Abstract

This study asked if the concerns about corruption in climate change in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) and, therefore, fiduciary standards, is justified or not. The study employed an explorative approach using the Nigeria REDD+ process as a case study. Using semistructured questionnaire and in-depth interviews with key informants, data were collected from 201 households from REDD+ project sites and twenty-one forestry officials from local forestry commission on the perceived extent of transparency in REDD+ implementation in the study area; how REDD+ local officials perceive the fiduciary standards and other governance standards by international climate funds; and effectiveness of anticorruption measures within the REDD+ projects. The confidence reposed in the project’s local implementing agency was generally poor. Allocation of carbon rights was the most critically perceived to be fraught with poor transparency in REDD+ processes. Only five out of eight governance measures that could help improve transparency in REDD+ processes were available locally two of which were rated as just fairly functional. This study agreed that the multilateral climate funds are justified in respect of the set fiduciary standards for climate finance flows.