1 FAO. 2020. Evaluación de los recursos forestales mundiales 2020. Informe principal. FAO. (Disponible en https://www.fao.org/documents/card/es/c/CA9825ES).
2 FAO. 2018. Términos y definiciones. FRA 2020. Evaluación de los recursos forestales mundiales. Documento de Trabajo 188. Roma. (Disponible en https://www.fao.org/3/I8661ES/i8661es.pdf).
3 FAO. 2018. Términos y definiciones. FRA 2020. Evaluación de los recursos forestales mundiales. Documento de Trabajo 188. Roma. (Disponible en https://www.fao.org/3/I8661ES/i8661es.pdf).
4 FAO. 2020. Evaluación de los recursos forestales mundiales 2020. Informe principal. FAO. (Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.4060/ca9825es).
5 FAO. En fase de preparación. Global Forest Resources Assessment – Remote sensing survey.
6 FAO. 2020. Evaluación de los recursos forestales mundiales 2020. Informe principal. FAO. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.4060/ca9825es).
7 BGCI. 2021. State of the World’s Trees. Richmond (Reino Unido), Agenda Internacional para la Conservación en los Jardines Botánicos (BGCI).
8 Vié, J.-C., Hilton-Taylor, C. y Stuart, S.N. 2009. Wildlife in a changing world – An analysis of the 2008 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Unión Internacional para la Conservación de la Naturaleza (UICN). 184 págs. (Disponible en https://portals.iucn.org/library/efiles/documents/rl-2009-001.pdf).
9 Burley, J. 2002. Forest biological diversity: an overview. Unasylva, 209: 3-9.
10 FAO. 2014. The State of the World’s Forest Genetic Resources. Roma, Comisión de Recursos Genéticos para la Alimentación y la Agricultura y FAO. 276 págs.
11 De Vos, J.M., Joppa, L.N., Gittleman, J.L., Stephens, P.R. y Pimm, S.L. 2015. Estimating the normal background rate of species extinction: background rate of extinction. Conservation Biology, 29(2): 452-462. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12380).
12 FAO. 2021. El estado de los recursos de tierras y aguas del mundo para la alimentación y la agricultura. Sistemas al límite. Informe de síntesis. Roma, FAO. 80 págs. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.4060/cb7654es).
13 FAO. 2021. El estado de los recursos de tierras y aguas del mundo para la alimentación y la agricultura: Sistemas al límite. Informe de síntesis. Roma, FAO. 80 págs. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.4060/cb7654es).
14 Pye, J.M., Holmes, T.P., Prestemon, J.P. y Wear, D.N. 2011. Economic impacts of the southern pine beetle. En: R.N. Coulson & K.D. Klepzig, eds. Southern pine beetle II, págs. 213-222. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-140. Asheville (Estados Unidos), US Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Southern Research Station. (Disponible en https://www.srs.fs.usda.gov/pubs/39071).
15 Hlásny, T., König, L., Krokene, P., Lindner, M., Montagné-Huck, C., Müller, J., Qin, H., et al. 2021. Bark beetle outbreaks in Europe: state of knowledge and ways forward for management. Current Forestry Reports, 7(3): 138-165. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1007/s40725-021-00142-x).
16 FAO. 2020. Evaluación de los recursos forestales mundiales 2020. Informe principal. FAO. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.4060/ca9825es).
17 van Wees, D., van der Werf, G.R., Randerson, J.T., Andela, N., Chen, Y. y Morton, D.C. 2021. The role of fire in global forest loss dynamics. Global Change Biology, 27(11): 2377-2391. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.15591).
18 Davey, S.M. y Sarre, A. 2020. Editorial: the 2019/20 Black Summer bushfires. Australian Forestry, 83(2): 47-51. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1080/00049158.2020.1769899).
19 FAO. 2020. Evaluación de los recursos forestales mundiales 2020. Informe principal. FAO. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.4060/ca9825es).
20 FAO. 2020. Evaluación de los recursos forestales mundiales 2020. Informe principal. FAO. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.4060/ca9825es).
21 FAO. 2020. Evaluación de los recursos forestales mundiales 2020. Informe principal. FAO. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.4060/ca9825es).
22 Friedlingstein, P., Jones, M.W., O’Sullivan, M., Andrew, R.M., Bakker, D.C.E., Hauck, J., Le Quéré, C. et al. 2021. Global carbon budget 2021. Anthroposphere – energy and emissions. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2021-386).
23 Grupo Intergubernamental de Expertos sobre el Cambio Climático y Edenhofer, O., eds. 2014. Climate change 2014: mitigation of climate change – Working Group III contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Nueva York, Cambridge University Press. 1435 págs.
24 Friedlingstein, P., Jones, M.W., O’Sullivan, M., Andrew, R.M., Bakker, D.C.E., Hauck, J., Le Quéré, C. et al. 2021. Global carbon budget 2021. Anthroposphere – energy and emissions. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2021-386).
25 Harris, N.L., Gibbs, D.A., Baccini, A., Birdsey, R.A., de Bruin, S., Farina, M., Fatoyinbo, L. et al. 2021. Global maps of twenty-first century forest carbon fluxes. Nature Climate Change, 11(3): 234-240. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-020-00976-6
26 Leite-Filho, A.T., Soares-Filho, B.S., Davis, J.L., Abrahão, G.M. y Börner, J. 2021. Deforestation reduces rainfall and agricultural revenues in the Brazilian Amazon. Nature Communications, 12(1): 2591. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-22840-7).
27 Duku, C. y Hein, L. 2021. The impact of deforestation on rainfall in Africa: a data-driven assessment. Environmental Research Letters, 16(6): 064044. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/abfcfb).
28 Schwaab, J., Meier, R., Mussetti, G., Seneviratne, S., Bürgi, C. y Davin, E.L. 2021. The role of urban trees in reducing land surface temperatures in European cities. Nature Communications, 12(1): 6763. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-26768-w).
29 Jones, K.E., Patel, N.G., Levy, M.A., Storeygard, A., Balk, D., Gittleman, J.L. y Daszak, P. 2008. Global trends in emerging infectious diseases. Nature, 451(7181): 990-993. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1038/nature06536).
30 Plataforma Intergubernamental Científico-normativa sobre Diversidad Biológica y Servicios de los Ecosistemas (IPBES). 2020. Workshop report on biodiversity and pandemics of the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). Zenodo. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.4147317).
31 Riesco, I.L. 2006. Forest loss and human health: focus on EU policies and practices. FERN.
32 Venkatesh, S. 2020. Coming out of the jungle, infectious diseases. En: Down to Earth [en línea]. [Consultado el 8 de noviembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://www.downtoearth.org.in/news/forests/coming-out-of-the-jungle-infectious-diseases-70969).
33 Wilcox, B.A. y Ellis, B.R. 2006. Los bosques y la aparición de nuevas enfermedades infecciosas en los seres humanos. Unasylva N.o 224: 11-18. (Disponible en https://www.fao.org/3/a0789s/a0789s03.htm).
34 Olivero, J., Fa, J.E., Real, R., Márquez, A.L., Farfán, M.A., Vargas, J.M., Gaveau, D. et al. 2017. Recent loss of closed forests is associated with Ebola virus disease outbreaks. Scientific Reports, 7(1): 14291. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-14727-9).
35 Rulli, M.C., Santini, M., Hayman, D.T.S. y D’Odorico, P. 2017. The nexus between forest fragmentation in Africa and Ebola virus disease outbreaks. Scientific Reports, 7(1): 41613. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1038/srep41613).
36 Newton, P., Castle, S., Kinzer, A., Miller, D. y Oldekop, J. 2022. The number of forest-proximate people – A new methodology and global estimates. Roma, FAO.
37 Castañeda, A., Doan, D., Newhouse, D., Nguyen, M.C., Uematsu, H. y Azevedo, J.P. 2018. A new profile of the global poor. World Development, 101: 250-267. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2017.08.002).
38 Miller, D.C., Muñoz-Mora, J.C. y Christiaensen, L. 2017. Prevalence, economic contribution, and determinants of trees on farms across Sub-Saharan Africa. Forest Policy and Economics, 84: 47-61. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2016.12.005).
39 FAO. 2020. Evaluación de los recursos forestales mundiales 2020. Informe principal. FAO. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.4060/ca9825es).
40 FAO. 2020. Evaluación de los recursos forestales mundiales 2020. Informe principal. FAO. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.4060/ca9825es).
41 FAO. 2020. Evaluación de los recursos forestales mundiales 2020. Informe principal. FAO. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.4060/ca9825es).
42 FAO. 2020. Evaluación de los recursos forestales mundiales 2020. Informe principal. FAO. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.4060/ca9825es).
43 Iniciativa de Derechos y Recursos (RRI). 2018. At a crossroads – Consequential trends in recognition of community-based forest tenure from 2002–2017. Iniciativa de Derechos y Recursos. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.53892/UCYL3747).
44 Miller, D.C., Rana, P., Nakamura, K., Irwin, S., Cheng, S.H., Ahlroth, S. y Perge, E. 2021. A global review of the impact of forest property rights interventions on poverty. Global Environmental Change, 66: 102218. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2020.102218).
45 Meinzen-Dick, R. 2009. Property rights for poverty reduction? 10 p. UN/DESA Working Papers 91. Nueva York (Estados Unidos), Departamento de Asuntos Económicos y Sociales de la ONU.
46 Hajjar, R., Newton, P., Ihalainen, M., Agrawal, A. y Gabay, M. 2020. Levers for alleviating poverty in forests and tree-based systems. Forests, trees and the eradication of poverty – Potential and limitations, págs. 125-176. IUFRO World Series 39. Unión Internacional de Organizaciones de Investigación Forestal.
47 Banco Mundial. 2021. The Changing Wealth of Nations 2021 – Managing assets for the future. Washington, D.C. (Disponible en http://hdl.handle.net/10986/36400).
48 Banco Mundial. 2021. The Changing Wealth of Nations 2021 – Managing assets for the future. Washington, D.C. (Disponible en http://hdl.handle.net/10986/36400).
49 Banco Mundial. 2021. The Changing Wealth of Nations 2021 – Managing assets for the future. Washington, D.C. (Disponible en http://hdl.handle.net/10986/36400).
50 Foro Económico Mundial. 2020. Nature risk rising – Why the crisis engulfing nature matters for business and the economy. New Nature Economy. (Disponible en https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_New_Nature_Economy_Report_2020.pdf).
51 Foundation for Sustainable Development. Sin fecha. ESVD [en línea]. [Consultado el 18 de enero de 2022]. (Disponible en https://www.esvd.net/)
52 Sorrenti, S. 2017. Non-wood forest products in international statistical systems. Roma, FAO.
53 Brander, L.M., de Groot, R., Schägner, P., Guisado-Goñi, P., van ’t Hoff, V. y Solomonides, S. 2022. The role of forest ecosystem services to support the green recovery – Evidence from the Ecosystem Services Valuation Database. Background paper for State of the World’s Forests 2022. FAO.
54 Brander, L.M., de Groot, R., Schägner, P., Guisado-Goñi, P., van ’t Hoff, V. y Solomonides, S. 2022. The role of forest ecosystem services to support the green recovery – Evidence from the Ecosystem Services Valuation Database. Background paper for State of the World’s Forests 2022. FAO.
55 Balmford, A., Green, J.M.H., Anderson, M., Beresford, J., Huang, C., Naidoo, R., Walpole, M. et al. 2015. Walk on the wild side: estimating the global magnitude of visits to protected areas. PLOS Biology, 13(2): e1002074. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1002074).
56 Li, Y., Mei, B., Linhares-Juvenal, T. y Formenton Cardoso, N. 2022. Forest sector contributions to the national economies in 2015 – The direct, indirect and induced effects on value-added, employment and labour income. Roma, FAO.
57 Li, Y., Mei, B., Linhares-Juvenal, T. y Formenton Cardoso, N. 2022. Forest sector contributions to the national economies in 2015 – The direct, indirect and induced effects on value-added, employment and labour income. Roma, FAO.
58 Li, Y., Mei, B., Linhares-Juvenal, T. y Formenton Cardoso, N. 2022. Forest sector contributions to the national economies in 2015 – The direct, indirect and induced effects on value-added, employment and labour income. Roma, FAO.
59 Li, Y., Mei, B., Linhares-Juvenal, T. y Formenton Cardoso, N. 2022. Forest sector contributions to the national economies in 2015 – The direct, indirect and induced effects on value-added, employment and labour income. Roma, FAO.
60 FAO. Sin fecha. FAOSTAT [en línea]. [Consultado el 27 de diciembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://www.fao.org/faostat/es/#data/FO).
61 Lippe, R.S., Cui, S. y Schweinle, J. Próximamente. Contribution of the forest sector to total employment in national economies. FAO.
62 Lippe, R.S., Cui, S. y Schweinle, J. Próximamente. Contribution of the forest sector to total employment in national economies. FAO.
63 Fondo Monetario Internacional. 2021. World economic outlook update. Enero. 11 págs.
64 Lakner, C., Yonzan, N., Mahler, D.G., Castaneda Aguilar, A. y Wu, H. 2021. Updated estimates of the impact of COVID-19 on global poverty: looking back at 2020 and the outlook for 2021. En: World Bank Blogs [en línea]. [Consultado el 30 de diciembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://blogs.worldbank.org/opendata/updated-estimates-impact-covid-19-global-poverty-looking-back-2020-and-outlook-2021).
65 Wunder, S., Kaimowitz, D., Jensen, S. y Feder, S. 2021. Coronavirus, macroeconomy, and forests: what likely impacts? Forest Policy and Economics, 131: 102536. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2021.102536).
66 ONU. Sin fecha. UN Comtrade | International Trade Statistics Database [en línea]. [Consultado el 13 de noviembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://comtrade.un.org/).
67 Centro de Comercio Internacional. Sin fecha. Trade map – Trade statistics for international business development [en línea]. [Consultado el 4 de enero de 2022]. (Disponible en https://www.trademap.org/Index.aspx).
68 Held, C., Meier-Landsberg, E. y Alonso, V. 2022. Global forest sector outlook 2050 – Assessing the future demand and sources of timber for a sustainable economy. Background paper for the State of the World’s Forests 2022. FAO.
69 Held, C., Meier-Landsberg, E. y Alonso, V. 2022. Global forest sector outlook 2050 – Assessing the future demand and sources of timber for a sustainable economy. Background paper for the State of the World’s Forests 2022. FAO.
70 Shupler, M., Mwitari, J., Gohole, A., Anderson de Cuevas, R., Puzzolo, E., Čukić, I., Nix, E. et al. 2021. COVID-19 impacts on household energy y food security in a Kenyan informal settlement: the need for integrated approaches to the SDGs. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 144: 111018. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.111018).
71 Stoner, O., Lewis, J., Martínez, I.L., Gumy, S., Economou, T. y Adair-Rohani, H. 2021. Household cooking fuel estimates at global and country level for 1990 to 2030. Nature Communications, 12(1): 5793. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-26036-x).
72 Lim, S.S., Vos, T., Flaxman, A.D., Danaei, G., Shibuya, K., Adair-Rohani, H., AlMazroa, M.A. et al. 2012. A comparative risk assessment of burden of disease and injury attributable to 67 risk factors and risk factor clusters in 21 regions, 1990-2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. The Lancet, 380(9859): 2224-2260. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61766-8).
73 Bennitt, F.B., Wozniak, S.S., Causey, K., Burkart, K. y Brauer, M. 2021. Estimating disease burden attributable to household air pollution: new methods within the Global Burden of Disease Study. The Lancet Global Health, 9: S18. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(21)00126-1).
74 Chidumayo, E.N. y Gumbo, D.J. 2013. The environmental impacts of charcoal production in tropical ecosystems of the world: a synthesis. Energy for Sustainable Development, 17(2): 86-94. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esd.2012.07.004).
75 IEA, IRENA, ONU, Banco Mundial y OMS. 2021. Tracking SDG7 – The Energy Progress Report 2021. Washington, D.C., Banco Mundial.
76 Stoner, O., Lewis, J., Martínez, I.L., Gumy, S., Economou, T. y Adair-Rohani, H. 2021. Household cooking fuel estimates at global and country level for 1990 to 2030. Nature Communications, 12(1): 5793. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-26036-x).
77 FAO. Sin fecha. FAOSTAT [en línea]. [Consultado el 11 de enero de 2022]. (Disponible en https://www.fao.org/faostat/es/#data/FO).
78 FAO. 2014. El estado de los bosques del mundo. Potenciar los beneficios socioeconómicos de los bosques. Roma, FAO. 146 págs. (Disponible en https://www.fao.org/3/i3710s/i3710s.pdf).
79 Shackleton, C.M. y de Vos, A. 2022. How many people globally actually use non-timber forest products? Forest Policy and Economics, 135: 102659. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2021.102659).
80 Lovrić, M., Da Re, R., Vidale, E., Prokofieva, I., Wong, J., Pettenella, D., Verkerk, P.J. et al. 2020. Non-wood forest products in Europe – a quantitative overview. Forest Policy and Economics, 116: 102175. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2020.102175).
