Land tenure and carbon rights constitute critical issues to take into account in achieving emission reductions, ensuring transparent benefit sharing and determining non-permanence (or non-compliance) liabilities in the context of REDD+ strategies and projects. This is so because tenure systems influence who becomes involved in efforts to avoid deforestation and improve forest management, and that land tenure, carbon rights and liabilities may be linked or divorced with implications for rural development. This paper explores these issues by looking at tenure regimes and carbon rights issues in Mexico, Brazil and Costa Rica. It is effectively shown that complex bundles of rights over forest resources have distinct implications for REDD+ design and implementation, and that REDD+ strategies in selected countries have to date failed in procedurally addressing land-use conflicts and carbon rights entitlements and liabilities.
References
[1]
Angelsen, A. Realising REDD+: National Strategy and Policy Options; Center for International Forestry Research: Bogor, Indonesia, 2009.
[2]
Angelsen, A. Policy options to reduce deforestation. In Realising REDD+: National Strategy and Policy Options; Angelsen, A., Ed.; Center for International Forestry Research: Bogor, Indonesia, 2009; pp. 125–138.
[3]
Forsyth, T. Multilevel, multiactor governance in REDD+: Participation, integration and coordination. In Realising REDD+: National Strategy and Policy Options; Angelsen, A., Ed.; Center for International Forestry Research: Bogor, Indonesia, 2009; pp. 113–124.
[4]
Tacconi, L.; Downs, F.; Larmour, P. Anti-corruption policies in the forest sector and REDD+. In Realising REDD+: National Strategy and Policy Options; Angelsen, A., Ed.; Center for International Forestry Research: Bogor, Indonesia, 2009; pp. 163–174.
[5]
Corbera, E.; Estrada, M.; Brown, K. Reducing greenhouse gas emissions from deforestation in developing countries: Revisiting the assumptions. Climatic Change 2010, 100, 355–388.
[6]
Corbera, E.; Brown, K.; Adger, W.N. The equity and legitimacy of markets for ecosystem services. Dev. Change 2007, 38, 587–613.
[7]
Vira, B.; Adams, W.M. Institutional complexity, biodiversity and ecosystem services. Paper presented at Governing Shared Resources: Connecting Local Experience to Global Challenges, 12th Biennial Conference of the International Association for the Study of Commons, Cheltenham, UK, 14–18 July 2008.
[8]
Sunderlin, W.; Dewi, S.; Puntodewo, A. Poverty and Forests. Multi-Country Analysis of Spatial Association and Proposed Policy Solutions. Center for International Forestry Research Occasional Paper No. 47; Center for International Forestry Research: Bogor, Indonesia, 2007.
[9]
Saunders, L.S.; Hanbury-Tenison, R.; Swingland, I.R. Social capital from carbon property: Creating equity for indigenous people. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. 2002, 360, 1763–1775.
[10]
Sunderlin, W.; Larson, A.M.; Cronkleton, P. Forest tenure rights and REDD+: From inertia to policy solutions. In Realising REDD+: National Strategy and Policy Options; Angelsen, A., Ed.; Center for International Forestry Research: Bogor, Indonesia, 2009; pp. 139–150.
[11]
Hatcher, J. Securing Tenure Rights and Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD): Costs and Lessons Learned; Rights and Resources Initiative: Washington, DC, USA, 2009.
[12]
Streck, C. Rights and REDD+: Legal and regulatory considerations. In Realising REDD+: National Strategy and Policy Options; Angelsen, A., Ed.; Center for International Forestry Research: Bogor, Indonesia, 2009; pp. 155–162.
[13]
Fortmann, L. Property in non-timber forest products. Europ. Trop. Forest Res. Network 2000, 32, 72–73.
[14]
Sikor, T.; Lund, C. Access and property: A question of power and authority. In The Politics of Possession: Property, Access and Authority; Sikor, T., Lund, C., Eds.; Blackwell: London, UK, 2009; pp. 1–22.
[15]
Fuys, A.; Dohrn, S. Common property regimes: Taking a closer look at resource access, authorisation, and legitimacy. In Beyond the Biophysical Knowledge, Culture, and Politics in Agriculture and Natural Resource Management; German, L.A., Ramisch, J.J., Verma, R., Eds.; Springer: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2010; pp. 193–214.
[16]
Ostrom, E.; Schlager, E. The formation of property rights. In Rights to Nature: Ecological, Economic, Cultural and Political Principles of Institutions for the Environment; Hanna, S., Folke, C., M？ler, K.G, Eds.; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 1996; pp. 127–156.
