This study aims to determine whether Norway‘s International Climate and Forest Initiative (NICFI) has come to be portrayed and handled as a depoliticized issue, and intends to highlight how possible depoliticization is a result of processes of co-production. In the thesis, depoliticization is identified in two ways. One sign of depoliticization is that debated issues are viewed as 'technical', in other words, as a complex matter for experts to discuss. The second is that these technical discussions take place in a domain partly concealed from the public. Asking whether NGO-expertise in some cases may contribute to the depoliticizing of issues, this study has come to mainly focus on the Norwegian non-governmental organization (NGO) Rainforest Foundation Norway (RFN). Arguably, RFN serves a role as an expert in relation to NICFI. Exploring the possible depoliticization of NICFI, two controversies are analyzed: the controversy over safeguards, and the controversy over financing REDD+. Through examination of these two controversies, the study argues that these discussions are indeed political. However, this study finds strong indicators that NICFI issues have been defined as somewhat 'technical', and that both the Norwegian authorities and RFN act in a way that keeps the debated issues partly concealed from the general public, and thus creating less opposition. This is of particular interest because traditionally bringing in experts has the opposite effect: experts often destabilize phenomena, causing more political commotion. By depoliticizing NICFI, one is stabilizing a specific social order in which NICFI may exist, as well as RFN‘s newfound position in Norwegian policy-making. Bearing this in mind, the thesis discusses possible implications and advantages of situations related to the depoliticization of issues.