81 FAO. Sin fecha. FAOSTAT [en línea]. [Consultado el 27 de diciembre de 2021]. Disponible en https://www.fao.org/faostat/es/#data/FO).
82 Jenkins, M., Timoshyna, A. y Cornthwaite, M. 2018. Wild at home – Exploring the global harvest, trade and use of wild plant ingredients. Cambridge (Reino Unido), TRAFFIC International.
83 Nasi, R., Taber, A. y Van Vliet, N. 2011. Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins. International Forestry Review, 13(3): 355-368. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1505/146554811798293872).
84 Coad, L., Fa, J.E., Abernethy, K., Van Vliet, N., Santamaria, C., Wilkie, D., El Bizri, H.R. et al. 2019. Towards a sustainable, participatory and inclusive wild meat sector. Centro de Investigación Forestal Internacional (CIFOR). (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.17528/cifor/007046).
85 Señaris and Ferrer (2012), como se ve en: Coad, L., Fa, J.E., Abernethy, K., Van Vliet, N., Santamaria, C., Wilkie, D., El Bizri, H.R. et al. 2019. Towards a sustainable, participatory and inclusive wild meat sector. Centro de Investigación Forestal Internacional (CIFOR). (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.17528/cifor/007046).
86 Jagger, P. y Cheek, J.Z. 2020. Key concepts for understanding forest-poverty dynamics. En: D.C. Miller, S. Mansourian & C. Wildburger, eds. Forests, trees and the eradication of poverty – Potential and limitations, págs. 33-54. IUFRO World Series. Viena, Unión Internacional de Organizaciones de Investigación Forestal (IUFRO).
87 Angelsen, A., Martius, C., de Sy, V. y Duchelle, A. 2018. Transforming REDD+ – Lessons and new directions. Bogor (Indonesia), Centro de Investigación Forestal Internacional (CIFOR). 276 págs.
88 Hickey, G.M., Pouliot, M., Smith-Hall, C., Wunder, S. y Nielsen, M.R. 2016. Quantifying the economic contribution of wild food harvests to rural livelihoods: a global-comparative analysis. Food Policy, 62: 122-132. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2016.06.001).
89 Chaudhury, G., Basumatari, M., Darji, C.B., Ahmed, A.F., Borah, D., Sah, R.K., Devi, A. et al. 2021. Economic significance of wild bioresources to rural communities in the Eastern Himalayan state of Assam, Northeast India. Trees, Forests and People, 5: 100102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tfp.2021.100102
90 Laird, S.A., Awung, G.L., Lysinge, R.J. & Ndive, L.E. 2011. The interweave of people and place: biocultural diversity in migrant and indigenous livelihoods around Mount Cameroon. International Forestry Review, 13(3): 275-293. https://doi.org/10.1505/146554811798293890.
91 Asselin, H. 2015. Indigenous forest knowledge. En: K. Peh, R. Corlett e Y. Bergeron, eds. Routledge handbook of forest ecology, págs. 586-596. Routledge.
92 Noack, F., Riekhof, M.-C. y Di Falco, S. 2019. Droughts, biodiversity, and rural incomes in the tropics. Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, 6(4): 823-852. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1086/703487).
93 Bawa, A. y Atengdem, P.B. 2016. Impact of CLIP project on the livelihood outcomes of sheabutter processing women in Karaga district of Northern Region, Ghana. International Journal for Research in Agricultural and Food Science, 2(4): 07-29. (Disponible en https://gnpublication.org/index.php/afs/article/view/359).
94 Laube, W. 2015. Global shea nut commodity chains and poverty eradication in northern Ghana: myth or reality? UDS International Journal of Development, 2(1): 128-147. (Disponible en http://udsspace.uds.edu.gh:80/handle/123456789/456).
95 Mohammed, F., Boateng, S. y Al-hassan, S. 2013. Effects of adoption of improved sheabutter processing technology on women’s livelihoods and their microenterprise growth. American Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 1(4): 244-250. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.11634/232907811301419).
96 FAO, Centro de Investigación Forestal Internacional, International Forestry Resources and Institutions Research Network y Banco Mundial. 2016. National socioeconomic surveys in forestry – Guidance and survey modules for measuring the multiple roles of forests in household welfare and livelihoods. FAO Forestry Paper 179. Roma.
97 Curtis, P.G., Slay, C.M., Harris, N.L., Tyukavina, A. y Hansen, M.C. 2018. Classifying drivers of global forest loss. Science, 361(6407): 1108-1111. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aau3445).
98 De Sy, V., Herold, M., Brockhaus, M., Di Gregorio, M. y Ochieng, R. 2018. Information and policy change: data on drivers can drive change if used wisely. Transforming REDD+: Lessons and New Directions, Bogor (Indonesia), Centro de Investigación Forestal Internacional.
99 Hosonuma, N., Herold, M., Sy, V.D., Fries, R.S.D., Brockhaus, M., Verchot, L., Angelsen, A. et al. 2012. An assessment of deforestation and forest degradation drivers in developing countries. Environmental Research Letters, 7(4): 044009. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/7/4/044009).
100 Pendrill, F., Persson, U.M., Godar, J. y Kastner, T. 2019. Deforestation displaced: trade in forest-risk commodities and the prospects for a global forest transition. Environmental Research Letters, 14(5): 055003. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab0d41).
101 FAO. En fase de preparación. Global Forest Resources Assessment – Remote sensing survey.
102 FAO. En fase de preparación. Global Forest Resources Assessment – Remote sensing survey.
103 Dummett, C. y Blundell, A. 2021. Illicit harvest, complicit goods – The state of illegal deforestation for agriculture. 81 págs. Forest Trends.
104 Pacheco, P., Mo, K., Dudley, N., Shapiro, A., Aguilar-Amuchastegui, N., Ling, P.-Y., Anderson, C. et al. 2021. Deforestation fronts – Drivers and responses in a changing world. Gland (Suiza), Fondo Mundial para la Naturaleza.
105 ONU. 2019. World Population Prospects 2019 – Highlights. Naciones Unidas. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.18356/13bf5476-en).
106 van Dijk, M., Morley, T., Rau, M.L. y Saghai, Y. 2021. A meta-analysis of projected global food demand and population at risk of hunger for the period 2010–2050. Nature Food, 2(7): 494-501. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-021-00322-9).
107 Meyfroidt, P., Lambin, E.F., Erb, K.-H. & Hertel, T.W. 2013. Globalization of land use: distant drivers of land change and geographic displacement of land use. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 5(5): 438-444. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2013.04.003).
108 Hoang, N.T. y Kanemoto, K. 2021. Mapping the deforestation footprint of nations reveals growing threat to tropical forests. Nature Ecology & Evolution, 5(6): 845-853. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-021-01417-z).
109 FAO. En fase de preparación. Global Forest Resources Assessment – Remote sensing survey.
110 Voora, V., Larrea, C., Bermudez, S. y Baliño, S. 2020. Global market report – Palm oil. International Institute for Sustainable Development and State of Sustainability Initiatives. 16 págs.
111 Franklin, S.L. y Pindyck, R.S. 2018. Tropical forests, tipping points, and the social cost of deforestation. Ecological Economics, 153: 161-171. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.06.003).
112 Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Pirani, A., Connors, S.L., Péan, C., Berger, S., Caud, N. et al., eds. 2021. Climate Change 2021 – The physical science basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press.
113 Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Medio Ambiente y Unión Internacional para la Conservación de la Naturaleza. 2021. Nature-based solutions for climate change mitigation. Nairobi (Kenia) y Gland (Suiza). 35 págs. (Disponible en https://wedocs.unep.org/xmlui/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/37318/NBSCCM.pdf).
114 Grupo Intergubernamental de Expertos sobre el Cambio Climático. 2019. Climate change and land – An IPCC special report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems. P.R. Shukla, J. Skea, E. Calvo Buendia, V. Masson-Delmotte, H.-O. Pörtner, D.C. Roberts, P. Zhai, et al., eds.
115 Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Pirani, A., Connors, S.L., Péan, C., Berger, S., Caud, N. et al., eds. 2021. Climate Change 2021 – The physical science basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press.
116 Grupo Intergubernamental de Expertos sobre el Cambio Climático. 2019. Climate Change and Land – An IPCC special report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems. P.R. Shukla, J. Skea, E. Calvo Buendia, V. Masson-Delmotte, H.-O. Pörtner, D.C. Roberts, P. Zhai, et al., eds
117 Goldstein, A., Turner, W.R., Spawn, S.A., Anderson-Teixeira, K.J., Cook-Patton, S., Fargione, J., Gibbs, H.K. et al. 2020. Protecting irrecoverable carbon in Earth’s ecosystems. Nature Climate Change, 10(4): 287-295. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-020-0738-8).
118 Busch, J. y Engelmann, J. 2017. Cost-effectiveness of reducing emissions from tropical deforestation, 2016-2050. Environmental Research Letters, 13(1): 015001. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa907c).
119 Roe, S., Streck, C., Beach, R., Busch, J., Chapman, M., Daioglou, V., Deppermann, A. et al. 2021. Land-based measures to mitigate climate change: potential and feasibility by country. Global Change Biology, 27(23): 6025-6058. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.15873).
120 Austin, K.G., Baker, J.S., Sohngen, B.L., Wade, C.M., Daigneault, A., Ohrel, S.B., Ragnauth, S. et al. 2020. The economic costs of planting, preserving, and managing the world’s forests to mitigate climate change. Nature Communications, 11(1): 5946. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-19578-z).
121 Roe, S., Streck, C., Beach, R., Busch, J., Chapman, M., Daioglou, V., Deppermann, A. et al. 2021. Land-based measures to mitigate climate change: potential and feasibility by country. Global Change Biology, 27(23): 6025-6058. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.15873).
122 Fuss, S., Golub, A. y Lubowski, R. 2021. The economic value of tropical forests in meeting global climate stabilization goals. Global Sustainability, 4: e1. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1017/sus.2020.34).
123 FAO. 2019. The State of the World’s Biodiversity for Food and Agriculture, J. Bélanger & D. Pilling (eds.). FAO Commission on Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture Assessments. Roma.
124 Klein, A.-M., Vaissière, B.E., Cane, J.H., Steffan-Dewenter, I., Cunningham, S.A., Kremen, C. y Tscharntke, T. 2007. Importance of pollinators in changing landscapes for world crops. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 274(1608): 303-313. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2006.3721).
125 Plataforma Intergubernamental Científico-normativa sobre Diversidad Biológica y Servicios de los Ecosistemas. 2019. Global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. Zenodo. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.3831673).
126 Díaz, S., Pascual, U., Stenseke, M., Martín-López, B., Watson, R.T., Molnár, Z., Hill, R. et al. 2018. Assessing nature’s contributions to people. Science, 359(6373): 270-272. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aap8826).
127 Hill, S.L.L., Arnell, A., Maney, C., Butchart, S.H.M., Hilton-Taylor, C., Ciciarelli, C., Davis, C. et al. 2019. Measuring forest biodiversity status and changes globally. Frontiers in Forests and Global Change, 2: 70. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.3389/ffgc.2019.00070).
128 Waldron, A., Adams, V., Allan, J., Arnell, A., Abrantes, J.P., Asner, G., Atkinson, S. et al. 2020. Protecting 30 percent of the planet – Costs, benefits and economic implications. Working paper analysing the economic implications of the proposed 30% target for a real protection in the draft post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.19950.64327).
129 Zomer, R.J., Trabucco A, Coe, R., Place, F., van Noordwijk, M. y Xu, J.C. 2014. Trees on farms – An update and reanalysis of agroforestry’s global extent and socio-ecological characteristics. Centro Mundial de Agrosilvicultura (ICRAF). (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.5716/WP14064.PDF).
130 Instituto de Recursos Mundiales. Sin fecha. Global Forest Watch [en línea]. [Consultado el 14 de noviembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://www.wri.org/initiatives/global-forest-watch).
131 Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (Program), ed. 2005. Ecosystems and human well-being – Synthesis. Washington, D.C., Island Press. 137 págs.
132 Dasgupta, P. 2021. The economics of biodiversity: the Dasgupta review – Full report. Actualizado el: 18 de febrero de 2021. Londres, HM Treasury. 610 págs.
133 WWAP (Programa Mundial de Evaluación de los Recursos Hídricos)/ONU-Agua. 2018. World Water Development Report 2018. En: UN-Water [en línea]. [Consultado el 8 de noviembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://www.unwater.org/publications/world-water-development-report-2018/).
134 WWAP. 2021. United Nations World Water Development Report 2021 – Valuing water. Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la Educación, la Ciencia y la Cultura.
135 Singh, S. y Mishra, A. 2014. Deforestation-induced costs on the drinking water supplies of the Mumbai metropolitan, India. Global Environmental Change, 27: 73-83. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.04.020).
136 Turpie, J., Warr, B. y Carter Ingram, J. 2015. Benefits of forest ecosystems in Zambia and the role of REDD+ in a green economy transformation. (Disponible en https://www.globallandscapesforum.org/publication/benefits-of-forest-ecosystems-in-zambia-and-the-role-of-redd-in-a-green-economy-transformation/).
137 Arias, M.E., Cochrane, T.A., Lawrence, K.S., Killeen, T.J. y Farrell, T.A. 2011. Paying the forest for electricity: a modelling framework to market forest conservation as payment for ecosystem services benefiting hydropower generation. Environmental Conservation, 38(4): 473-484. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1017/S0376892911000464).
138 Moran, E.F., Lopez, M.C., Moore, N., Müller, N. y Hyndman, D.W. 2018. Sustainable hydropower in the 21st century. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(47): 11891-11898. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1809426115).
139 Annandale, G.W., Morris, G.L. y Karki, P. 2016. Extending the life of reservoirs – Sustainable sediment management for dams and run-of-river hydropower. Washington, D.C., Banco Mundial. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-0838-8).
140 Menéndez, P., Losada, I.J., Torres-Ortega, S., Narayan, S. y Beck, M.W. 2020. The global flood protection benefits of mangroves. Scientific Reports, 10(1): 4404. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-61136-6).
141 Menéndez, P., Losada, I.J., Torres-Ortega, S., Narayan, S. y Beck, M.W. 2020. The global flood protection benefits of mangroves. Scientific Reports, 10(1): 4404. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-61136-6).
142 Allen, T., Murray, K.A., Zambrana-Torrelio, C., Morse, S.S., Rondinini, C., Di Marco, M., Breit, N. et al. 2017. Global hotspots and correlates of emerging zoonotic diseases. Nature Communications, 8(1): 1124. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-017-00923-8).
143 Wilcox, B.A. y Ellis, B.R. 2006. Los bosques y la aparición de nuevas enfermedades infecciosas en los seres humanos. Unasylva, 57: 11-18. (Disponible en https://www.fao.org/3/a0789s/a0789s03.htm).
144 Sow, A., Nikolay, B., Faye, O., Cauchemez, S., Cano, J., Diallo, M., Faye, O. et al. 2020. Changes in the transmission dynamic of Chikungunya virus in southeastern Senegal. Viruses, 12(2): 196. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.3390/v12020196).
145 Plataforma Intergubernamental Científico-normativa sobre Diversidad Biológica y Servicios de los Ecosistemas. 2020. Workshop Report on Biodiversity and Pandemics of the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). Zenodo. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.4147317).
146 Dobson, A.P., Pimm, S.L., Hannah, L., Kaufman, L., Ahumada, J.A., Ando, A.W., Bernstein, A. et al. 2020. Ecology and economics for pandemic prevention. Science, 369(6502): 379-381. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abc3189).
147 Plataforma Intergubernamental Científico-normativa sobre Diversidad Biológica y Servicios de los Ecosistemas. 2020. Workshop Report on Biodiversity and Pandemics of the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). Zenodo. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.4147317).
148 FAO. 2020. Programa de la FAO de respuesta y recuperación ante la pandemia COVID-19. Prevenir la próxima pandemia zoonótica: Reforzar y ampliar el enfoque Una Salud para evitar pandemias de origen animal. FAO. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.4060/cb0301es).
149 Jung, M., Arnell, A., de Lamo, X., García-Rangel, S., Lewis, M., Mark, J., Merow, C. et al. 2021. Areas of global importance for conserving terrestrial biodiversity, carbon and water. Nature Ecology & Evolution, 5(11): 1499-1509. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-021-01528-7).
150 Reed, J., Barlow, J., Carmenta, R., van Vianen, J. y Sunderland, T. 2019. Engaging multiple stakeholders to reconcile climate, conservation and development objectives in tropical landscapes. Biological Conservation, 238: 108229. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2019.108229).
151 Denier, L., Scherr, S., Shames, S., Chatterton, P., Hovani, L. y Stam, N. 2015. The little sustainable landscapes book. Oxford (Reino Unido), Global Canopy Foundation. (Disponible en https://globalcanopy.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/GCP_LSLB_EN.pdf).
152 Reed, J., Ickowitz, A., Chervier, C., Djoudi, H., Moombe, K., Ros-Tonen, M., Yanou, M. et al. 2020. Integrated landscape approaches in the tropics: a brief stock-take. Land Use Policy, 99: 104822. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104822).