[17]
Hanna, S.; Folke, C.; M？ler, K.G. Property rights and the natural environment. In Rights to Nature: Ecological, Economic, Cultural and Political Principles of Institutions for the Environment; Hanna, S., Folke, C., Folke, C., Eds.; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 1996; pp. 1–10.
[18]
Meinzen-Dick, R.; Mwangi, E. Cutting the web of interests: Pitfalls of formalizing property rights. Land Use Policy 2008, 26, 36–43.
[19]
White, A.; Martin, A. Who Owns the World's Forests? Forest Tenure and Public Forests in Transition; Forest Trends: Washington, DC, USA, 2002.
[20]
Sunderlin, W.; Hatcher, J.; Liddle, M. From Exclusion to Ownership: Challenges and Opportunities in Advancing Forest Tenure Reform; Rights and Resources Initiative: Washington, DC, USA, 2008.
[21]
Global Forest Resources Assessment 2010. Key Findings; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2010. Available online: http://foris.fao.org/static/data/fra2010/KeyFindings-en.pdf (Accessed on 18 February 2011).
[22]
Tropical Forest Tenure Assessment: Trends, Challenges and Opportunities, 2009, 2009. Available online: http://www.rightsandresources.org/documents/files/doc_1075.pdf (Accessed on 18 February 2011).
[23]
Ellsworth, L.; White, A. Deeper Roots: Strengthening Community Tenure Security and Community Livelihoods; Ford Foundation: New York, NY, USA, 2004.
[24]
Araujo, C.; Araujo Bonjean, C.; Combes, J.L.; Combes Motel, P.; Reis, E.J. Property rights and deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon. Ecol. Econ. 2009, 68, 2461–2468.
[25]
Finley-Brook, M. Indigenous land tenure insecurity fosters illegal logging in Nicaragua. Int. Forest. Rev. 2007, 9, 850–864.
[26]
Pacheco, P. Agrarian reform in the Brazilian Amazon: Its implications for land distribution and deforestation. World Dev. 2009, 37, 1337–1347.
[27]
Simmons, C.S.; Walker, R.; Perz, S.; Aldrich, S.; Caldas, M.; Pereira, R.; Fernandes, C.; Arima, R. Doing it for themselves: Direct action land reform in the Brazilian Amazon. World Dev. 2010, 38, 429–444.
[28]
Harvey, C.A.; Zerbock, O.; Papageorgiou, S.; Parra, A. What is needed to Make REDD+ Work on the Ground? Lessons Learned from Pilot Forest Carbon Initiatives; Conservation International: Washington, DC, USA, 2010.
[29]
Lovera, S. REDD realities. In Contours of Climate Justice: Ideas for Shaping New Climate And Energy Politics. Dag Hammarskj？ld Foundation Occasional Paper No. 6; Brand, U., Bullard, N., Lander, E., Mueller, T., Eds.; Dag Hammarskj？ld Foundation: Uppsala Sweden, 2009.
[30]
Cotula, L.; Mayers, J. Tenure in REDD—Start-point or afterthought. In Natural Resource Issues No. 15; International Institute for Environment and Development: London, UK, 2009.
[31]
China's Forests: Global Lessons and Market Reforms; Hyde, W.F., Belcher, B., Xu, J., Eds.; 2003.
[32]
Larson, A.M; Cronkleton, P.; Barry, D.; Pacheco, P. Tenure Rights and Beyond: Community Access to Forest Resources in Latin America; Center for International Forestry Research: Bogor, Indonesia, 2008.
[33]
Sikor, T.; Müller, D. The limits of state-led land reform: An introduction. World Dev. 2009, 37, 1307–1316.
[34]
Ellsworth, L. A Place in the World: Tenure Security and Community Livelihoods. A Literature Review; Forest Trends: Washington, DC, USA, 2002.
[35]
Jaramillo, C.F.; Kelly, T. Deforestation and Property Rights in Latin America. Inter-American Development Bank Report; Inter-American Development Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 1997.
[36]
Angelsen, A. Agricultural expansion and deforestation: Modeling the impact of population, market forces and property rights. J. Dev. Econ. 1999, 58, 185–218.
[37]
Gould, K.A. Land regularization on agricultural frontiers: The case of Northwestern Petén, Guatemala. Land Use Policy 2006, 23, 395–407.
[38]
Gueneau, S.; Tozzi, P. Towards the privatization of global forest governance? Int. Forest. Rev. 2008, 10, 550–562.
