142
6
In February 2015, a delegation from the Norwegian parliament visited Dar es
Salaam, and the embassy organized a meeting about the experiences with the
Norwegian REDD programme in Tanzania. Pilot projects were presented by the
organizations who had been given the responsibility for carrying out these projects.
One of us who was in Tanzania at the time, requested the embassy’s permission to
observe this meeting, but the request was turned down. In this way, the success narrative could be presented to Norwegian parliamentarians without the risk of them
learning about research which concludes in contradiction to the success narrative
promoted by the embassy.
Politicians are, however, not just victims in this case. They should have made
sure that there is a system for reliable knowledge production about the consequences
of policy-making. In the absence of independent knowledge production, it is possible for success stories about failed projects, programmes and policies to thrive.
Methods: The Relevance of Case Studies
A case study can be defined as an in-depth study of a single example of a category
of phenomena. Most political ecologists carry out case studies. Can such studies
generate knowledge of value beyond the specific cases? Kondoa is but one among
many areas around the world with REDD interventions. Can such cases provide
insights of value about REDD in general? Or is the value of a single case study
always limited to the case itself ?
In 2018, we communicated research findings on REDD through an opinion
piece in the largest newspaper in Norway. We told about how the project in Kondoa
was presented by the Norwegian government as an illustration of the success of
their REDD programme, although our research findings did not confirm this success. The Minister of Climate and Environment at the time, Ola Elvestuen (Liberal
Party), responded and dismissed our critique because it was based on a single case
study. In public debates like this, we have learned that many people believe that
case studies bring ‘anecdotes’ rather than valuable knowledge.
The case study specialist Bent Flyvbjerg argues that there are crucial knowledge gains from case studies other than generalization, and that the claim that one
cannot generalize from one case is also wrong (Flyvbjerg 2006). He refers to the
example Popper (1959/2002) used about falsification: With the proposition that all
swans are white, only one case of a black swan would falsify this.
In line with Flyvbjerg, we also argue that knowledge from case studies provides
elements that are crucial in order to understand larger topics. We will mention
three ways that case studies can bring important knowledge about a broader
theme, such as the local consequences of REDD.
First, there might be special features about a particular case that makes an indepth study more valuable than studies of other cases. As shown both in this and in
other chapters, we think that cases with strong narrative claims, for instance, of
success or of failure, make in-depth insights particularly valuable. This is even more
valuable when the claims are presented in a discursive narrative of a leading and
thereby powerful discourse. In the Kondoa case, Norwegian government officials
widely disseminated presentations of this case as an example of how successful
Chapter 6 · Climate Mitigation Choices: Reducing Deforestation ...
6
In February 2015, a delegation from the Norwegian parliament visited Dar es
Salaam, and the embassy organized a meeting about the experiences with the
Norwegian REDD programme in Tanzania. Pilot projects were presented by the
organizations who had been given the responsibility for carrying out these projects.
One of us who was in Tanzania at the time, requested the embassy’s permission to
observe this meeting, but the request was turned down. In this way, the success narrative could be presented to Norwegian parliamentarians without the risk of them
learning about research which concludes in contradiction to the success narrative
promoted by the embassy.
Politicians are, however, not just victims in this case. They should have made
sure that there is a system for reliable knowledge production about the consequences
of policy-making. In the absence of independent knowledge production, it is possible for success stories about failed projects, programmes and policies to thrive.
Methods: The Relevance of Case Studies
A case study can be defined as an in-depth study of a single example of a category
of phenomena. Most political ecologists carry out case studies. Can such studies
generate knowledge of value beyond the specific cases? Kondoa is but one among
many areas around the world with REDD interventions. Can such cases provide
insights of value about REDD in general? Or is the value of a single case study
always limited to the case itself ?
In 2018, we communicated research findings on REDD through an opinion
piece in the largest newspaper in Norway. We told about how the project in Kondoa
was presented by the Norwegian government as an illustration of the success of
their REDD programme, although our research findings did not confirm this success. The Minister of Climate and Environment at the time, Ola Elvestuen (Liberal
Party), responded and dismissed our critique because it was based on a single case
study. In public debates like this, we have learned that many people believe that
case studies bring ‘anecdotes’ rather than valuable knowledge.
The case study specialist Bent Flyvbjerg argues that there are crucial knowledge gains from case studies other than generalization, and that the claim that one
cannot generalize from one case is also wrong (Flyvbjerg 2006). He refers to the
example Popper (1959/2002) used about falsification: With the proposition that all
swans are white, only one case of a black swan would falsify this.
In line with Flyvbjerg, we also argue that knowledge from case studies provides
elements that are crucial in order to understand larger topics. We will mention
three ways that case studies can bring important knowledge about a broader
theme, such as the local consequences of REDD.
First, there might be special features about a particular case that makes an indepth study more valuable than studies of other cases. As shown both in this and in
other chapters, we think that cases with strong narrative claims, for instance, of
success or of failure, make in-depth insights particularly valuable. This is even more
valuable when the claims are presented in a discursive narrative of a leading and
thereby powerful discourse. In the Kondoa case, Norwegian government officials
widely disseminated presentations of this case as an example of how successful
Chapter 6 · Climate Mitigation Choices: Reducing Deforestation ...