153 Grupo Intergubernamental de Expertos sobre el Cambio Climático. 2022. Climate Change 2022 – Impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. H.O. Pörtner, D.C. Roberts, M. Tignor, E.S. Poloczanska, K. Mintenbeck, A. Alegría, M. Craig, S. Langsdorf, S. Löschke, V. Möller, A. Okem y B. Rama, eds. Cambridge University Press. En prensa.
154 Meybeck, A., Gitz, V., Wolf, J. y Wong, T. 2020. Cómo abordar la silvicultura y la agroforestería en los Planes Nacionales de Adaptación – Directrices complementarias. Bogor/Roma. FAO y FTA. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.4060/cb1203es).
155 FAO, ed. 2017. The future of food and agriculture – Trends and challenges. Roma. 163 págs.
156 Banco Mundial. Sin fecha. Agricultural land (sq. km) | Data [en línea]. [Consultado el 11 de noviembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/AG.LND.AGRI.K2?end=2015&start=1961).
157 Ritchie, H. y Roser, M. 2013. Crop yields – Our world in data [en línea]. [Consultado el 8 de noviembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://ourworldindata.org/crop-yields#citation).
158 Campanhola, C. y Pandey, S., eds. 2019. Sustainable food and agriculture. Elsevier. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/C2016-0-01212-3).
159 Byerlee, D., Stevenson, J. y Villoria, N. 2014. Does intensification slow crop land expansion or encourage deforestation? Global Food Security, 3(2): 92-98. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2014.04.001).
160 Ritchie, H. y Roser, M. 2013. Crop Yields - Our World in Data [en línea]. [Consultado el 8 de noviembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://ourworldindata.org/crop-yields#citation).
161 Evenson, R.E. y Rosegrant, M. 2003. The economic consequences of crop genetic improvement programmes. En: R.E. Evenson & D. Gollin, eds. Crop variety improvement and its effect on productivity – The impact of international agricultural research, págs. 473-497. Wallingford, CABI. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1079/9780851995496.0473).
162 Stevenson, J.R., Villoria, N., Byerlee, D., Kelley, T. y Maredia, M. 2013. Green Revolution research saved an estimated 18 to 27 million hectares from being brought into agricultural production. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(21): 8363-8368. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1208065110).
163 Mosnier, A., Mant, R., Pirker, J., Makoudjou, A., Awono, E., Bodin, P., Tonga, P. et al. 2015. Modelling land use changes in Cameroon 2000–2030 – A report by the REDD-PAC project. Cambridge, Laxenburg, Yaoundé, UNEP-WCMC, IIASA, COMIFAC. (Disponible en http://pure.iiasa.ac.at/id/eprint/13771/).
164 Mosnier, P., Mant, R., Pirker, J., Bodin, P., Bokelo, D., Tonga, P., Havlik, P. et al. Sin fecha. Modelling land use changes in the Democratic Republic of Congo 2000-2030. A report by the REDD-PAC project. (Disponible en http://pure.iiasa.ac.at/id/eprint/13775//).
165 Havlík, P., Valin, H., Mosnier, A., Obersteiner, M., Baker, J.S., Herrero, M., Rufino, M.C. et al. 2013. Crop productivity and the global livestock sector: implications for land use change and greenhouse gas emissions. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 95(2): 442-448. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1093/ajae/aas085).
166 Lobell, D.B., Baldos, U.L.C. y Hertel, T.W. 2013. Climate adaptation as mitigation: the case of agricultural investments. Environmental Research Letters, 8(1): 015012. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/8/1/015012).
167 Stabile, M.C.C., Guimarães, A.L., Silva, D.S., Ribeiro, V., Macedo, M.N., Coe, M.T., Pinto, E. et al. 2020. Solving Brazil’s land use puzzle: increasing production and slowing Amazon deforestation. Land Use Policy, 91: 104362. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.104362).
168 Mullan, K., Caviglia-Harris, J.L. y Sills, E.O. 2021. Sustainability of agricultural production following deforestation in the tropics: evidence on the value of newly-deforested, long-deforested and forested land in the Brazilian Amazon. Land Use Policy, 108: 105660. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105660)
169 Garcia, E., Ramos Filho, F., Mallmann, G. y Fonseca, F. 2017. Costs, benefits and challenges of sustainable livestock intensification in a major deforestation frontier in the Brazilian Amazon. Sustainability, 9(1): 158. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.3390/su9010158).
170 Krause, M., Lotze-Campen, H., Popp, A., Dietrich, J.P. y Bonsch, M. 2013. Conservation of undisturbed natural forests and economic impacts on agriculture. Land Use Policy, 30(1): 344-354. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.03.020).
171 Villoria, N.B., Byerlee, D. y Stevenson, J. 2014. The effects of agricultural technological progress on deforestation: what do we really know? Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, 36(2): 211-237. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1093/aepp/ppu005).
172 Byerlee, D., Stevenson, J. y Villoria, N. 2014. Does intensification slow crop land expansion or encourage deforestation? Global Food Security, 3(2): 92-98. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2014.04.001).
173 Lobell, D.B., Baldos, U.L.C. y Hertel, T.W. 2013. Climate adaptation as mitigation: the case of agricultural investments. Environmental Research Letters, 8(1): 015012. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/8/1/015012).
174 Stabile, M.C.C., Guimarães, A.L., Silva, D.S., Ribeiro, V., Macedo, M.N., Coe, M.T., Pinto, E. et al. 2020. Solving Brazil’s land use puzzle: increasing production and slowing Amazon deforestation. Land Use Policy, 91: 104362. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.104362).
175 Garrett, R.D., Levy, S., Carlson, K.M., Gardner, T.A., Godar, J., Clapp, J., Dauvergne, P. et al. 2019. Criteria for effective zero-deforestation commitments. Global Environmental Change, 54: 135-147. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2018.11.003).
176 Lambin, E.F., Gibbs, H.K., Heilmayr, R., Carlson, K.M., Fleck, L.C., Garrett, R.D., le Polain de Waroux, Y. et al. 2018. The role of supply-chain initiatives in reducing deforestation. Nature Climate Change, 8(2): 109-116. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-017-0061-1).
177 Rueda, X., Garrett, R.D. y Lambin, E.F. 2017. Corporate investments in supply chain sustainability: selecting instruments in the agri-food industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 142: 2480-2492. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.11.026).
178 Rothrock, P. y Wheaterer, L. 2020. Commitments in action – Corporate tells for financing forest conservation & restoration, 2020 [en línea]. Forest Trends. [Consultado el 5 de noviembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://www.forest-trends.org/publications/commitments-in-action-corporate-tells-for-financing-forest-conservation-restoration-2020/).
179 Garrett, R.D., Levy, S., Carlson, K.M., Gardner, T.A., Godar, J., Clapp, J., Dauvergne, P. et al. 2019. Criteria for effective zero-deforestation commitments. Global Environmental Change, 54: 135-147. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2018.11.003).
180 CDP. 2021. The collective effort to end deforestation – A pathway for companies to raise their ambition. (Disponible en https://www.cdp.net/en/research/global-reports/global-forests-report-2020).
181 CDP. 2021. Home – CDP [en línea]. [Consultado el 10 de noviembre de 2021]. https://www.cdp.net/en).
182 Burley, H. y Thomson, E. 2022. A climate wake-up – But business failing to hear the alarm on deforestation. Oxford (Reino Unido), Global Canopy. (Disponible en https://forest500.org/sites/default/files/forest500_2022report_final.pdf).
183 Naciones Unidas. Sin fecha. Vías de acción | Naciones Unidas. En: Cumbre sobre los sistemas alimentarios [en línea]. [Consultado el 9 de febrero de 2022]. (Disponible en https://www.un.org/es/food-systems-summit/action-tracks).
184 Roberts, C.M., O’Leary, B.C. y Hawkins, J.P. 2020. Climate change mitigation and nature conservation both require higher protected area targets. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 375(1794): 20190121. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2019.0121).
185 Robinson, B.E., Holland, M.B. y Naughton-Treves, L. 2014. Does secure land tenure save forests? A meta-analysis of the relationship between land tenure and tropical deforestation. Global Environmental Change, 29: 281-293. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.05.012).
186 FAO. 2021. Indigenous Peoples’ food systems. FAO, Alianza de Bioversity International y CIAT. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.4060/cb5131en).
187 Lipscomb, M. y Prabakaran, N. 2020. Property rights and deforestation: evidence from the Terra Legal land reform in the Brazilian Amazon. World Development, 129: 104854. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2019.104854).
188 Segura Warnholtz, G., Fernández, M. y Springer, F. 2017. Securing forest tenure rights for rural development – Lessons from six countries in Latin America. (Disponible en http://hdl.handle.net/10986/26301).
189 Moffette, F., Alix-Garcia, J., Shea, K. y Pickens, A.H. 2021. The impact of near-real-time deforestation alerts across the tropics. Nature Climate Change, 11(2): 172-178. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-020-00956-w).
190 Gibbs, H.K., Munger, J., L’Roe, J., Barreto, P., Pereira, R., Christie, M., Amaral, T. et al. 2016. Did ranchers and slaughterhouses respond to zero-deforestation agreements in the Brazilian Amazon? Conservation Letters, 9(1): 32-42. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12175).
191 Heilmayr, R., Rausch, L.L., Munger, J. y Gibbs, H.K. 2020. Brazil’s Amazon Soy Moratorium reduced deforestation. Nature Food, 1(12): 801-810. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-020-00194-5).
192 Carodenuto, S. 2019. Governance of zero deforestation cocoa in West Africa: new forms of public–private interaction. Environmental Policy and Governance, 29(1): 55-66. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1002/eet.1841).
193 Silva, de F., Perrin, R.K. y Fulginiti, L.E. 2019. The opportunity cost of preserving the Brazilian Amazon forest. Agricultural Economics, 50(2): 219-227. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1111/agec.12478).
194 Jones, K.W., Powlen, K., Roberts, R. y Shinbrot, X. 2020. Participation in payments for ecosystem services programs in the Global South: a systematic review. Ecosystem Services, 45: 101159. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2020.101159).
195 Salzman, J., Bennett, G., Carroll, N., Goldstein, A. y Jenkins, M. 2018. The global status and trends of payments for ecosystem services. Nature Sustainability, 1(3): 136-144. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-018-0033-0).
196 Searchinger, T.D., Malins, C., Dumas, P., Baldock, D., Glauber, J., Jayne, T., Huang, J. et al. 2020. Revising public agricultural support to mitigate climate change. Washington, D.C., Banco Mundial. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1596/33677).
197 Searchinger, T.D., Malins, C., Dumas, P., Baldock, D., Glauber, J., Jayne, T., Huang, J. et al. 2020. Revising public agricultural support to mitigate climate change. Washington, D.C., Banco Mundial. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1596/33677).
198 Poore, J. y Nemecek, T. 2018. Reducing food’s environmental impacts through producers and consumers. Science, 360(6392): 987-992. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaq0216).
199 Börner, J., Schulz, D., Wunder, S. y Pfaff, A. 2020. The effectiveness of forest conservation policies and programs. Annual Review of Resource Economics, 12(1): 45-64. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-resource-110119-025703).
200 Rakatama, A., Pandit, R., Ma, C. e Iftekhar, S. 2017. The costs and benefits of REDD+: A review of the literature. Forest Policy and Economics, 75: 103-111. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2016.08.006).
201 Leblois, A., Damette, O. y Wolfersberger, J. 2017. What has driven deforestation in developing countries since the 2000s? Evidence from new remote-sensing data. World Development, 92: 82-102. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2016.11.012).
202 Anónimo. 2020. Progress on the New York Declaration on Forests Goal 1 assessment. Climate Focus. (Disponible en https://forestdeclaration.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/2020NYDFGoal1.pdf).
203 Anónimo. 2020. Progress on the New York Declaration on Forests Goal 1 assessment. Climate Focus. (Disponible en https://forestdeclaration.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/2020NYDFGoal1.pdf).
204 Gichuki, L., Brouwer, R., Davies, J., Vidal, A., Kuzee, M., Magero, C., Walter, S. et al. 2019. Revivir la tierra y restaurar los paisajes. Convergencia de políticas entre la restauración del paisaje forestal y la neutralidad en la degradación de las tierras. Unión Internacional para la Conservación de la Naturaleza. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.CH.2019.11.es).
205 Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Medio Ambiente, ed. 2009. The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity for national and international policy makers – Summary. Responding to the value of nature. The Economics of Ecosystems & Biodiversity. Ginebra (Suiza). 39 págs.
206 Oberle, B., Bringezu, S., Hatfield-Dodds, S., Hellweg, S., Schandl, H. y Clement, J. 2019. Global resources outlook 2019 – Natural resources for the future we want. Nairobi, Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Medio Ambiente.
207 Mirzabaev, A., Sacande, M., Motlagh, F., Shyrokaya, A. y Martucci, A. 2021. Economic efficiency and targeting of the African Great Green Wall. Nature Sustainability. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-021-00801-8).
208 Mansuy, N. 2020. Stimulating post-COVID-19 green recovery by investing in ecological restoration. Restoration Ecology, 28(6): 1343-1347. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.13296).
209 Benayas, J.M.R., Newton, A.C., Diaz, A. y Bullock, J.M. 2009. Enhancement of biodiversity and ecosystem services by ecological restoration: a meta-analysis. Science, 325(5944): 1121-1124. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1172460).
210 Burek, P., Satoh, Y., Fischer, G., Kahil, M.T., Schertzer, A., Tramberend, S., Fabiola Nava, L. et al. 2016. Water futures and solution – Fast Track Initiative final report. 113 págs. 16-006. Laxenburg (Austria), International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis. (Disponible en http://pure.iiasa.ac.at/id/eprint/13008/1/WP-16-006.pdf).
211 WWAP/ONU-Agua. 2018. World Water Development Report 2018. En: ONU-Agua [en línea]. [Consultado el 8 de noviembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://www.unwater.org/publications/world-water-development-report-2018/).
212 van der Esch, S., Sewell, A., Bakkenes, M., Doelman, J., Stehfest, E., Langhans, C., Fleskens, L. et al. 2021. The global potential for land restoration – Scenarios for the Global Land Outlook 2. Main messages and executive summary. La Haya, PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency.
213 Stanturf, J., Mansourian, S. y Kleine, M., eds. 2017. Implementing forest landscape restoration – A practitioner’s guide. Viena, Unión Internacional de Organizaciones de Investigación Forestal.
214 Grupo Intergubernamental de Expertos sobre el Cambio Climático y Edenhofer, O., ed. 2014. Climate change 2014 – Mitigation of climate change: Working Group III contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Nueva York, Cambridge University Press. 1435 págs.
215 Grupo Intergubernamental de Expertos sobre el Cambio Climático. En prensa. Summary for Policymakers. En: Climate Change 2021 – The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. V. Masson-Delmotte, P. Zhai, A. Pirani, S.L. Connors, C. Péan, S. Berger, N. Caud, et al., eds. Cambridge University Press.
216 Witze, A. 2020. The Arctic is burning like never before – and that’s bad news for climate change. Nature, 585(7825): 336-337. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-02568-y).
217 FAO. 2020. Peatlands mapping and monitoring – Recommendations and technical overview. Roma, FAO. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.4060/ca8200en).
218 Similä, M., Aapala, K., Penttinen, J. y Finnland, eds. 2014. Ecological restoration in drained peatlands – Best practices from Finland. Vantaa (Metsähallitus), Natural Heritage Services [u.a.]. 84 págs.
219 Kiely, L., Spracklen, D.V., Arnold, S.R., Papargyropoulou, E., Conibear, L., Wiedinmyer, C., Knote, C. et al. 2021. Assessing costs of Indonesian fires and the benefits of restoring peatland. Nature Communications, 12(1): 7044. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-27353-x).
220 Prosperi, P., Bloise, M., Tubiello, F.N., Conchedda, G., Rossi, S., Boschetti, L., Salvatore, M. et al. 2020. New estimates of greenhouse gas emissions from biomass burning and peat fires using MODIS Collection 6 burned areas. Climatic Change, 161(3): 415-432. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-020-02654-0).
221 National Interagency Fire Center. Sin fecha. Suppression costs | National Interagency Fire Center [en línea]. [Consultado el 14 de enero de 2022]. (Disponible en https://www.nifc.gov/fire-information/statistics/suppression-costs).
222 Gobierno de Canadá. 2021. Cost of wildland fire protection [en línea]. [Consultado el 19 de enero de 2022]. (Disponible en https://www.nrcan.gc.ca/climate-change/impacts-adaptations/climate-change-impacts-forests/forest-change-indicators/cost-fire-protection/17783).
223 Thomas, D., Butry, D., Gilbert, S., Webb, D. y Fung, J. 2017. The costs and losses of wildfires – A literature survey. NIST SP 1215. Gaithersburg (Estados Unidos), National Institute of Standards and Technology. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215).
224 Association for Fire Ecology, International Association of Wildland Fire y The Nature Conservancy. 2015. Reduce wildfire risks or we’ll continue to pay more for fire disasters – Position statement. [Consultado el 18 de enero de 2022]. (Disponible en https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5ea4a2778a22135afc733499/t/5eae000aed72103d3af6301b/1588461581402/True-Costs-of-Wildfire-2.pdf).
