Contribution short abstract

This paper analyzes the architecture of Ghana’s REDD+ (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) process from 2008 to 2013 to demonstrate how a seemingly multi-stakeholder collaborative engagement framework can ultimately reinforce longstanding power asymmetries.

Contribution long abstract

The growing emphasis on multi-stakeholder engagements in environmental governance is widely celebrated for promoting inclusion and participatory decision-making. This paper analyzes the architecture of Ghana’s REDD+ (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) process from 2008 to 2013 to demonstrate how a seemingly multi-stakeholder collaborative engagement framework can ultimately reinforce longstanding power asymmetries. Drawing on documentary analysis and in-depth interviews with 27 stakeholders involved in REDD+ consultations and policy formulation, the paper identifies three key mechanisms through which participatory processes were constrained in the making of REDD+: (i) the Forestry Commission’s retention of decision-making authority; (ii) the instrumentalization and marginalization of civil society actors, even when formally included; and (iii) rushed, performative consultations that limited genuine input. The paper draws attention to the fact that as global climate finance mechanisms are domesticated within national political structures, the discourse of participation can be co-opted to consolidate power rather than redistribute it. The paper, therefore, concludes by calling for institutional reforms that democratize environmental governance—reforms that must shift power, enhance accountability, and center the lived experiences and knowledge systems of marginalized actors. These insights hold broader relevance for forest governance and climate policy in West Africa, where participatory approaches must confront, not conceal, structural inequalities