[39]
The End of the Hinterland: Forests, Conflict and Climate Change; Rights and Resources Institute: Washington, DC, USA, 2010.
[40]
Corbera, E.; Brown, K. Offsetting benefits? Analyzing access to forest carbon. Environ. Plann. A. 2010, 42, 1739–1761.
[41]
Corbera, E.; González Soberanis, C.; Brown, K. Institutional dimensions of payments for ecosystem services: An analysis of Mexico's carbon forestry programme. Ecol. Econ. 2009, 68, 743–761.
[42]
Wunder, S.; Engel, S.; Pagiola, S. Taking stock: A comparative analysis of payments for environmental services programmes in developed and developing countries. Ecol. Econ. 2008, 65, 834–852.
[43]
Boyd, E.; Hultman, N.; Timmons Roberts, J.; Corbera, E.; Cole, J.; Bozmoski, A.; Ebeling, J.; Tippman, R.; Mann, P.; Brown, K.; Liverman, D. Reforming the CDM for sustainable development: Lessons learned and policy futures. Environ. Sci. Policy 2009, 12, 820–831.
[44]
Assies, W. Land tenure and tenure regimes in Mexico: An overview. J. Agrar. Change 2008, 8, 33–63.
[45]
Warman, A. El campo Mexicano en el siglo XX; Fondo de Cultura Económica: Mexico DF, Mexico, 2001.
[46]
Mexico: A Country Study; Merrill, T.L., Miró, R., Eds.; GPO for the Library of Congress: Washington, DC, USA, 1996.
[47]
De Ita, A. Land concentration in Mexico after PROCEDE. In Promised Land: Competing Visions of Agrarian Reform; Rosset, P.M., Patel, R., Courville, M., Eds.; Institute for Food and Development Policy: Oakland, CA, USA, 2008.
[48]
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) Evaluación de los Recursos Forestales Mundales. Informe Nacional, México, 2010; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2010. Available online: http://www.fao.org/forestry/20262-1-176.pdf (accessed on 18 February 2011).
[49]
De Janvry, A.; Gordillo, G.; Sadoulet, E. Mexico's Second Agrarian Reform: Households and Community Responses; University of California: San Diego, CA, USA, 1997.
[50]
Wilshusen, P.H. The receiving end of reform: Everyday responses to neoliberalization in Southeastern Mexico. Antipode 2010, 42, 767–799.
[51]
López-Nogales, A.; López-Nogales, R. Ley Agraria Comentada; Editorial Porrúa: Ciudad de México, Mexico, 1999.
[52]
Leigh Taylor, P. New organizational strategies in community forestry in Durango, Mexico. In The Community Forests of Mexico: Managing for Sustainable Landscapes; Bray, D.B., Merino-Pérez, L., Barry, D., Eds.; University of Texas Press: Austin, TX, USA, 2005; pp. 125–150.
[53]
Procede. Registro Agrario Nacional: Presidencia De La República, México, 2010. Available online: http://www.ran.gob.mx/ran/programas_sustantivos/ran_procede.html (accessed on 27 July 2010).
[54]
Mexico: Readiness Preparation Proposal (Mexico R-PP). Forest Carbon Partnership Facility; The World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2010.
[55]
Land Tenure and Property Rights Regional Report Volume 2.10: The Caribbean, Central America, and North America; Publication produced for review by the United states Agency for International Development by ARD, Inc.; ARD Inc.: Burlington, VT, USA, 2007.
[56]
Merino-Pérez, L.; Segura-Warnholtz, G. 2005 Forest and conservation policies and their impact on forest communities in Mexico. In The Community Forests of Mexico: Managing for Sustainable Landscapes; Bray, D.B., Merino-Pérez, L., Barry, D., Eds.; University of Texas Press: Austin, TX, USA, 2005; pp. 49–69.
[57]
Klooster, D. Institutional choice, community and struggle: A case study of forest co-management in Mexico. World Dev. 2000, 28, 1–20.
[58]
Bray, D.B.; Durán Medina, E.; Merino Pérez, L.; Torres Rojo, J.M.; Velázquez Montes, A. Nueva Evidencia: Los Bosques Comunitarios de México. Protegen el Ambiente, Disminuyen la Pobreza y Promueven la Paz Social; Consejo Civil Mexicano para la Silvicultura Sostenible: Mexico DF, Mexico, 2007.