225 FAO y Mecanismo Mundial de la Convención de las Naciones Unidas de Lucha contra la Desertificación. 2015. Sustainable financing for forest and landscape restoration – Opportunities, challenges and the way forward. Roma. 114 págs.
226 Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Medio Ambiente. 2021. State of finance for nature – Tripling investments in nature-based solutions by 2030. Nairobi.
227 O’Callaghan, B.J. y Murdock, E. 2021. Are we building back better? Evidence from 2020 and pathways to inclusive green recovery spending. Global Recovery Observatory y Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Medio Ambiente. 57 págs.
228 Hepburn, C., O’Callaghan, B., Stern, N., Stiglitz, J. y Zenghelis, D. 2020. Will COVID-19 fiscal recovery packages accelerate or retard progress on climate change? Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 36(Supplement_1): S359-S381. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/graa015).
229 Besseau, P., Graham, S. y Christophersen, T., eds. 2018. Restoring forests and landscapes – The key to a sustainable future. Viena, Asociación Global sobre Restauración del Paisaje Forestal. (Disponible en https://www.forestlandscaperestoration.org/images/gpflr_final%2027aug.pdf).
230 Verdone, M. y Seidl, A. 2017. Time, space, place, and the Bonn Challenge global forest restoration target. Restoration Ecology, 25(6): 903-911. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.12512).
231 Roe, S., Streck, C., Beach, R., Busch, J., Chapman, M., Daioglou, V., Deppermann, A. et al. 2021. Land-based measures to mitigate climate change: potential and feasibility by country. Global Change Biology, 27(23): 6025-6058. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.15873).
232 Dave, R., Saint-Laurent, C., Murray, L., Antunes Daldegan, G., Brouwer, R., de Mattos Scaramuzza, C.A., Raes, L. et al. 2019. Second Bonn Challenge progress report – Application of the Barometer in 2018. Unión Internacional para la Conservación de la Naturaleza. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.CH.2019.06.en).
233 Rudee, A. 2020. Want to help the US economy? Rethink the Trillion Trees Act. (Disponible en https://www.wri.org/insights/want-help-us-economy-rethink-trillion-trees-act).
234 ELD Initiative. 2015. Report for policy and decision makers - Reaping economic and environmental benefits from sustainable land management. (Disponible en https://www.eld-initiative.org/fileadmin/pdf/ELD-pm-report_05_web_300dpi.pdf).
235 Convención de las Naciones Unidas de Lucha contra la Desertificación. 2020. The Great Green Wall – Implementation status and way ahead to 2030. (Disponible en https://www.unccd.int/publications/great-green-wall-implementation-status-and-way-ahead-2030).
236 Stanturf, J., Mansourian, S. y Kleine, M., eds. 2017. Implementing forest landscape restoration – A practitioner’s guide. Viena, Asociación Global sobre Restauración del Paisaje Forestal.
237 Dietzel, A., Maes, J., Comisión Europea, Centro Común de Investigación e Instituto de Medio Ambiente y Sostenibilidad. 2015. Costs of restoration measures in the EU based on an assessment of LIFE projects. Luxemburgo, Publications Office. (Disponible en http://dx.publications.europa.eu/10.2788/235713).
238 De Groot, R.S., Blignaut, J., Van Der Ploeg, S., Aronson, J., Elmqvist, T. y Farley, J. 2013. Benefits of investing in ecosystem restoration. Conservation Biology, 27(6): 1286-1293. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12158).
239 Birch, J.C., Newton, A.C., Aquino, C.A., Cantarello, E., Echeverría, C., Kitzberger, T., Schiappacasse, I. et al. 2010. Cost-effectiveness of dryland forest restoration evaluated by spatial analysis of ecosystem services. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 107(50): 21925-21930. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1003369107).
240 Bodin, B., Garavaglia, V., Pingault, N., Ding, H., Wilson, S., Meybeck, A., Gitz, V. et al. 2021. A standard framework for assessing the costs and benefits of restoration: introducing The Economics of Ecosystem Restoration. Restoration Ecology. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.13515).
241 Bodin, B., Garavaglia, V., Pingault, N., Ding, H., Wilson, S., Meybeck, A., Gitz, V. et al. 2021. A standard framework for assessing the costs and benefits of restoration: introducing The Economics of Ecosystem Restoration. Restoration Ecology. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.13515).
242 Holl, K.D. y Howarth, R.B. 2000. Paying for restoration. Restoration Ecology, 8(3): 260-267. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1526-100x.2000.80037.x).
243 Shoo, L.P., Catterall, C.P., Nicol, S., Christian, R., Rhodes, J., Atkinson, P., Butler, D. et al. 2017. Navigating complex decisions in restoration investment. Conservation Letters, 10(6): 748-756. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12327).
244 Brancalion, P.H.S., Amazonas, N.T., Chazdon, R.L., Melis, J., Rodrigues, R.R., Silva, C.C., Sorrini, T.B. et al. 2020. Exotic eucalypts: from demonized trees to allies of tropical forest restoration? Journal of Applied Ecology, 57(1): 55-66. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.13513).
245 De Groot, R.S., Blignaut, J., Van Der Ploeg, S., Aronson, J., Elmqvist, T. y Farley, J. 2013. Benefits of investing in ecosystem restoration. Conservation Biology, 27(6): 1286-1293. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12158).
246 Kimball, S., Lulow, M., Sorenson, Q., Balazs, K., Fang, Y.-C., Davis, S.J., O’Connell, M. et al. 2015. Cost-effective ecological restoration. Restoration Ecology, 23(6): 800-810. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.12261).
247 Unión Internacional para la Conservación de la Naturaleza. Sin fecha. Metodología de evaluación de oportunidades de restauración (ROAM) | UICN [en línea]. [Consultado el 31 de diciembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://www.iucn.org/theme/forests/our-work/forest-landscape-restoration/restoration-opportunities-assessment-methodology-roam).
248 International Institute for Sustainability. Sin fecha. WePlan Forests [en línea]. [Consultado el 31 de diciembre de 2021]. (Disponible en http://weplan-forests.org/).
249 Beyer, H.L., Williams, B., Schmoeller, M. y Crouzeilles, R. 2021. The implications of natural regeneration for tropical and subtropical forest restoration in Colombia, Indonesia, Kenya, Madagascar, Peru and the Philippines.
250 Zomer, R.J., Neufeldt, H., Xu, J., Ahrends, A., Bossio, D., Trabucco, A., van Noordwijk, M. et al. 2016. Global tree cover and biomass carbon on agricultural land: the contribution of agroforestry to global and national carbon budgets. Scientific Reports, 6(1): 29987. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1038/srep29987).
251 Pumariño, L., Sileshi, G.W., Gripenberg, S., Kaartinen, R., Barrios, E., Muchane, M.N., Midega, C. et al. 2015. Effects of agroforestry on pest, disease and weed control: a meta-analysis. Basic and Applied Ecology, 16(7): 573-582. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.baae.2015.08.006).
252 Minnemeyer, S., Laestadius, L. y Sizer, N. 2011. A world of opportunity. Washington, D.C., Instituto de Recursos Mundiales (WRI). (Disponible en http://pdf.wri.org/world_of_opportunity_brochure_2011-09.pdf).
253 Pumariño, L., Sileshi, G.W., Gripenberg, S., Kaartinen, R., Barrios, E., Muchane, M.N., Midega, C. et al. 2015. Effects of agroforestry on pest, disease and weed control: a meta-analysis. Basic and Applied Ecology, 16(7): 573-582. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.baae.2015.08.006).
254 Muchane, M.N., Sileshi, G.W., Gripenberg, S., Jonsson, M., Pumariño, L. y Barrios, E. 2020. Agroforestry boosts soil health in the humid and sub-humid tropics: a meta-analysis. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 295: 106899. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2020.106899).
255 Udawatta, R.P., Rankoth, L. y Jose, S. 2019. Agroforestry and biodiversity. Sustainability, 11(10): 2879. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.3390/su11102879).
256 Barral, M.P., Rey Benayas, J.M., Meli, P. y Maceira, N.O. 2015. Quantifying the impacts of ecological restoration on biodiversity and ecosystem services in agroecosystems: a global meta-analysis. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 202: 223-231. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2015.01.009).
257 Muchane, M.N., Sileshi, G.W., Gripenberg, S., Jonsson, M., Pumariño, L. y Barrios, E. 2020. Agroforestry boosts soil health in the humid and sub-humid tropics: a meta-analysis. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 295: 106899. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2020.106899).
258 Zomer, R.J., Neufeldt, H., Xu, J., Ahrends, A., Bossio, D., Trabucco, A., van Noordwijk, M. et al. 2016. Global tree cover and biomass carbon on agricultural land: the contribution of agroforestry to global and national carbon budgets. Scientific Reports, 6(1): 29987. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1038/srep29987).
259 Zomer, R.J., Neufeldt, H., Xu, J., Ahrends, A., Bossio, D., Trabucco, A., van Noordwijk, M. et al. 2016. Global tree cover and biomass carbon on agricultural land: the contribution of agroforestry to global and national carbon budgets. Scientific Reports, 6(1): 29987. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1038/srep29987).
260 Rosenstock, T.S., Wilkes, A., Jallo, C., Namoi, N., Bulusu, M., Suber, M., Mboi, D. et al. 2019. Making trees count: measurement and reporting of agroforestry in UNFCCC national communications of non-Annex I countries. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 284: 106569. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2019.106569).
261 Lehmann, L.M., Smith, J., Westaway, S., Pisanelli, A., Russo, G., Borek, R., Sandor, M. et al. 2020. Productivity and economic evaluation of agroforestry systems for sustainable production of food and non-food products. Sustainability, 12(13): 5429. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.3390/su12135429).
262 Kuyah, S., Whitney, C.W., Jonsson, M., Sileshi, G.W., Öborn, I., Muthuri, C.W. y Luedeling, E. 2019. Agroforestry delivers a win-win solution for ecosystem services in sub-Saharan Africa. A meta-analysis. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 39(5): 47. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-019-0589-8).
263 Aryal, K., Thapa, P.S. y Lamichhane, D. 2019. Revisiting agroforestry for building climate resilient communities: a case of package-based integrated agroforestry practices in Nepal. Emerging Science Journal, 3(5): 303-311. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.28991/esj-2019-01193).
264 Lawin, K.G. y Tamini, L.D. 2019. Land tenure differences and adoption of agri-environmental practices: evidence from Benin. The Journal of Development Studies, 55(2): 177-190. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1080/00220388.2018.1443210).
265 Ollinaho, O.I. y Kröger, M. 2021. Agroforestry transitions: the good, the bad and the ugly. Journal of Rural Studies, 82: 210-221. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2021.01.016).
266 Do, H., Luedeling, E. y Whitney, C. 2020. Decision analysis of agroforestry options reveals adoption risks for resource-poor farmers. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 40(3): 20. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-020-00624-5).
267 Charles, R., Munishi, P. y Nzunda, E. 2013. Agroforestry as adaptation strategy under climate change in Mwanga District, Kilimanjaro, Tanzania. International Journal of Environmental Protection, 3: 29-38.
268 Fisher, M., Chaudhury, M. y McCusker, B. 2010. Do forests help rural households adapt to climate variability? Evidence from southern Malawi. World Development, 38(9): 1241-1250. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2010.03.005).
269 Wunder, S., Börner, J., Shively, G. y Wyman, M. 2014. Safety nets, gap filling and forests: a global-comparative perspective. World Development, 64: S29-S42. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2014.03.005).
270 Magcale-Macandog, D.B., Rañola, F.M., Rañola, R.F., Ani, P.A.B. y Vidal, N.B. 2010. Enhancing the food security of upland farming households through agroforestry in Claveria, Misamis Oriental, Philippines. Agroforestry Systems, 79(3): 327-342. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-009-9267-1).
271 Glover, E., Hassan, B.A. y Glover, M. 2013. Analysis of socio-economic conditions influencing adoption of agroforestry practices. International Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, 3: 178-184.
272 Bettles, J., Battisti, D.S., Cook-Patton, S.C., Kroeger, T., Spector, J.T., Wolff, N.H. y Masuda, Y.J. 2021. Agroforestry and non-state actors: a review. Forest Policy and Economics, 130: 102538. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2021.102538).
273 Sollen-Norrlin, M., Ghaley, B.B. y Rintoul, N.L.J. 2020. Agroforestry benefits and challenges for adoption in Europe and beyond. Sustainability, 12(17): 7001. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.3390/su12177001).
274 Brondizio, E.S. 2012. Institutional crafting and the vitality of rural areas in an urban world: perspectives from a Japanese community in the Amazon. Global Environmental Research, 16(2): 145-151.
275 Futemma, C., De Castro, F. y Brondizio, E.S. 2020. Farmers and social innovations in rural development: collaborative arrangements in eastern Brazilian Amazon. Land Use Policy, 99: 104999. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104999).
276 Piekielek, J. 2010. Cooperativism and agroforestry in the eastern Amazon: the case of Tomé-Açu. Latin American Perspectives, 37(6): 12-29. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1177/0094582X10382097).
277 Ollinaho, O.I. y Kröger, M. 2021. Agroforestry transitions: the good, the bad and the ugly. Journal of Rural Studies, 82: 210-221. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2021.01.016).
278 Franzel, S., Denning, G.L., Lillesø, J.P.B. y Mercado, A.R. 2004. Scaling up the impact of agroforestry: lessons from three sites in Africa and Asia. En: P.K.R. Nair, M.R. Rao & L.E. Buck, eds. New vistas in agroforestry, págs. 329-344. Advances in Agroforestry. Dordrecht (Países Bajos), Springer. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-2424-1_23).
279 Wilson, M. y Lovell, S. 2016. Agroforestry—the next step in sustainable and resilient agriculture. Sustainability, 8(6): 574. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.3390/su8060574).
280 Robiglio, V. y Reyes, M. 2016. Restoration through formalization? Assessing the potential of Peru’s Agroforestry Concessions scheme to contribute to restoration in agricultural frontiers in the Amazon region. World Development Perspectives, 3: 42-46. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wdp.2016.11.013).
281 Waldén, P., Ollikainen, M. y Kahiluoto, H. 2020. Carbon revenue in the profitability of agroforestry relative to monocultures. Agroforestry Systems, 94(1): 15-28. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-019-00355-x).
282 Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Medio Ambiente. 2021. State of finance for nature – Tripling investments in nature-based solutions by 2030. Nairobi. (Disponible en https://www.unep.org/resources/state-finance-nature).
283 Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Medio Ambiente y FAO. 2021. Becoming #GenerationRestoration – Ecosystem restoration for people, nature and climate. Nairobi (Disponible en https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/36251/ERPNC.pdf).
284 Herrick, J.E., Abrahamse, T. y Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Medio Ambiente. 2019. Land restoration for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals – An International Resource Panel think piece.
285 Oberle, B., Bringezu, S., Hatfield-Dodds, S., Hellweg, S., Schandl, H. y Clement, J. 2019. Global resources outlook 2019 – Natural resources for the future we want. Nairobi, Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Medio Ambiente.
286 Popp, J., Lakner, Z., Harangi-Rákos, M. y Fári, M. 2014. The effect of bioenergy expansion: food, energy, and environment. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 32: 559-578. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.01.056).
287 FAO. Sin fecha. Estadísticas de productos forestales – Producción y consumo de los productos forestales [en línea]. [Consultado el 11 de noviembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://www.fao.org/forestry/statistics/80938@180723/es/).
288 Consejo Empresarial Mundial para el Desarrollo Sostenible. 2020. Circular bioeconomy – The business opportunity contributing to a sustainable world. Ginebra (Suiza). (Disponible en https://www.wbcsd.org/contentwbc/download/10806/159810/1).
289 Banco Mundial. 2016. Housing for all by 2030. Infographics [en línea]. Banco Mundial. [Consultado el 8 de noviembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/infographic/2016/05/13/housing-for-all-by-2030).
290 Consejo Empresarial Mundial para el Desarrollo Sostenible. 2020. Circular bioeconomy – The business opportunity contributing to a sustainable world.
291 Global Alliance for Buildings and Construction, Agencia Internacional de la Energía y Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Medio Ambiente. 2019. 2019 Global Status Report for Buildings and Construction Sector – Towards a zero-emission, efficient and resilient buildings and construction sector. (Disponible en http://www.unep.org/resources/publication/2019-global-status-report-buildings-and-construction-sector).
292 Churkina, G., Organschi, A., Reyer, C.P.O., Ruff, A., Vinke, K., Liu, Z., Reck, B.K. et al. 2020. Buildings as a global carbon sink. Nature Sustainability, 3(4): 269-276. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-019-0462-4).
293 Verkerk, P.J., Hassegawa, M., Van Brusselen, J., Cramm, M., Chen, X., Imparato Maximo, Y., Koç, M. et al. 2021. Forest products in the global bioeconomy. Roma, FAO. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.4060/cb7274en).
