Grace Wong

Dr. Grace Wong


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

25Years (2002-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 November 2013 in Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
JBJames R.A. Butler
James R.A. Butler
GWGrace Wong
Grace Wong
DMDaniel J. Metcalfe
Daniel J. Metcalfe
MHMiroslav Honzák
Miroslav Honzák
PPPetina L. Pert
Petina L. Pert
JBJon E. Brodie
Jon E. Brodie

7 November 2019 in Sustainability Science
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
AAAmanda Jiménez Aceituno
Amanda Jiménez Aceituno
GPGarry D. Peterson
Garry D. Peterson
ANAlbert Norström
Albert Norström
GWGrace Wong
Grace Wong
ADAndrea S. Downing
Andrea S. Downing
The Anthropocene presents a set of interlinked sustainability challenges for humanity. The United Nations 2030 Agenda has identified 17 specific Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as a way to confront these challenges. However, local initiatives have long been addressing issues connected to these goals in a myriad of diverse and innovative ways. We present a new approach to assess how local initiatives contribute to achieving the SDGs. We analyse how many, and how frequently, different SDGs and targets are addressed in a set of African initiatives. We consider goals and targets addressed by the same initiative as interacting between them. Then, we cluster the SDGs based on the combinations of goals and targets addressed by the initiatives and explore how SDGs differ in how local initiatives engage with them. We identify 5 main groups: SDGs addressed by broad-scope projects, SDGs addressed by specific projects, SDGs as means of implementation, cross-cutting SDGs and underrepresented SDGs. Goal 11 (sustainable cities & communities) is not clustered with any other goal. Finally, we explore the nuances of these groups and discuss the implications and relevance for the SDG framework to consider bottom-up approaches. Efforts to monitor the success on implementing the SDGs in local contexts should be reinforced and consider the different patterns initiatives follow to address the goals. Additionally, achieving the goals of the 2030 Agenda will require diversity and alignment of bottom-up and top-down approaches.

29 April 2017 in Conservation Biology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Arild AngelsenArild Angelsen
Arild Angelsen
MBMaria Brockhaus
Maria Brockhaus
ADAmy Duchelle
Amy Duchelle
ALAnne Larson
Anne Larson
CMChristopher Martius
Christopher Martius
SWSven Wunder
Sven Wunder

1 May 2017 in Ecological Economics
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
LLLasse Loft
Lasse Loft
DLDung Ngoc Le
Dung Ngoc Le
TPThuy Thu Pham
Thuy Thu Pham
AYAnastasia Lucy Yang
Anastasia Lucy Yang
JTJanuarti Sinarra Tjajadi
Januarti Sinarra Tjajadi
GWGrace Wong
Grace Wong

24 May 2019 in Climate Policy
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
GWGrace Wong
Grace Wong
CLCecilia Luttrell
Cecilia Luttrell
LLLasse Loft
Lasse Loft
AYAnastasia Yang
Anastasia Yang
TPThuy Thu Pham
Thuy Thu Pham
MBMaria Brockhaus
Maria Brockhaus
REDD+ was designed globally as a results-based instrument to incentivize emissions reduction from deforestation and forest degradation. Over 50 countries have developed strategies for REDD+, implemented pilot activities and/or set up forest monitoring and reporting structures, safeguard systems and benefit sharing mechanisms (BSMs), offering lessons on how particular ideas guide policy design. The implementation of REDD+ at national, sub-national and local levels required payments to filter through multiple governance structures and priorities. REDD+ was variously interpreted by different actors in different contexts to create legitimacy for certain policy agendas. Using an adapted 3E (effectiveness, efficiency, equity and legitimacy) lens, we examine four common narratives underlying REDD+ BSMs: (1) that results-based payment (RBP) is an effective and transparent approach to reducing deforestation and forest degradation; (2) that emphasis on co-benefits risks diluting carbon outcomes; (3) that directing REDD+ benefits predominantly to poor smallholders, forest communities and marginalized groups helps address equity; and (4) that social equity and gender concerns can be addressed by well-designed safeguards. This paper presents a structured examination of eleven BSMs from within and beyond the forest sector and analyses the evidence to variably support and challenge these narratives and their underlying assumptions to provide lessons for REDD+ BSM design. Our findings suggest that contextualizing the design of BSMs, and a reflexive approach to examining the underlying narratives justifying particular design features, is critical for achieving effectiveness, equity and legitimacy. Key policy insights

1 September 2010 in Ecological Complexity
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PPP.L. Pert
P.L. Pert
JBJ.R.A. Butler
J.R.A. Butler
JBJ.E. Brodie
J.E. Brodie
CBC. Bruce
C. Bruce
MHM. Honzák
M. Honzák
GWGrace Wong
Grace Wong