[59]
Bray, D.B.; Duran, E.; Hugo Ramos, V.; Mas, J.F.; Velazquez, A.; Balas McNab, R.; Barry, D.; Radachowsky, J. Tropical deforestation, community forests, and protected areas in the maya forest. Ecol. Soc. 2008, 13, p. 56. Available online: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol13/iss2/art5 (accessed on 13 January 2011).
[60]
Barsimantov, J. Tenure, tourism and timber in Quintana Roo, Mexico: Land tenure changes in forest ejidos after agrarian reforms. Int. J. Commons 2010, 4, 293–318.
[61]
Bray, D.B.; Antinori, C.; Torres-Rojo, M. The Mexican model of community forest management: Agrarian policy, forestry policy and entrepreneurial organization. Forest Policy Econ. 2006, 8, 470–484.
[62]
Bray, D.B.; Merino-Pérez, L.; Barry, D. Community managed in the strong sense of the phrase: The community forest enterprises of Mexico. In The Community Forests of Mexico: Managing for Sustainable Landscapes; Bray, D.B., Merino-Pérez, L., Barry, D., Eds.; University of Texas Press: Austin, TX, USA, 2005; pp. 3–26.
[63]
O'Brien, K.L. Sacrificing the Forest: Environmental and Social Struggles in Chiapas; Westview Press: Boulder, CO, USA, 1998.
[64]
Klooster, D. Community-based forestry in Mexico: Can it reverse processes of degradation? Land Degrad. Dev 1999, 10, 365–381.
[65]
Barsimantov, J.A.; Navia Antezana, J. Land use and land tenure change in Mexico's avocado production region: Can community forestry reduce incentives to deforest for high value crops? Proceedings of Twelfth Biennial Conference of the International Association for the Study of the Commons, Cheltenham, UK, 14–18 July 2008.
[66]
Tucker, C.M. Community institutions and forest management in mexico's monarch butterfly reserve. Soc. Nat. Res. 2004, 17, 569–587.
[67]
Furtado, C. Forma？？o econ？mica do Brasil; Editorial Fundo de Cultura: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 1959.
[68]
Reydon, B.; Bueno, A.K.; Tiozo, C. Regula？？o da propriedade rural no Brasil; resultados dos primeiros passos. In Mercados de terras no Brasil: estrutura e dinamica; Reydon, B., Cornélio, F.N., Eds.; Ministério de Desenvolvimento Agrário, Núcleo de Estudos Agrários e Desenvolvimento Rural (MDA/NEAD): Brasilia, Brazil, 2006; pp. 53–71.
[69]
Alston, L.J.; Libecap, G.D.; Mueller, B. Titles, Conflict and Land Use: The Development of Property Rights and Land Reform on the Brazilian Amazon Frontier; Economics, Cognition and Society Series, University of Michigan: Ann Arbor, MI, USA, 1999.
[70]
Global Forest Resources Assessment; Brazil Country Report; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2010. Available online: http://www.fao.org/forestry/20262-1-206.pdf (accessed on 21 July 2010).
[71]
Mapa Amaz？nia Brasileira; Instituto Socioambiental: Brasilia, Brazil, 2009.
[72]
Lentini, M.; Pereira, D.; Celentano, D.; Pereira, R. Fatos Florestais da Amaz？nia; Instituto do Homem e Meio Ambiente da Amaz？nia: Belém, Brazil, 2005.
[73]
Brito, B.; Barreto, P. Impactos das novas leis fundiárias na defini？？o de direitos de propriedade no Pará. O Estado da Amaz？nia 15: March 2010; Imazon: Bélem, Brazil, 2010.
[74]
Nepstad, D.; Schwartzman, S.; Bamberger, B.; Santilli, M.; Ray, D.; Schlesinger, P.; Lefebvre, P.; Alencar, A.; Prinz, E.; Fiske, G.; Rolla, A. Inhibition of Amazon deforestation and fire by parks and indigenous lands. Conserv. Biol. 2006, 20, 65–73.
[75]
De Oliveira, J.A.P. Property rights, land conflicts and deforestation in the Eastern Amazon. Forest Policy Econ. 2008, 10, 303–315.
[76]
May, P.; Millikan, B. Learning from REDD: A Global Comparative Study—Country Profile Report: Brazil, 2010; CIFOR: Belém, Brazil, 2010.
[77]
Brockett, C.D.; Gottfried, R.R. State policies and the preservation of forest cover: Lessons from contrasting public-policy regimes in Costa Rica. Latin Am. Res. Rev. 2002, 37, 7–40.