294 Ottelin, J., Amiri, A., Steubing, B. & Junnila, S. 2021. Comparative carbon footprint analysis of residents of wooden and non-wooden houses in Finland. Environmental Research Letters, 16(7): 074006. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ac06f9).
295 Stora Enso. Sin fecha. 10 reasons why wooden buildings are good for you – And the scientific research to back it up. White paper.
296 Knox, A. y Parry-Husbands, H. 2018. Workplaces – Wellness + wood = productivity. Forest and Wood Products Australia.
297 Stay, M. 2021. Gabon’s Special Economic Zone, the world’s first certified carbon neutral industrial zone – VivAfrik. En: New in 24 [en línea]. [Consultado el 27 de diciembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://new.in-24.com/world/amp/229127).
298 Vussonji, D.C., Makeka, M. y Zwane, C. Próximamente. Building a sustainable circular bioeconomy in Africa through forest products – Trends, opportunities and challenges. Dalberg Catalyst y FAO.
299 Makake, M. 2021. Toward a regenerative forest economy for Gabon. Presentation made at the Yale Forest Forum.
300 Vussonji, D.C., Makeka, M. y Zwane, C. Próximamente. Building a sustainable circular bioeconomy in Africa through forest products – Trends, opportunities and challenges. Dalberg Catalyst y FAO.
301 Secretariado del Comité Consultivo de Industrias Sostenibles de Base Forestal. 2020. Status of public policies encouraging wood use in construction – An overview. FAO.
302 Breneman, S., Timmers, M. y Richardson, D. 2019. Tall wood buildings in the 2021 IBC. Up to 18 stories of mass timber. Wood Products Council. (Disponible en https://www.woodworks.org/wp-content/uploads/wood_solution_paper-TALL-WOOD.pdf).
303 Forest and Wood Products Australia. 2019. FWPA drives new National Construction Code changes to increase demand for timber products. Comunicado de prensa. (Disponible en (Disponible en https://www.fwpa.com.au/images/mediareleases/2019/FWPA_MR_NCC_2019_Changes_FINAL.pdf).
304 Consejo Empresarial Mundial para el Desarrollo Sostenible. 2020. Circular bioeconomy – The business opportunity contributing to a sustainable world. Ginebra (Suiza). (Disponible en https://www.wbcsd.org/contentwbc/download/10806/159810/1).
305 Rotherham, T. y Burrows, J. 2014. Improvement in efficiency of fibre utilization by the Canadian forest products industry 1970 to 2010. The Forestry Chronicle, 90(6): 801-806.
306 FAO, Organización Internacional de las Maderas Tropicales y ONU. 2020. Forest product conversion factors. Roma. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.4060/ca7952en).
307 FAO. Sin fecha. FAOSTAT [en línea]. [Consultado el 27 de diciembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://www.fao.org/faostat/es/#data/FO).
308 Bais-Moleman, A.L., Sikkema, R., Vis, M., Reumerman, P., Theurl, M.C. y Erb, K.-H. 2018. Assessing wood use efficiency and greenhouse gas emissions of wood product cascading in the European Union. Journal of Cleaner Production, 172: 3942-3954. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.04.153).
309 Allott, J., O’Kelly, G. y Pendergraph, S. 2020. Data: The next wave in forestry productivity | McKinsey. En: McKinsey & Company [en línea]. [Consultado el 27 de diciembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/paper-forest-products-and-packaging/our-insights/data-the-next-wave-in-forestry-productivity).
310 Ellen MacArthur Foundation. 2021. The nature imperative – How the circular economy tackles biodiversity loss. Ellen MacArthur Foundation. (Disponible en file:///Users/andrewfrench/Downloads/The%20Nature%20Imperative_%20How%20the%20circular%20economy%20tackles%20biodiversity%20loss.pdf).
311 Comisión Europea. Sin fecha. Bio-based products. [en línea]. Internal market, industry, entrepreneurship and SMEs. [Consultado el 5 de noviembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://ec.europa.eu/growth/sectors/biotechnology/bio-based-products_en).
312 Metreveli, G., Wågberg, L., Emmoth, E., Belák, S., Strømme, M. y Mihranyan, A. 2014. A size-exclusion nanocellulose filter paper for virus removal. Advanced Healthcare Materials, 3(10): 1546-1550. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1002/adhm.201300641).
313 Universidad de British Columbia. 2020. UBC researchers develop biodegradable medical mask for COVID-19 [en línea]. [Consultado el 13 de noviembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://news.ubc.ca/2020/05/21/ubc-researchers-develop-biodegradable-medical-mask-for-covid-19/).
314 Claro, F.C., Jordão, C., de Viveiros, B.M., Isaka, L.J.E., Villanova Junior, J.A. y Magalhães, W.L.E. 2020. Low cost membrane of wood nanocellulose obtained by mechanical defibrillation for potential applications as wound dressing. Cellulose, 27(18): 10765-10779. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-020-03129-2).
315 UPM. Sin fecha. Wood-based FibDex® wound dressing can speed up healing and bring new convenience to patient care | UPM.COM [en línea]. [Consultado el 13 de noviembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://www.upm.com/articles/innovations/20/wood-based-fibdex-wound-dressing-can-speed-up-healing-and-bring-new-convenience-to-patient-care/).
316 Smith, T., Majid, F., Eckl, V. y Reynolds, C.M. 2021. Herbal supplement sales in US increase by record-breaking 17.3% in 2020. HerbalGram, (131): 52-65.
317 Asociación Europea de la Industria de la Biomasa. Sin fecha. Biochemicals [en línea]. [Consultado el 27 de diciembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://www.eubia.org/cms/wiki-biomass/biochemicals-and-biopolymers/).
318 ONU y FAO. 2021. Forest Sector Outlook Study 2020–2040. Geneva Timber and Forest Study Paper 51. Ginebra (Suiza), Naciones Unidas. (Disponible en https://unece.org/sites/default/files/2021-11/SP-51-2021-11_0.pdf).
319 Verkerk, P.J., Hassegawa, M., Van Brusselen, J., Cramm, M., Chen, X., Imparato Maximo, Y., Koç, M. et al. 2021. Forest products in the global bioeconomy. Roma, FAO. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.4060/cb7274en).
320 ReportLinker. 2020. Global cellulosic man-made fibers industry.
321 Verkerk, P.J., Hassegawa, M., Van Brusselen, J., Cramm, M., Chen, X., Imparato Maximo, Y., Koç, M. et al. 2021. Forest products in the global bioeconomy. Roma, FAO. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.4060/cb7274en).
322 ONU y FAO. 2021. Forest Sector Outlook Study 2020–2040. Geneva Timber and Forest Study Paper 51. Ginebra (Suiza), Naciones Unidas. (Disponible en https://unece.org/sites/default/files/2021-11/SP-51-2021-11_0.pdf).
323 AIE. 2021. Net Zero by 2050. A roadmap for the global energy sector. AIE. (Disponible en https://www.iea.org/reports/net-zero-by-2050).
324 Bailis, R., Drigo, R., Ghilardi, A. y Masera, O. 2015. The carbon footprint of traditional woodfuels. Nature Climate Change, 5(3): 266-272. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2491).
325 Programa de asistencia para la administración del sector de la energía (ESMAP). 2012. Commercial woodfuel production – Experience from three locally controlled wood production models. Knowledge Series 012/12. World Bank Energy Sector Management Assistance Program. (Disponible en https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/17478/751950ESMAP0WP0el0KS120120Optimized.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y).
326 FAO. 2020. Sustainable charcoal production for food security and forest landscape restoration. (Disponible en https://www.fao.org/3/ca7967en/ca7967en.pdf).
327 Guidal, A., Herail, A. y Rosenstock, T. 2019. Feasibility of industrial charcoal production in the Republic of Congo. Kinshasa, World Agroforestry – ICRAF.
328 MNREM. 2017. National Charcoal Strategy of Malawi (2017–2027). Ministry of Natural Resources, Energy and Mining (MNREM), Malawi.
329 REN21. 2021. Renewables 2021 Global Status Report. REN21 Secretariat. (Disponible en https://www.ren21.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/GSR2021_Full_Report.pdf).
330 Lazaridou, D.C., Michailidis, A. y Trigkas, M. 2021. Exploring environmental and economic costs and benefits of a forest-based circular economy: a literature review. Forests, 12(4): 436. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.3390/f12040436).
331 Raven, P. 2021. Letter regarding use of forests for bioenergy to President Biden, President von der Leyen, Presudent Mchel, Prime Minister Suga, and President Moon.
332 AIE. 2021. Net zero by 2050 – A roadmap for the global energy sector. Agencia Internacional de la Energía (AIE). (Disponible en https://www.iea.org/reports/net-zero-by-2050).
333 CCA. 2021. Venture Catalyst [en línea]. (Disponible en https://cleancooking.org/venture-catalyst/).
334 Wiebe, K.S., Simas, M. y Harsdorff, M. Sin fecha. Measuring the socioeconomic impacts of climate policies to guide NDC enhancement and a just transition. Nigeria Green Jobs Assessment Report. Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Desarrollo y Organización Internacional del Trabajo.
335 Renner, M. 2017. Rural renewable energy investments and their impact on employment. Strengthen Publication Series Working Paper 1. 95 p. Ginebra (Suiza), Organización Internacional del Trabajo.
336 OCDE. Sin fecha. Climate Change: OECD DAC External Development Finance Statistics – OECD [en línea]. [Consultado el 19 de enero de 2022]. (Disponible en https://www.oecd.org/dac/financing-sustainable-development/development-finance-topics/climate-change.htm).
337 Whiteman, A., Wickramasinghe, A. y Piña, L. 2015. Global trends in forest ownership, public income and expenditure on forestry and forestry employment. Forest Ecology and Management, 352: 99-108. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2015.04.011).
338 OCDE. 2020. Towards sustainable land use – Aligning biodiversity, climate and food policies. Organización para la Cooperación y el Desarrollo Económicos (OCDE). (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1787/3809b6a1-en).
339 Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Medio Ambiente. 2021. State of finance for nature – Tripling investments in nature-based solutions by 2030. Nairobi.
340 FAO, Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Desarrollo y Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Medio Ambiente. 2021. A multi-billion-dollar opportunity – Repurposing agricultural support to transform food systems. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.4060/cb6562en).
341 Vivid Economics y Finance for Biodiversity Initiative. 2021. Greenness of Stimulus Index – An assessment of COVID-19 stimulus by G20 countries and other major economies in relation to climate action and biodiversity goals. (Disponible en https://a1be08a4-d8fb-4c22-9e4a-2b2f4cb7e41d.filesusr.com/ugd/643e85_f712aba98f0b4786b54c455fc9207575.pdf).
342 Bottaro, G., Liagre, L. y Pettenella, D. 2021. How is the forest sector integrated in the National Recovery and Resilience Plans of EU countries?
343 Global Recovery Observation. Sin fecha. Global Recovery Observatory – Oxford University Economic Recovery Project [en línea]. [Consultado el 11 de noviembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://recovery.smithschool.ox.ac.uk/tracking/).
344 Group of Multilateral Development Banks. 2021. Joint report on multilateral development banks’ climate finance 2020. Londres, Banco Europeo de Reconstrucción y Desarrollo. (Disponible en https://thedocs.worldbank.org/en/doc/9234bfc633439d0172f6a6eb8df1b881-0020012021/original/2020-Joint-MDB-report-on-climate-finance-Report-final-web.pdf).
345 Group of Multilateral Development Banks. 2021. Joint report on multilateral development banks’ climate finance 2020. Londres, Banco Europeo de Reconstrucción y Desarrollo. (Disponible en https://thedocs.worldbank.org/en/doc/9234bfc633439d0172f6a6eb8df1b881-0020012021/original/2020-Joint-MDB-report-on-climate-finance-Report-final-web.pdf).
346 Swann, S., Blandford, L., Cheng, S., Cook, J., Miller, A. y Barr, R. 2021. Public international funding of nature-based solutions for adaptation – A landscape assessment. Instituto de Recursos Mundiales. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.46830/wriwp.20.00065).
347 Atteridge, A. y Tenggren, S. 2019. Finance for the adaptation of ecosystems to climate change – A review of the Adaptation Fund portfolio. 28 p. Estocolmo, Stockholm Environment Institute.
348 Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Medio Ambiente. 2021. State of finance for nature – Tripling investments in nature-based solutions by 2030. Nairobi.
349 Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Medio Ambiente. 2021. State of finance for nature – Tripling investments in nature-based solutions by 2030. Nairobi.
350 Foro Económico Mundial. 2021. Investing in forests – The business case. Ginebra (Suiza). (Disponible en https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Investing_in_Forests_2021.pdf).
351 Castrén, T., Katila, M., Lindroos, K. y Salmi, J. 2014. private financing for sustainable forest management and forest products in developing countries—Trends and drivers. Washington, D.C., Programa sobre los bosques (PROFOR).
352 Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Medio Ambiente. 2021. State of finance for nature – Tripling investments in nature-based solutions by 2030. Nairobi.
353 Indufor Oy y Criterion Africa Partners. 2017. Allocating capital for maximum impact in Africa’s plantation forestry sector. Helsinki.
354 Held, C. 2020. The impact of FLEGT VPAs on forest sector investment risk in Indonesia and Viet Nam. 24 págs. Organización Internacional de las Maderas Tropicales.
355 Forest Europe. 2020. State of Europe’s Forests 2020. Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe. (Disponible en https://foresteurope.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/SoEF_2020.pdf).
356 Forest Europe. 2020. State of Europe’s Forests 2020. Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe. (Disponible en https://foresteurope.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/SoEF_2020.pdf).
357 Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Medio Ambiente. 2021. State of finance for nature – Tripling investments in nature-based solutions by 2030. Nairobi.
358 Banco Mundial. 2020. Mobilizing private finance for nature. Washington, D.C., Banco Mundial. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1596/35984).
359 Elbein, S. 2020. A new way to profit from ancient Alaskan forests – leave them standing [en línea]. National Geographic. [Consultado el 12 de noviembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/new-way-to-profit-from-ancient-alaskan-forests-leave-them-standing).
360 Fondo Mundial para la Naturaleza. 2020. Community leaders in Central Vietnam pioneer a sustainable forestry model [en línea]. WWF Forest Solutions. [Consultado el 10 de noviembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://forestsolutions.panda.org/insights/community-leaders-in-central-vietnam-pioneer-a-sustainable-forestry-model).
361 Fondo Mundial para la Naturaleza. 2017. Vietnam – Supplying the world with garden furniture, small forest owners in Vietnam could help end deforestation [en línea]. [Consultado el 10 de noviembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://wwf.exposure.co/vietnam).
362 Nguyen Vinh Quang, To Xuan Phuc, Basik Treanor, N., Nguyen Ton Quyen y Cao Thi. 2018. Linking smallholder plantations to global markets. Washington, D.C., Forest Trends. (Disponible en https://www.forest-trends.org/publications/linking-smallholder-plantations-to-global-markets/).
363 Pham, T.T., Nguyen, D.T., Ðào Thi, L.C. y Hoàng, T.L. 2020. Preparing Vietnam for new rules on international market: Zero deforestation production and business. Centro de Investigación Forestal Internacional (CIFOR). (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.17528/cifor/007573).
364 Sadanandan Nambiar, E.K. 2021. Strengthening Vietnam’s forestry sectors and rural development: higher productivity, value, and access to fairer markets are needed to support small forest growers. Trees, Forests and People, 3: 100052. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tfp.2020.100052).
365 Organización para la Cooperación y el Desarrollo Económicos. Sin fecha. Blended Finance – OECD [en línea]. [Consultado el 28 de diciembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://www.oecd.org/dac/financing-sustainable-development/blended-finance-principles/).
366 Blended Finance Taskforce. Sin fecha. Tropical Asia Forest Fund 2 [en línea]. [Consultado el 10 de noviembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://www.blendedfinance.earth/blended-finance-funds/2020/11/16/tropical-asia-forest-fund-2).
367 Fondo Verde para el Clima. Sin fecha. FP173: The Amazon Bioeconomy Fund: Unlocking private capital by valuing bioeconomy products and services with climate mitigation and adaptation results in the Amazon | Fondo Verde para el Clima [en línea]. [Consultado el 28 de diciembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://www.greenclimate.fund/project/fp173).
368 Louman, B., Meybeck, A., Mulder, G., Brady, M., Fremy, F., Savenije, H., Gitz, V. et al. 2020. Innovative finance for sustainable landscapes. Centro de Investigación Forestal Internacional (CIFOR). (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.17528/cifor/007852).
369 Almeida, M. 2020. Green Bonds Global State of the Market 2019. Climate Bonds Initiative.
370 Comisión Europea. 2021. 250 000 millones EUR en bonos verdes NextGenerationEU [en línea]. [Consultado el 14 de noviembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/es/ip_21_4565).
371 FAO. 2019. Catalyzing private finance for inclusive and sustainable forest value chains. Report of the expert meeting. Roma. (Disponible en https://www.fao.org/forestry/48858-064440fb9719c37f1b7b2a3e957b017c1.pdf); Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Medio Ambiente. Sin fecha. Private investment for restoration: Addressing the pipeline bottleneck [en línea]. [Consultado el 28 de diciembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://www.unep.org/events/webinar/private-investment-restoration-addressing-pipeline-bottleneck).
