its objectives under real-world constraints.

The jurisdictional approach concept emerged in response to the widespread failure of sectoral forest conservation projects. Despite its increasing popularity, understanding jurisdictional approach outcomes is challenging, given that many remain in either the formation or implementation stage. Furthermore, diverse stakeholders hold different perspectives on what exactly a jurisdictional approach is intended to pursue. These different perspectives are important to unravel, as having a shared understanding of the outcomes is important to build the critical support needed for it. This study aims to add to the limited evidence with a case study in Sabah, Malaysia, which is committed to addressing a leading deforestation driver (palm oil) through sustainability certification in a jurisdiction. We used Q-methodology to explore stakeholder perceptions, revealing three distinct perspectives regarding what outcomes jurisdictional approaches should pursue. We asked about outcomes achievable within ten years (2022“2032) and considering real-world constraints. We found different perspectives regarding economic, environmental, governance, and smallholders welfare outcomes. However, we found consensus among stakeholders about some outcomes: (i) that achieving zero-deforestation is untenable, (ii) that issuing compensation or incentives to private land owners to not convert forests into plantations is unrealistic, (iii) that the human well-being of plantation workers could improve through better welfare, and (iv) the free, prior and informed consent given by local communities being required legally. The findings offer insights into key stakeholders perceptions of the deliverables of jurisdictional approaches and the difficulty of achieving its objectives under real-world constraints.