[78]
Evaluación de los Recursos Forestales Mundiales. Informe Nacional, Costa Rica, 2010; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2010. Available online: http://www.fao.org/forestry/20262-1-172.pdf (accessed on 21 July 2010).
[79]
Poder Legislativo 1996 Ley Forestal No 7575. Alcance N°21 a la Gaceta N°72; Imprenta Nacional: La Uruca, Costa Rica, 1996.
[80]
Navarro, G.A.; Bermudez, G. Estudio sobre el impacto de las restricciones técnicas y legales sobre la rentabilidad del manejo forestal sostenible de bosques naturales intervenidos y su competitividad respecto a otros usos de la tierra en Costa Rica. Informe de consultoría PTC/COS/3003/FAO para ECTI-SINAC-MINAE; Ministerio de Ambiente y Energía: San José, Costa Rica, 2007.
[81]
Watson, V.; Cervantes, S.; Castro, C.; Mora, L.; Solis, M.; Porras, I.T.; Cornejo, B. Making Space for Better Forestry: Policy That Works for Forests and People; 1998.
[82]
De Camino, R.; Segura, O.; Arias, L.G.; Pérez, I. 2000 Costa Rica: Forest Strategy and the Evolution of Land Use; The World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2000.
[83]
Costa Rica: Readiness Preparation Proposal (Costa Rica R-PP); 2010 Forest Carbon Partnership Facility, The World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2010.
[84]
Pedroni, L.; Dutschke, M.; Streck, C.; Estrada, M. Creating incentives for avoiding further deforestation: The nested approach. Climate Policy 2009, 9, 207–220.
[85]
De Jong, B.H.J.; Iglesias Gutiérrez, L.; Alanís de la Rosa, J.A. Advances of Mexico in preparing for REDD. Presentation at the UNFCCC Workshop on Methodological Issues Relating to Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Developing Countries, Tokyo, Japan, 25–27 June 2008.
[86]
2009 Comisión Intersecretarial de Cambio Climático; Plan Especial de Cambio Climático (PECC): Gobierno de México, Mexico, 2009. Available online: http://www.semarnat.gob.mx/queessemarnat/politica_ambiental/cambioclimatico/Documents/pecc/090828_PECC.Capitulos_DOF.pdf (accessed on 21 July 2010).
[87]
Torres-Rojo, J.M. Presentación del Programa Pro-árbol al Consejo Civil Mexicano para el Desarrollo Sustentable; Mexico DF, Mexico, 2010. 2010. Available online: http://www.cmdrs.gob.mx/sesiones/2010/8a_sesion/3b_proarbol.pdf (accessed on 13 January 2011).
[88]
Bray, D.B. Community forestry in Mexico Twenty lessons learned and four future pathways. In The Community Forests of Mexico: Managing for Sustainable Landscapes; Bray, D.B., Merino-Pérez, L., Barry, D., Eds.; University of Texas Press: Austin, TX, USA, 2005; pp. 335–350.
[89]
Toledo-Aceves, T.; Meave, J.A.; González-Espinosa, M.; Ramírez-Marcial, N. Tropical montane cloud forests: Current threats and opportunities for their conservation and sustainable management in Mexico. J. Environ. Manage. 2011, 92, 974–981.
[90]
Mu？oz-Pi？a, C.; Guevara, A.; Torres, J.M.; Bra？a, J. Paying for hydrological services of Mexico's forests: Analysis, negotiations and results. Ecol. Econ. 2008, 65, 725–736.
[91]
Mu？oz-Pi？a, C.; Rivera, M.; Cisneros, A.; García, H. Retos de la focalización del Programa de Pago por los Servicios Ambientales en México. Revista Espa？ola de Estudios Agrosociales y Pesqueros 2011, 228, 11–29.
[92]
Readiness Preparation Proposal Review: Mexico. Forest Carbon Partnership Facility-Mexico (FCPF-Mexico); World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2010.
[93]
Santilli, M.P.; Moutinho, P.; Schwartzman, S.; Nepstad, D.C.; Curran, L.; Nobre, C. Tropical deforestation and the Kyoto Protocol: An editorial essay. Climatic Change 2005, 71, 267–276.
[94]
Government of Brazil. Submission of Brazil: Dialogue on long-term cooperative action to address climate change by enhancing implementation of the Convention. UNFCCC Second Workshop, Nairobi, Brazil, 15–16 November 2006.
[95]
Plano Nacional de Mudan？as Climáticas (PNMC) 2008; Casa Civil da Presidência da República: Brasília, Brazil, 2008.