372 Cunningham, S.A., Attwood, S.J., Bawa, K.S., Benton, T.G., Broadhurst, L.M., Didham, R.K., McIntyre, S. et al. 2013. To close the yield-gap while saving biodiversity will require multiple locally relevant strategies. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 173: 20-27. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2013.04.007).
373 Foley, J.A., Ramankutty, N., Brauman, K.A., Cassidy, E.S., Gerber, J.S., Johnston, M., Mueller, N.D. et al. 2011. Solutions for a cultivated planet. Nature, 478(7369): 337-342. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1038/nature10452).
374 Angelsen, A., Kaimowitz, D. y Centro de Investigación Forestal Internacional, eds. 2001. Agricultural technologies and tropical deforestation. Nueva York, CABI Pub, en asociación con el Centro de Investigación Forestal Internacional. 422 págs.
375 Banco Mundial. 2017. Harnessing the potential of productive forests and timber supply chains for climate change mitigation and green growth. Washington, D.C. (Disponible en https://www.climateinvestmentfunds.org/sites/default/files/knowledge-documents/productive_forests_pub_4-3-17web.pdf).
376 Nambiar, E.K.S. 2019. Tamm Review: re-imagining forestry and wood business: pathways to rural development, poverty alleviation and climate change mitigation in the tropics. Forest Ecology and Management, 448: 160-173. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2019.06.014).
377 FAO, Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Desarrollo y Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Medio Ambiente. 2021. A multi-billion-dollar opportunity – Repurposing agricultural support to transform food systems. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.4060/cb6562en).
378 FAO, Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Desarrollo y Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Medio Ambiente. 2021. A multi-billion-dollar opportunity – Repurposing agricultural support to transform food systems. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.4060/cb6562en).
379 Whiteman, A., Wickramasinghe, A. y Piña, L. 2015. Global trends in forest ownership, public income and expenditure on forestry and forestry employment. Forest Ecology and Management, 352: 99-108. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2015.04.011).
380 Banco Mundial. 2021. The Changing Wealth of Nations 2021 – Managing assets for the future. Washington, D.C.
381 FAO, UN Development Programme & UN Environment Programme. 2021. A multi-billion-dollar opportunity – Repurposing agricultural support to transform food systems. https://doi.org/10.4060/cb6562en
382 Buttoud, G. 2012. From PES to REDD: making policy tools and economic mechanisms interact for a better forest governance. Forest Policy and Economics, 18: 1-3. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2012.03.001).
383 Karsenty, A. 2021. Fiscal and non-fiscal incentives for sustainable forest management –Synthesis of the lessons derived from case studies in Brazil, Cambodia, the Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Myanmar, Peru, Thailand and Viet Nam. ITTO Technical Series 48. Yokohama (Japón), Organización Internacional de las Maderas Tropicales.
384 Busch, J., Ring, I., Akullo, M., Amarjargal, O., Borie, M., Cassola, R.S., Cruz-Trinidad, A. et al. 2021. A global review of ecological fiscal transfers. Nature Sustainability, 4(9): 756-765. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-021-00728-0).
385 Rao, M., Bast, A. y de Boer, A. 2021. European private food safety standards in global agri-food supply chains: a systematic review. International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, 24(5): 739-754. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.22434/IFAMR2020.0146).
386 Fernandez de Cordoba, S., ed. 2018. Voluntary sustainability standards, trade and sustainable development. UN Forum on Sustainability Standards. (Disponible en https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/unfss_3rd_2018_en.pdf).
387 Ver, por ejemplo: Cerutti, P.O., Goetghebuer, T., Leszczynska, N., Newbery, J., Breyne, J., Dermawan, A., Mauquoy, C. et al. 2020. Collecting evidence of FLEGT-VPA impacts for improved FLEGT communication. 79 p. Bogor (Indonesia), Centro de Investigación Forestal Internacional (CIFOR).
388 Dieterle, G. y Karsenty, A. 2020. ‘Wood security’: the importance of incentives and economic valorisation in conserving and expanding forests. International Forestry Review, 22(1): 81-92. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1505/146554820829523916).
389 Pendrill, F., Persson, U.M., Godar, J., Kastner, T., Moran, D., Schmidt, S. y Wood, R. 2019. Agricultural and forestry trade drives large share of tropical deforestation emissions. Global Environmental Change, 56: 1-10. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2019.03.002).
390 Hoang, N.T. y Kanemoto, K. 2021. Mapping the deforestation footprint of nations reveals growing threat to tropical forests. Nature Ecology & Evolution, 5(6): 845-853. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-021-01417-z).
391 Texto del acuerdo: anónimo. Sin fecha. Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement between the Republic of Indonesia and the EFTA states [en línea]. [Consultado el 10 de noviembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://www.efta.int/sites/default/files/documents/legal-texts/free-trade-relations/indonesia/efta-indonesia-main-agreement.pdf).
392 Confederación Suiza. 2021. Huile de palme durable d’Indonésie: le Conseil fédéral approuve l’ordonnance [en línea]. [Consultado el 10 de noviembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://www.admin.ch/gov/fr/accueil/documentation/communiques.msg-id-84740.html).
393 Marchi, V.D., Maria, E.D. y Micelli, S. 2013. Environmental strategies, upgrading and competitive advantage in global value chains: environmental strategies, upgrading and competitive advantage in GVC. Business Strategy and the Environment, 22(1): 62-72. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.1738
394 Network for Greening the Finance Sector. 2021. NGFS and INSPIRE launch a joint research project on ‘Biodiversity and Financial Stability’ | Banco de Francia [en línea]. [Consultado el 14 de noviembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://www.ngfs.net/en/communique-de-presse/ngfs-and-inspire-launch-joint-research-project-biodiversity-and-financial-stability).
395 Taskforce on Nature-Related Financial Disclosures. Sin fecha. About – TNFD [en línea]. [Consultado el 1 de enero de 2022]. (Disponible en https://tnfd.global/about/).
396 Organización de Aviación Civil Internacional. Sin fecha. Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA) [en línea]. [Consultado el 10 de noviembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://www.icao.int/environmental-protection/CORSIA/Pages/default.aspx).
397 Lowering Emissions by Accelerating Forest finance (LEAF) Coalition. Sin fecha. The LEAF Coalition [en línea]. [Consultado el 10 de noviembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://leafcoalition.org/).
398 Ecosystem Marketplace. Sin fecha. Global carbon hub for data and insights on carbon markets and voluntary offsets – Ecosystem Marketplace [en línea]. [Consultado el 10 de noviembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://www.ecosystemmarketplace.com/carbon-markets/).
399 Ecosystem Marketplace. Sin fecha. Global Carbon Hub for Data and Insights on Carbon Markets and Voluntary Offsets - Ecosystem Marketplace [en línea]. [Consultado el 10 de noviembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://www.ecosystemmarketplace.com/carbon-markets/).
400 Banco Mundial. 2017. Harnessing the potential of productive forests and timber supply chains for climate change mitigation and green growth. Washington, DC. (Disponible en https://www.climateinvestmentfunds.org/sites/default/files/knowledge-documents/productive_forests_pub_4-3-17web.pdf).
401 Fondo Verde para el Clima. Sin fecha. Portfolio dashboard | Fondo Verde para el Clima [en línea]. [Consultado el 28 de diciembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://www.greenclimate.fund/projects/dashboard).
402 Nesha, M.K., Herold, M., De Sy, V., Duchelle, A.E., Martius, C., Branthomme, A., Garzuglia, M. et al. 2021. An assessment of data sources, data quality and changes in national forest monitoring capacities in the Global Forest Resources Assessment 2005-2020. Environmental Research Letters, 16(5): 054029. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/abd81b00).
403 Nesha, M.K., Herold, M., De Sy, V., Duchelle, A.E., Martius, C., Branthomme, A., Garzuglia, M. et al. 2021. An assessment of data sources, data quality and changes in national forest monitoring capacities in the Global Forest Resources Assessment 2005–2020. Environmental Research Letters, 16(5): 054029. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/abd81b).
404 Nesha, M.K., Herold, M., De Sy, V., Duchelle, A.E., Martius, C., Branthomme, A., Garzuglia, M. et al. 2021. An assessment of data sources, data quality and changes in national forest monitoring capacities in the Global Forest Resources Assessment 2005-2020. Environmental Research Letters, 16(5): 054029. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/abd81b).
405 Chagas, T., Galt, H., Lee, D., Neeff, T. y Streck, C. 2020. A close look at the quality of REDD+ carbon credits. (Disponible en https://www.climatefocus.com/publications/close-look-quality-redd-carbon-credits).
406 Macqueen, D., Benni, N., Boscolo, M. y Zapata, J. 2018. Access to finance for forest and farm producer organisations (FFPOs). Roma, FAO y Londres, Instituto Internacional de Medio Ambiente y Desarrollo.
407 FAO. 2019. Catalyzing private finance for inclusive and sustainable forest value chains – Report of the expert meeting [en línea]. [Consultado el 26 de noviembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://www.fao.org/forestry/48858-064440fb9719c37f1b7b2a3e957b017c1.pdf).
408 Lowder, S.K., Sánchez, M.V. y Bertini, R. 2021. Which farms feed the world and has farmland become more concentrated? World Development, 142: 105455. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2021.105455).
409 Chiriac, D. y Naran, B. 2020. Examining the climate finance gap for small-scale agriculture. Iniciativa de Política Climática. (Disponible en https://www.climatepolicyinitiative.org/publication/climate-finance-small-scale-agriculture/).
410 Rainforest Foundation Norway. 2021. Falling short – Donor funding for Indigenous Peoples and local communities to secure tenure rights and manage forests in tropical countries (2011-2020). Oslo, Rainforest Foundation Norway. (Disponible en https://www.cwis.org/document/falling-short-donor-funding-for-indigenous-peoples-and-local-communities-to-secure-tenure-rights-and-manage-forests-in-tropical-countries-2011-2020/).
411 Anónimo. 2021. Governments and private funders announce historic US$1.7 billion pledge at COP26 in support of Indigenous Peoples and local communities / Ford Foundation. In: Fundación Ford [en línea]. [Consultado el 2 de febrero de 2022]. (Disponible en https://www.fordfoundation.org/news-and-stories/news-and-press/news/governments-and-private-funders-announce-historic-us-17-billion-pledge-at-cop26-in-support-of-indigenous-peoples-and-local-communities/).
412 Starfinger, M. 2021. Financing smallholder tree planting: tree collateral & Thai ‘Tree Banks’ – Collateral 2.0? Land Use Policy, 111: 105765. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105765).
413 Nugroho, B., Soedomo, S. y Dermawan, A. 2017. Policy effectiveness of loan for delaying timber harvesting for smallholder private forest in Indonesia. Jurnal Manajemen Hutan Tropika (Journal of Tropical Forest Management), 23(2): 61-70. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.7226/jtfm.23.2.61).
414 RECOFTC. 2015. Access to information for securing resource and tenure rights Houaythong Village, Lao PDR. First edition. Equity Case Study Brief. RECOFTC.
415 Parthiban, K.T., Seenivasan, R., Vennila, S., Anbu, P.V., Kumar, P., Saravanan, V., Umesh Kanna, S. et al. 2011. Designing and augmenting pulpwood supply chain through contract tree farming. Indian Journal of Ecology, 38(Special issue): 41-47.
416 Byakagaba, P., Okullo, J.B.L., Eilu, G. y Mwavu, E.N. 2021. The role of fallowing in the restoration of woody species in the woodlands of northern Uganda. African Journal of Ecology, aje.12895. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1111/aje.12895).
417 Lawrence, D. y Louman, B. 2021. Finance for integrated landscape management – A landscape approach to climate-smart cocoa in the Juabeso-Bia Landscape, Ghana. Tropenbos Ghana y Tropenbos International. (Disponible en https://www.tropenbos.org/file.php/2462/finance-integrated-landscape-mangement-touton-ghana.pdf).
418 Durbin, J., King, D., Calderwood, N., Wells, Z. y Godoy, F. 2019. Benefit sharing at scale – Good practices for results-based land use programs. Washington, D.C, Banco Mundial. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1596/32765).
419 Bertzky, M., Canosa, O., Koch, A. y Llopis, P. 2021. Assessment report – Comparative analysis of benefit-sharing mechanisms in REDD+ programs. Fondo Mundial para la Naturaleza. (Disponible en https://wwfint.awsassets.panda.org/downloads/wwf_assessment_report_redd__programs_v4.pdf).
420 Lowder, S.K., Sánchez, M.V. y Bertini, R. 2021. Which farms feed the world and has farmland become more concentrated? World Development, 142: 105455. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2021.105455).
421 Fondo Mundial para la Naturaleza, Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Medio Ambiente, Centro Mundial de Vigilancia de la Conservación, GEF Small Grants Programme, ICCA-Global Support Initiative, LandMark Global Platform of Indigenous and Community Lands, The Nature Conservancy, Conservación Internacional, Sociedad para la Conservación de la Vida Silvestre et al. 2021. The state of the Indigenous Peoples and local communities lands and territories. Gland (Suiza). (Disponible en https://wwflac.awsassets.panda.org/downloads/report_the_state_of_the_indigenous_peoples_and_local_communities_lands_and_territories_1.pdf).
422 Verdone, M. 2018. The world’s largest private sector? Recognising the cumulative economic value of small-scale forest and farm producers. Unión Internacional para la Conservación de la Naturaleza.
423 PROFOR. 2019. Unlocking the potential of small and medium forest enterprises [en línea]. [Consultado el 10 de noviembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://www.profor.info/knowledge/unlocking-potential-small-and-medium-forest-enterprises).
424 Mayers, J. 2006. Small and medium-sized forestry enterprises. Tropical Forest Update, 16(2): 10-11.
425 Garnett, S.T., Burgess, N.D., Fa, J.E., Fernández-Llamazares, Á., Molnár, Z., Robinson, C.J., Watson, J.E.M. et al. 2018. A spatial overview of the global importance of Indigenous lands for conservation. Nature Sustainability, 1(7): 369-374. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-018-0100-6).
426 Kruid, S., Macedo, M.N., Gorelik, S.R., Walker, W., Moutinho, P., Brando, P.M., Castanho, A. et al. 2021. Beyond deforestation: carbon emissions from land grabbing and forest degradation in the Brazilian Amazon. Frontiers in Forests and Global Change, 4: 645282. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.3389/ffgc.2021.645282).
427 Alejo, C., Meyer, C., Walker, W.S., Gorelik, S.R., Josse, C., Aragon-Osejo, J.L., Rios, S. et al. 2021. Are indigenous territories effective natural climate solutions? A neotropical analysis using matching methods and geographic discontinuity designs. PLOS ONE, 16(7): e0245110. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0245110).
428 Walker, W.S., Gorelik, S.R., Baccini, A., Aragon-Osejo, J.L., Josse, C., Meyer, C., Macedo, M.N. et al. 2020. The role of forest conversion, degradation, and disturbance in the carbon dynamics of Amazon indigenous territories and protected areas. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(6): 3015-3025. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1913321117).
429 Blackman, A. y Veit, P. 2018. Titled Amazon indigenous communities cut forest carbon emissions. Ecological Economics, 153: 56-67. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.06.016).
430 FAO y FILAC. 2021. Los pueblos indígenas y tribales y la gobernanza de los bosques. Una oportunidad para la acción climática en Latina América y el Caribe. FAO. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.4060/cb2953es).
431 Baragwanath, K. y Bayi, E. 2020. Collective property rights reduce deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(34): 20495-20502. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1917874117).
432 Blackman, A. y Veit, P. 2018. Titled Amazon indigenous communities cut forest carbon emissions. Ecological Economics, 153: 56-67. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.06.016).
433 Ding, H., Veit, P., Gray, E., Reytar, K., Altamirano-Cabrera, J.-C., Blackman, A. y Hodgdon, B. 2016. Climate benefits, tenure costs – The economic case for securing indigenous land rights in the Amazon.
434 FAO y FILAC. 2021. Los pueblos indígenas y tribales y la gobernanza de los bosques - Una oportunidad para la acción climática en Latina América y el Caribe. FAO. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.4060/cb2953es).
435 Tauli-Corpuz, V., Alcorn, J., Molnar, A., Healy, C. y Barrow, E. 2020. Cornered by PAs: adopting rights-based approaches to enable cost-effective conservation and climate action. World Development, 130: 104923. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2020.104923).
436 Ding, H., Veit, P., Gray, E., Reytar, K., Altamirano-Cabrera, J.-C., Blackman, A. y Hodgdon, B. 2016. Climate benefits, tenure costs – The economic case for securing indigenous land rights in the Amazon.
