Strategic dissonance: REDD+ implementation narratives and practices in Colombia

• This article examines the narrative tensions between public and private REDD+ implementers in Colombia, in light of recent scandals impacting carbon markets. • It shows an interplay of narrative competition and practical collaboration between REDD+ jurisdictional programs and voluntary projects. • The article links these different positions to the strategic mobilization of environmental governance discourses and to two coexisting political agendas. • One of these agendas advocates for convergence and collaboration in mitigation efforts while another one is driven by competition and market control. • These agendas reflect shifting priorities within the Colombian state and underscore the intricate relationship between neoliberal conservation, regulatory frameworks and capitalism. This article examines the narrative and material tensions between jurisdictional and private REDD+ (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) implementers in Colombia, against the backdrop of recent global scandals in carbon markets. It reveals a pattern of strategic dissonance between narrative and practice. These actors —from public officials to companies involved in generating carbon credits— publicly attribute governance failures to their public or private counterparts while simultaneously collaborating to maintain the regulatory status-quo. They present their respective initiatives as more financially viable, yet jointly finance climate action to meet mitigation targets. While some promote the integration of jurisdictional and private mitigation efforts, others interpret such efforts as strategies of market consolidation and exclusion. Drawing on over 50 interviews with stakeholders—including government officials, project developers, and environment conservation actors—the article links these forms of dissonance to the strategic mobilization of different environmental governance discourses and to the coexistence of opposing REDD+ political agendas. These findings shed light on the fragmented and politically contingent nature of climate governance in Colombia, and underscore the complex relationship between neoliberal conservation and capitalism.