437 Fondo Mundial para la Naturaleza, Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Medio Ambiente, World Conservation Monitoring Centre, GEF Small Grants Programme, ICCA-Global Support Initiative, LandMark Global Platform of Indigenous and Community Lands, The Nature Conservancy, Conservación Internacional, Sociedad para la Conservación de la Vida Silvestre et al. 2021. The state of the indigenous peoples and local communities’ lands and territories – A technical review of the state of Indigenous Peoples’ and Local Communities’ lands, their contributions to global biodiversity conservation and ecosystem services, the pressures they face, and recommendations for actions. Gland (Suiza). (Disponible en https://wwflac.awsassets.panda.org/downloads/report_the_state_of_the_indigenous_peoples_and_local_communities_lands_and_territories_1.pdf).
438 Iniciativa de Derechos y Recursos, Woodwell Climate Research Center y Rainforest Foundation US. 2021. Significance of community-held territories in 24 countries to global climate. Policy brief. Iniciativa de Derechos y Recursos. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.53892/YBGF2711).
439 Dawson, N.M., Coolsaet, B., Sterling, E.J., Loveridge, R., Gross-Camp, N.D., Wongbusarakum, S., Sangha, K.K. et al. 2021. The role of Indigenous peoples and local communities in effective and equitable conservation. Ecology and Society, 26(3): art19. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-12625-260319).
440 Aggarwal, S., Larson, A., McDermott, C., Katila, P. y Giessen, L. 2021. Tenure reform for better forestry: an unfinished policy agenda. Forest Policy and Economics, 123: 102376. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2020.102376).
441 Gilmour, D.A. 2016. Cuarenta años de forestería comunitaria. Un estudio sobre su alcance y eficacia. Estudio FAO: Montes 176. Roma, FAO. (Disponible en https://www.fao.org/3/i5415s/i5415s.pdf).
442 Baynes, J., Herbohn, J., Smith, C., Fisher, R. y Bray, D. 2015. Key factors which influence the success of community forestry in developing countries. Global Environmental Change, 35: 226-238. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.09.011).
443 FAO e ICRAF. 2019. Agroforestry and tenure. Forestry Working Paper 8. Roma, FAO. 40 págs.
444 Kraus, S., Liu, J., Koch, N. y Fuss, S. 2021. No aggregate deforestation reductions from rollout of community land titles in Indonesia yet. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(43): e2100741118. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2100741118).
445 Hajjar, R., Newton, P., Ihalainen, M., Agrawal, A. y Gabay, M. 2020. Levers for alleviating poverty in forests and tree-based systems. Forests, trees and the eradication of poverty – Potential and limitations, págs. 125-176. IUFRO World Series 39. Unión Internacional de Organizaciones de Investigación Forestal.
446 Miller, D.C., Rana, P., Nakamura, K., Irwin, S., Cheng, S.H., Ahlroth, S. y Perge, E. 2021. A global review of the impact of forest property rights interventions on poverty. Global Environmental Change, 66: 102218. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2020.102218).
447 Hajjar, R., Newton, P., Ihalainen, M., Agrawal, A. y Gabay, M. 2020. Levers for alleviating poverty in forests and tree-based systems. Forests, trees and the eradication of poverty – Potential and limitations, págs. 125–176. IUFRO World Series 39. Unión Internacional de Organizaciones de Investigación Forestal.
448 Barrow, E., Kamugisha-Ruhombe, J., Nhantumbo, I., Oyono, R. y Savadogo, M. 2016. Who owns Africa’s forests? Exploring the impacts of forest tenure reform on forest ecosystems and livelihoods. Forests, Trees and Livelihoods, 25(2): 132-156. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1080/14728028.2016.1159999).
449 De Royer, S., Van Noordwijk, M. y Roshetko, J.M. 2018. Does community-based forest management in Indonesia devolve social justice or social costs? International Forestry Review, 20(2): 167-180. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1505/146554818823767609).
450 Namubiru-Mwaura, E. 2014. Land tenure and gender – Approaches and challenges for strengthening rural women’s land rights. 36 págs. Women’s Voice, Agency, & Participation Research Series 6. Washington, D.C, Banco Mundial.
451 Elias, M., Hummel, S.S., Basnett, B.S. y Colfer, C.J.P. 2017. Gender bias affects forests worldwide. Ethnobiology Letters, 8(1). (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.14237/ebl.8.1.2017.834).
452 Hajjar, R., Newton, P., Ihalainen, M., Agrawal, A. y Gabay, M. 2020. Levers for alleviating poverty in forests and tree-based systems. Forests, trees and the eradication of poverty – Potential and limitations, págs. 125-176. IUFRO World Series 39. Unión Internacional de Organizaciones de Investigación Forestal.
453 Blomley, T. 2013. Lessons learned from community forestry in Africa and their relevance for REDD+. Washington, D.C, USAID-supported Forest Carbon, Markets and Communities Program. (Disponible en https://www.climatelinks.org/sites/default/files/asset/document/CF_Africa.pdf).
454 FAO y Fondo para el Desarrollo de los Pueblos Indígenas de América Latina y el Caribe. 2021. Los pueblos indígenas y tribales y la gobernanza de los bosques. Una oportunidad para la acción climática en América Latina y el Caribe. FAO. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.4060/cb2953es).
455 Gilmour, D.A. 2016. Cuarenta años de forestería comunitaria. Un estudio sobre su alcance y eficacia. Estudio FAO: Montes 176. Roma, FAO. (Disponible en https://www.fao.org/3/i5415s/i5415s.pdf).
456 FAO, ed. 2012. Voluntary guidelines on the responsible governance of tenure of land, fisheries and forests in the context of national food security. Roma. 40 págs.
457 Alden Wily, L. 2018. Collective land ownership in the 21st century: overview of global trends. Land, 7(2): 68. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.3390/land7020068).
458 Alden Wily, L. 2018. Collective land ownership in the 21st century: overview of global trends. Land, 7(2): 68. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.3390/land7020068).
459 Gobierno de la India, Ministerio de Asuntos Tribales. 2021. Monthly update on status of implementation of the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dweller (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006. Delhi. (Disponible en https://tribal.nic.in/FRA/data/MPRJan2020.pdf).
460 Freudenberger, M.S. 2013. The future of customary tenure – Options for policymakers. USAID Issue Brief. USAID. (Disponible en https://www.land-links.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/USAID_Land_Tenure_Customary_Tenure_Brief_0-1.pdf).
461 Fitzpatrick, D. 2005. ‘Best practice’ options for the legal recognition of customary tenure. Development and Change, 36(3): 449-475. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0012-155X.2005.00419.x).
462 Gobierno de la India. 2007. The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006. [Consultado el 29 de noviembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://www.fra.org.in/document/FRA%20ACT-Eng.pdf).
463 Blackman, A., Corral, L., Lima, E.S. y Asner, G.P. 2017. Titling indigenous communities protects forests in the Peruvian Amazon. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(16): 4123-4128. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1603290114).
464 FAO. Sin fecha. Governance of tenure – SOLA Suite [en línea]. [Consultado el 10 de noviembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://www.fao.org/tenure/sola-suite/en).
465 Bouvier, I., Brooks, S., Green, J., Lowery, S. y Stevens, C. 2019. Using participatory approaches and innovative technology to empower communities in securing their land. Documento presentado en la Conferencia Anual del Banco Mundial sobre Tierra y Pobreza, 25 de marzo de 2019, Washington, D.C. (Disponible en https://www.land-links.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/using-participatory-approaches-and-innovative-technology-to-empower-communities-in-securing-their-land.pdf).
466 Gilmour, D.A. 2016. Forty years of community-based forestry – A review of its extent and effectiveness. FAO Forestry Paper 176. Roma, FAO. (Disponible en https://bit.ly/3B1F5lH).
467 Aggarwal, S., Larson, A., McDermott, C., Katila, P. y Giessen, L. 2021. Tenure reform for better forestry: an unfinished policy agenda. Forest Policy and Economics, 123: 102376. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2020.102376).
468 Aggarwal, S., Larson, A., McDermott, C., Katila, P. y Giessen, L. 2021. Tenure reform for better forestry: an unfinished policy agenda. Forest Policy and Economics, 123: 102376. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2020.102376).
469 Nhantumbo, I., Macqueen, D., Cruz, R. y Serra, A. 2013. Investing in locally controlled forestry in Mozambique – Potential for promoting sustainable rural development in the province of Niassa. Londres, Instituto Internacional de Medio Ambiente y Desarrollo. 92 págs. (Disponible en https://pubs.iied.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/migrate/13569IIED.pdf).
470 Sonko, K.N. y Camara, K. 2000. Community forestry implementation in the Gambia: its principles and prospects. Proceedings of the International Workshop on Community Forestry in Africa. Participatory Forest Management: A Strategy for Sustainable Forest Management in Africa. (Disponible en https://www.fao.org/3/X7760B/X7760B00.htm).
471 Lawry, S., McLain, R., Swallow, B. y Biedenweg, K. 2012. Devolution of forest rights and sustainable forest management. Volume 1 – A review of policies and programs in 16 developing countries. USAID. (Disponible en https://www.land-links.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/USAID_Land_Tenure_Devolution_of_Forest_Rights_and_Sustainable_Forest_Management_Volume_1.pdf).
472 McFarland, W., Whitley, S. y Kissinger, G. 2015. Subsidies to key commodities driving forest loss. 51 págs. ODI Working Paper. Instituto de Desarrollo de Ultramar.
473 Tetra Tech. 2017. Promoting trees outside forests – Action-learning pilot program in Hoshangabad landscape. USAID. 29 págs.
474 McLain, R., Lawry, S., Guariguata, M.R. y Reed, J. 2021. Toward a tenure-responsive approach to forest landscape restoration: a proposed tenure diagnostic for assessing restoration opportunities. Land Use Policy, 104: 103748. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.11.053).
475 FAO e ICRAF. 2019. Agroforestry and tenure. Forestry Working Paper 8. Roma. 40 págs.
476 Comisión Económica de las Naciones Unidas para Europa y FAO. 2019. Who owns our forests? Forest ownership in the ECE region. Ginebra (Suiza). (Disponible en http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/timber/publications/SP-43.pdf).
477 Koffi, G. y Worms, P. 2021. Niger formally adopts farmer-managed natural regeneration [en línea]. ICRAF. [Consultado el 20 de octubre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://bit.ly/3nfHRix).
478 ONU. Sin fecha. Farmer Managed Natural Regeneration (FMNR): a technique to effectively combat poverty and hunger through land and vegetation restoration. En: United Nations Partnerships for SDGs platform [en línea]. [Consultado el 16 de diciembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/partnership/?p=30735).
479 Stickler, M. 2012. Rights to trees and livelihoods in Niger – Focus on land in Africa. World Resource Institute and Landesa.
480 Crouzeilles, R., Ferreira, M.S., Chazdon, R.L., Lindenmayer, D.B., Sansevero, J.B.B., Monteiro, L., Iribarrem, A. et al. 2017. Ecological restoration success is higher for natural regeneration than for active restoration in tropical forests. Science Advances, 3(11): e1701345. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1701345).
481 FAO. 2021. Society, economy and forests – The unfolding forest transition in China and the lessons for the future. Bangkok. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.4060/cb3232en).
482 Wang, L. 2012. Success cases and good practices in forest farmer cooperative organizations in China. Roma (Italia), FAO. 32 págs. (Disponible en https://www.fao.org/publications/card/en/c/ff2dfab2-03dc-56b9-b5e4-fabdb28cb467/).
483 FAO. 2020. Producción y consumo de los productos forestales [en línea]. [Consultado el 13 de noviembre de 2021]. Disponible en https://www.fao.org/forestry/statistics/80938@180723/es/).
484 He, J., Kebede, B., Martin, A. y Gross-Camp, N. 2020. Privatization or communalization: a multi-level analysis of changes in forest property regimes in China. Ecological Economics, 174: 106629. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2020.106629).
485 Midgley, S.J., Stevens, P.R. y Arnold, R.J. 2017. Hidden assets: Asia’s smallholder wood resources and their contribution to supply chains of commercial wood. Australian Forestry, 80(1): 10-25. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1080/00049158.2017.1280750).
486 Hoang, H.T.N., Hoshino, S., Onitsuka, K. y Maraseni, T. 2019. Cost analysis of FSC forest certification and opportunities to cover the costs a case study of Quang Tri FSC group in Central Vietnam. Journal of Forest Research, 24(3): 137-142. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1080/13416979.2019.1610993).
487 Nambiar, E.K.S. 2021. Strengthening Vietnam’s forestry sectors and rural development: higher productivity, value, and access to fairer markets are needed to support small forest growers. Trees, Forests and People, 3: 100052. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tfp.2020.100052).
488 Pretty, J., Attwood, S., Bawden, R., van den Berg, H., Bharucha, Z.P., Dixon, J., Flora, C.B. et al. 2020. Assessment of the growth in social groups for sustainable agriculture and land management. Global Sustainability, 3: e23. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1017/sus.2020.19).
489 Pretty, J., Attwood, S., Bawden, R., van den Berg, H., Bharucha, Z.P., Dixon, J., Flora, C.B. et al. 2020. Assessment of the growth in social groups for sustainable agriculture and land management. Global Sustainability, 3: e23. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1017/sus.2020.19).
490 Fisher, M.R., Moeliono, M., Mulyana, A., Yuliani, E.L., Adriadi, A., Kamaluddin, Judda, J. et al. 2018. Assessing the new social forestry project in Indonesia: recognition, livelihood and conservation? International Forestry Review, 20(3): 346-361. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1505/146554818824063014).
491 Segura Warnholtz, G., Fernández, M., Smyle, J. y Springer, J. 2017. Securing forest tenure rights for rural development – Lessons from six countries in Latin America. Washington, D.C, Program on Forests. (Disponible en http://hdl.handle.net/10986/26301).
492 Paudel, N.S., Monterroso, I. y Cronkleton, P. 2012. Secondary level organisations and the democratisation of forest governance: case studies from Nepal and Guatemala. Conservation & Society, 10(2): 124-135. (Disponible en https://www.conservationandsociety.org.in/articlecited.asp?issn=0972-4923;year=2012;volume=10;issue=2;spage=124;epage=135;aulast=Paudel;type=3;aid=ConservatSoc_2012_10_2_124_97485).
493 FAO. 2016. Reducing rural poverty through farmer-to-farmer exchange. Roma. 4 págs. (Disponible en https://www.fao.org/publications/card/en/c/66915227-169e-42cb-8b1a-32045c6f1f8c/).
494 Nightingale, A.J. 2018. The socioenvironmental state: political authority, subjects, and transformative socionatural change in an uncertain world. Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space, 1(4): 688-711. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1177/2514848618816467).
495 Covey, J., Macqueen, D., Bolin, A. y Hou Jones, X. 2021. Co-producing knowledge: a demand-led, prosperity-focused, research agenda with forest and farm producer organisations. Environmental Science & Policy, 124: 336-347. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2021.07.006).
496 Stickler, C., Duchelle, A., Ardila, J.P., David, O., Chan, C., Rojas, J.G., Bezerra, T. et al. 2018. The state of jurisdictional sustainability – Synthesis for practitioners and policymakers. San Francisco (Estados Unidos), Earth Innovation Institute, Centro de Investigación Forestal Internacional y Governor’s Climate and Forests Task Force Secretariat. 20 págs. (Disponible en https://earthinnovation.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Stickler_et_al_2018_StateJS_Synthesis_small.pdf).
497 Stickler, C., Duchelle, A., Ardila, J.P., David, O., Chan, C., Rojas, J.G., Bezerra, T. et al. 2018. The state of jurisdictional sustainability – Synthesis for practitioners and policymakers. San Francisco (Estados Unidos), Earth Innovation Institute, Centro de Investigación Forestal Internacional y Governor’s Climate and Forests Task Force Secretariat. 20 págs. (Disponible en https://earthinnovation.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Stickler_et_al_2018_StateJS_Synthesis_small.pdf).
498 IDH. 2015. Mato Grosso set to achieve inclusive green growth [en línea]. [Consultado el 1 de enero de 2022]. (Disponible en https://www.idhsustainabletrade.com/news/mato-grosso-set-achieve-inclusive-green-growth/).
499 Alianza para los bosques tropicales. 2021. Jurisdictional approach to sustainability – Lessons learnt from private sector action in Aceh Tamiang (Indonesia). (Disponible en https://www.tropicalforestalliance.org/assets/Uploads/AcehTamiang_Case_study-July2021-Final.pdf).
500 National Forestry and Grassland Administration. 2020. Twenty years’ restoration of forests and grasslands from farmland in China.
501 Xie, C. 2017. Links between social protection and forestry policies – Lessons from China. Social Protection and Forestry Working Paper 4. FAO. 44 págs.
502 d’Andrea, M., Ma, Q., Ocampo, A. y Omar, B. Sin fecha. Expanding social protection in rural areas, focusing on fisheries and forestry. Policy in Focus, 17(2): 34-37. (Disponible en https://ipcig.org/pub/eng/PIF45_Universal_social_protection_a_target_for_all.pdf).
503 National Forestry and Grassland Administration. 2019. A report for monitoring and assessment of the socio-economic impacts of China’s key forestry programs. Beijing, China Forestry Publishing House.
504 National Forestry and Grassland Administration. 2020. China forestry and grassland development report. Beijing, China Forestry Publishing House.
505 Dodds, R., Ali, A. y Galaski, K. 2018. Mobilizing knowledge: determining key elements for success and pitfalls in developing community-based tourism. Current Issues in Tourism, 21(13): 1547-1568. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2016.1150257).
506 Asare-Nuamah, P., Botchway, E. y Onumah, J.A. 2019. Helping the helpless: contribution of rural extension services to smallholder farmers’ climate change adaptive capacity and adaptation in rural Ghana. International Journal of Rural Management, 15(2): 244-268. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1177/0973005219876211).
507 Hunt, W., Birch, C., Coutts, J. y Vanclay, F. 2012. The many turnings of agricultural extension in Australia. The Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension, 18(1): 9-26. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1080/1389224X.2012.638780).
508 Yusuf, A.S, Adeyemi, T.O, Adeleye, A.S, Bakpolor, V.R, Adegboyega, D.A y Adetola, O.O. 2020. Impacts of agriculture and forestry in the control of climate change: the role of extension services. International Journal on Integrated Education, 3(10): 71-75. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.31149/ijie.v3i10.681).
509 Czapiewski, K. y Janc, K. 2019. Education, human capital and knowledge – the paradigm shift and future scenarios on Polish rural areas. En: J. Bański, ed. Three decades of transformation in the East-Central European countryside, págs. 351-367. Cham (Suiza), Springer International Publishing. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21237-7_16).
510 Kanwar, A., Balasubramanian, K. y Carr, A. 2019. Changing the TVET paradigm: new models for lifelong learning. International Journal of Training Research, 17(sup1): 54-68. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1080/14480220.2019.1629722).
511 Covey, J., Macqueen, D., Bolin, A. y Hou Jones, X. 2021. Co-producing knowledge: a demand-led, prosperity-focused, research agenda with forest and farm producer organisations. Environmental Science & Policy, 124: 336-347. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2021.07.006).
512 FAO. 2019. Farmers taking the lead – Thirty years of farmer field schools. Roma. 72 págs. (Disponible en https://www.fao.org/publications/card/en/c/CA5131EN/).
513 Sherwood, S., Schut, M. y Leeuwis, C. 2012. Learning in the social wild: encounters between farmer field schools and agricultural science and development in Ecuador. En: Adaptive collaborative approaches in natural resources governance – Rethinking participation, learning and innovation, págs. 102-137. Londres, Routledge.
514 Humphries, S., Holmes, T.P., Kainer, K., Koury, C.G.G., Cruz, E. y de Miranda Rocha, R. 2012. Are community-based forest enterprises in the tropics financially viable? Case studies from the Brazilian Amazon. Ecological Economics, 77: 62-73. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.10.018).
515 Wulandari, C. y Inoue, M. 2018. The importance of social learning for the development of community based forest management in Indonesia: the case of community forestry in Lampung Province. Small-scale Forestry, 17(3): 361-376. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1007/s11842-018-9392-7).
516 FAO. 2019. Los agricultores toman el mando | FAO Stories | Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la Alimentación y la Agricultura [en línea]. [Consultado el 12 de enero de 2022]. (Disponible en https://www.fao.org/fao-stories/article/es/c/1199157/).
517 FAO. Sin fecha. Empresariado y Escuelas de campo para agricultores | Plataforma Global de las Escuelas de Campo de Agricultores | Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la Alimentación y la Agricultura [en línea]. [Consultado el 8 de diciembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://www.fao.org/farmer-field-schools/ffs-overview/comercio/es/).
518 Rezaeinejad, I. 2021. Impact online marketing strategies on improving the status of businesses in the COVID-19 Situation in Iran. Asian Basic and Applied Research Journal, 4(2): 24-33. (Disponible en https://globalpresshub.com/index.php/ABAARJ/article/view/1281).
519 Piabuo, S.M., Tsafac, S., Minang, P.A., Foundjem-Tita, D., Guimke, G. y Duguma, L. Sin fecha. Effect of COVID-19 on rural community enterprises – Case of community forest enterprises in Cameroon. Nairobi, Centro Mundial de Agrosilvicultura – ICRAF.
520 Tengö, M., Hill, R., Malmer, P., Raymond, C.M., Spierenburg, M., Danielsen, F., Elmqvist, T. et al. 2017. Weaving knowledge systems in IPBES, CBD and beyond: lessons learned for sustainability. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 26-27: 17-25. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2016.12.005).
521 FAO. 2021. Indigenous Peoples’ food systems. FAO, Alianza de Bioversity International y CIAT. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.4060/cb5131en).
522 Edwards, A., Archer, R., De Bruyn, P., Evans, J., Lewis, B., Vigilante, T., Whyte, S. et al. 2021. Transforming fire management in northern Australia through successful implementation of savanna burning emissions reductions projects. Journal of Environmental Management, 290: 112568. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112568).
523 Russell-Smith, J., Yates, C.P., Edwards, A.C., Whitehead, P.J., Murphy, B.P. y Lawes, M.J. 2015. Deriving multiple benefits from carbon market-based savanna fire management: an Australian example. PLOS ONE, 10(12): e0143426. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0143426).
524 Edwards, A., Archer, R., De Bruyn, P., Evans, J., Lewis, B., Vigilante, T., Whyte, S. et al. 2021. Transforming fire management in northern Australia through successful implementation of savanna burning emissions reductions projects. Journal of Environmental Management, 290: 112568. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112568).
525 Russell-Smith, J., Yates, C., Vernooij, R., Eames, T., van der Werf, G., Ribeiro, N., Edwards, A. et al. 2021. Opportunities and challenges for savanna burning emissions abatement in southern Africa. Journal of Environmental Management, 288: 112414. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112414).
526 Rekola, M., ed. 2019. Global outlook on forest education (GOFE). Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la Educación, la Ciencia y la Cultura. (Disponible en https://foresteducation.wordpress.com/).
527 Rekola, M. y Sharik, T. 2021. Global synthesis report on forest education. Roma, FAO.
528 FAO y Fondo para el Desarrollo de los Pueblos Indígenas de América Latina y el Caribe. 2021. Los pueblos indígenas y tribales y la gobernanza de los bosques. Una oportunidad para la acción climática en América Latina y el Caribe. FAO. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.4060/cb2953es).
529 FAO, Unión Internacional de Organizaciones de Investigación Forestal y Organización Internacional de las Maderas Tropicales. Próximamente. Proceedings of the International Conference on Forest Education. (Disponible en www.fao.org/forestry/forest-education/conference/en).
530 FAO. 2018. Agricultural services and digital inclusion. (Disponible en www.fao.org/3/i7361en/I7361EN.pdf).
531 Philip, L. y Williams, F. 2019. Remote rural home based businesses and digital inequalities: understanding needs and expectations in a digitally underserved community. Journal of Rural Studies, 68: 306-318. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2018.09.011).
532 Schroeder, K., Lampietti, J. y Elabed, G. 2021. What’s cooking – Digital transformation of the agrifood system. Washington, D.C, Banco Mundial. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-1657-4).
533 Unión Internacional de Telecomunicaciones. 2020. Measuring digital development – Facts and figures 2020. (Disponible en www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/Pages/facts/default.aspx).
534 Working Group on 21st Century Financing Models for Sustainable Broadband Development. 2021. 21st century financing models for bridging broadband connectivity gaps. Comisión de la Banda Ancha para el Desarrollo Sostenible. 198 págs.
535 Misaki, E., Apiola, M., Gaiani, S. y Tedre, M. 2018. Challenges facing sub-Saharan small-scale farmers in accessing farming information through mobile phones: a systematic literature review. The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries, 84(4): e12034. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1002/isd2.12034).
536 Secretario General de las Naciones Unidas. 2020. Hoja de ruta para la cooperación digital: aplicación de las recomendaciones del Panel de Alto Nivel sobre la Cooperación Digital. Naciones Unidas. (Disponible en https://www.un.org/es/content/digital-cooperation-roadmap/).
537 Harris, L. y Nordhaug, L.M. 2021. The Digital Public Goods Alliance’s commitment to co-develop digital public infrastructure for an equitable recovery | Digital Public Goods Alliance [en línea]. [Consultado el 25 de marzo de 2022]. (Disponible en https://digitalpublicgoods.net/blog/the-digital-public-goods-alliances-commitment-to-co-develop-digital-public-infrastructure-for-an-equitable-recovery).
538 Ivus, O. y Boland, M. 2015. The employment and wage impact of broadband deployment in Canada. Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d’économique, 48(5): 1803-1830. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1111/caje.12180).
539 Park, S. 2017. Digital inequalities in rural Australia: a double jeopardy of remoteness and social exclusion. Journal of Rural Studies, 54: 399-407. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2015.12.018).
540 Correa, T., Pavez, I. y Contreras, J. 2017. Beyond access: a relational and resource-based model of household Internet adoption in isolated communities. Telecommunications Policy, 41(9): 757-768. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2017.03.008).
541 FAO. 2021. FAO-EU FLEGT Programme success story – Innovative digital approaches to sustaining livelihoods through the production and sale of legal timber. FAO. 2 págs. (Disponible en https://www.fao.org/publications/card/en/c/CB4537EN).
542 Poschen, P. 2015. Decent work, green jobs and the sustainable economy – Solutions for climate change and sustainable development. Sheffield, Greenleaf Publishing [u.a.]. 182 págs. (Disponible en http://bit.ly/2O8YUUo).
543 Bolin, A. 2020. Women’s empowerment through collective action – How can forest and farm producer organisations can make a difference. FAO e Instituto Internacional de Medio Ambiente y Desarrollo. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.4060/ca8713en).
544 Mwangi, E., Meinzen-Dick, R. y Sun, Y. 2011. Gender and sustainable forest management in East Africa and Latin America. Ecology and Society, 16(1). (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-03873-160117).
545 Iniciativa de Derechos y Recursos. 2018. Ante una encrucijada: Tendencias Significativas en el Reconocimiento de la Tenencia Forestal Comunitaria de 2002 a 2017. Washington, D.C. (Disponible en https://rightsandresources.org/es/publication/ante-una-encrucijada-tendencias-significativas-en-el-reconocimiento-de-la-tenencia-forestal-comunitaria-de-2002-a-2017/).
546 Cruz-Burga, Z., Monterroso, I., Larson, A., Valencia, F. y Saldaña, J.S. 2019. The impact of formalizing rights to land and forest – Indigenous community perspectives in Madre de Dios and Loreto. InfoBrief 242. Centro de Investigación Forestal Internacional. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.17528/cifor/007156).
547 Durán, R., Monterroso, I. y Larson, A.M. 2018. Género e interculturalidad en la formalización de las comunidades nativas en Perú: Desafíos y recomendaciones. Centro de Investigación Forestal Internacional. (Disponible en https://www.cifor.org/knowledge/publication/6916/).
548 Bolaños, O. 2017. Los derechos de las mujeres indígenas y los desafíos para los proyectos de titulación de la propiedad comunal en el Perú: Resumen Político [en línea]. Centro de Investigación Forestal Internacional [Consultado el 10 de noviembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://www.cifor.org/knowledge/publication/6543/).
549 Jhaveri, N.J. 2020. Forest tenure pathways to gender equality – A practitioner’s guide. Centro de Investigación Forestal Internacional. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.17528/cifor/007909).
550 Macqueen, D. y Campbell, J. 2020. Prosperity in place – Meaningful work for mobile youth that enhances forest landscapes. Roma y Londres, FAO e Instituto Internacional de Medio Ambiente y Desarrollo. (Disponible en https://pubs.iied.org/13615iied).
551 Macqueen, D. y Campbell, J. 2020. Prosperity in place – Meaningful work for mobile youth that enhances forest landscapes. Roma y Londres, FAO e Instituto Internacional de Medio Ambiente y Desarrollo. (Disponible en https://pubs.iied.org/13615iied).
552 Nanavaty, R., Desai, M. y Bhatt, M. 2018. SEWA: developing a business incubation ecosystem for smallholders and forest producers in India. En: Forest business incubation – Towards sustainable forest and farm producer organisation (FFPO) businesses that ensure climate resilient landscapes, págs. 245-276. Roma, FAO y Londres, Instituto Internacional de Medio Ambiente y Desarrollo. (Disponible en https://pubs.iied.org/13595iied).
553 Macqueen, D. y Campbell, J. 2020. Prosperity in place – Meaningful work for mobile youth that enhances forest landscapes. Roma y Londres, FAO e Instituto Internacional de Medio Ambiente y Desarrollo. (Disponible en https://pubs.iied.org/13615iied).
554 Holden, S.T. y Tilahun, M. 2018. The importance of Ostrom’s design principles: youth group performance in northern Ethiopia. World Development, 104: 10-30. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2017.11.010).
555 Herren, H.R., Bassi, A.M., Zhuohua, T. y Binns, P.W. 2012. Green jobs for a revitalised food and agriculture sector. Roma, FAO. (Disponible en https://bit.ly/3pp7kbG).
556 Macqueen, D. y Campbell, J. 2020. Prosperity in place – Meaningful work for mobile youth that enhances forest landscapes. Roma y Londres, FAO e Instituto Internacional de Medio Ambiente y Desarrollo. (Disponible en https://pubs.iied.org/13615iied).
557 Moran, H. 2018. FEDECOVERA: a cooperative business development exercise in Guatemala. Forest business incubation – Towards sustainable forest and farm producer organisation (FFPO) businesses that ensure climate resilient landscapes, págs. 91-110. Roma y Londres, FAO e Instituto Internacional de Medio Ambiente y Desarrollo. (Disponible en https://pubs.iied.org/13595iied).
558 Majurin, E. 2012. How women fare in East African cooperatives – The case of Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda. Dar es Salaam, Organización Internacional del Trabajo. (Disponible en https://hdl.loc.gov/loc.gdc/gdcovop.2019352559).
559 Bolin, A. 2020. Women’s empowerment through collective action – How can forest and farm producer organisations can make a difference. FAO e Instituto Internacional de Medio Ambiente y Desarrollo. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.4060/ca8713en).
560 Allan, A., Ahern, B. y Wilson, M. 2016. The state of linkage report – The first global mapping of savings group linkage. Londres, CARE, Plan y Barclays. (Disponible en file:///Users/andrewfrench/Downloads/the-state-of-linkage-report-20161-1.pdf).
561 FAO. 2021. Marco estratégico para 2022-2031. (Disponible en https://www.fao.org/3/cb7099es/cb7099es.pdf).
562 FAO. 2018. Transformar la alimentación y la agricultura para alcanzar los ODS: 20 acciones interconectadas para guiar a los encargados de adoptar decisiones. (Disponible en https://www.fao.org/3/I9900ES/i9900es.pdf).
563 Vis, M., Mantau, U. y Allen, B., eds. 2016. Study on the optimised cascading use of wood. No 394/PP/ENT/RCH/14/7689. European Commission. (Disponible en https://ec.europa.eu/docsroom/documents/18081/attachments/1/translations/en/renditions/pdf).
564 Kirchherr, J., Reike, D. y Hekkert, M. 2017. Conceptualizing the circular economy: an analysis of 114 definitions. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 127: 221-232. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.09.005).
565 Bocken, N.M.P., de Pauw, I., Bakker, C. y van der Grinten, B. 2016. Product design and business model strategies for a circular economy. Journal of Industrial and Production Engineering, 33(5): 308-320. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1080/21681015.2016.1172124).
566 FAO. 2020. Evaluación de los recursos forestales mundiales 2020. Informe principal. FAO. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.4060/ca9825es).
567 FAO. 2020. Evaluación de los recursos forestales mundiales 2020. Informe principal. FAO. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.4060/ca9825es).
568 Stanturf, J., Mansourian, S. y Kleine, M., eds. 2017. Implementing forest landscape restoration – A practitioner’s guide. Vienna, International Union of Forest Research Organizations.
569 Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (Program), ed. 2005. Ecosystems and human well-being: synthesis. Washington, DC, Island Press. 137 págs.
570 Martínez Pastur, G., Perera, A.H., Peterson, U. e Iverson, L.R. 2018. Ecosystem services from forest landscapes: an overview. Ecosystem services from forest landscapes – broad scale considerations, págs. 1-10. Nueva York, USA, Springer Science+Business Media.
571 Organización Internacional del Trabajo. 2016. ¿Qué es un empleo verde? [Consultado el 16 de noviembre de 2021]. (Disponible en https://www.ilo.org/global/topics/green-jobs/news/WCMS_325253/lang--es/index.htm).
572 De Beer, J.H. y McDermott, M.J. 1989. The economic value of non-timber forest products in Southeast Asia - With emphasis on Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand. Amsterdam (Países Bajos), Comité de los Países Bajos para la UICN.
573 Shackleton, C., Delang, C.O., Shackleton, S. y Shanley, P. 2011. Non-timber forest products: concept and definitions. En: S. Shackleton, C. Shackleton & P. Shanley, eds. Non-timber forest products in the global context, págs. 3-21. Tropical Forestry. Berlín, Heidelberg, Springer Berlin Heidelberg. (Disponible en https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-17983-9_1).
574 FAO. 1999. Towards a harmonized definition of non-wood forest products. Unasylva, 50(198): 63-64.