[96]
Climate Community Biodiversity Alliance (CCBA). The Juma Sustainable Development Reserve Project: Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Deforestation in the State of Amazonas, Brazil; FAS: Manaus, Brazil, 2009. Available online: http://www.fasamazonas.org/en/secao/juma-redd-project (accessed on 18 February 2011).
[97]
Pfaff, A.; Robalino, J.; Sanchez-Azofeifa, G. Payments for Environmental Services: Empirical Analysis for Costa Rica; Columbia University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2006.
[98]
Morse, W.C.; Schedlbauer, J.L.; Sesnie, S.E.; Finegan, B.; Harvey, C.A.; Hollenhorst, S.J.; Kavanagh, K.L.; Stoian, D.; Wulfhorst, J.D. Consequences of environmental service payments for forest retention and recruitment in a Costa Rican biological corridor. Ecol. Soc. 2009, 14, p. 23. Available online: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol14/iss1/art23/ (accessed on 13 January 2011).
[99]
Robalino, J.; Pfaff, A.; Sánchez-Azofeifa, G.; Alpízar, F.; Rodríguez, C.M.; León, C. Deforestation Impacts of Environmental Services Payments: Costa Rica's PSA Program 2000–2005; EfD-Resources for the Future: Washington, DC, USA, 2008.
[100]
Pagiola, S. Payments for environmental services in Costa Rica. Ecol. Econ. 2008, 65, 712–724.
[101]
Zbinden, S.; Lee, D.R. Paying for environmental services: An analysis of participation in Costa Rica's PSA program. World Dev. 2005, 33, 255–272.
[102]
Rojas, M.; Aylward, B. What are We Learning from Experiences with Markets for Environmental Services in Costa Rica? A Review and Critique of the Literature; Environmental Economics Programme, International Institute for Environment and Development: London, UK, 2003.
[103]
Costenbander, J. Legal Frameworks for REDD. Design and Implementation at the National Level; IUCN: Gland, Switzerland, 2009.
[104]
Felicani, F. Forest Carbon Rights as a New Property: Legal Elements Related to REDD and Best Practices; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2010.
[105]
Forest Carbon Partnership Facility-Costa Rica (FCPF-Costa Rica). Readiness Preparation Proposal Review: Costa Rica; World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2010.
[106]
Lyster, R. REDD+ transparency, participation and resource rights: The role of law. Environ. Sci. Policy. 2011. in press.
[107]
Adger, W.N.; Brown, K.; Fairbrass, J.; Jordan, A.; Paavola, J.; Rosendo, S.; Seyfang, G. Governance for sustainability: Towards a ‘thick’ analysis of environmental decision-making. Environ. Plann. A. 2003, 35, 1095–1110.
[108]
Davis, C.; Nakhooda, S.; Daviet, F. Getting ready. A review of the World Bank Forest Carbon Partnership Facility Readiness Preparation Proposals v.1.3.. WRI Working Paper; World Resources Institute: Washington, DC, USA, 2010. Available online: http://www.wri.org/gfi (accessed on 13 July 2010).
[109]
Davis, C.; Williams, A.; Goers, L.; Daviet, F.; Lupberger, S. Getting Ready with Forest Governance. A Review of the World Bank Forest Carbon Partnership Facility Readiness Preparation Proposals, V.1.4.. WRI Working Paper; World Resources Institute: Washington, DC, USA, 2010. Available online: http://www.wri.org/gfi (accessed on 13 July 2010).
[110]
Karsenty, A. The architecture of proposed REDD schemes after Bali: Facing critical choices. Int. Forest. Rev. 2008, 10, 443–457.
[111]
B？rner, J.; Wunder, S. Paying for avoided deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon: From cost assessment to scheme design. Int. Forest. Rev. 2008, 10, 496–511.
[112]
Ghazoul, J.; Butler, R.A.; Mateo-Vega, J.; Koh, L.P. REDD: A reckoning of environment and development implications. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2010, 25, 396–402.
[113]
Bray, D.B.; Merino-Pérez, L.; Negreros-Castillo, P.; Segura-Warnholz, G.; Torres-Rojo, J.M.; Vester, H.F.M. Mexico's community-managed forests as a global model for sustainable landscapes. Conserv. Biol. 2002, 17, 672–677.
[114]
Bray, D.G.; Klepeis, P. Deforestation, forest transitions, and institutions for sustainability in south-eastern Mexico. Environ. History 2005, 11, 195–223.
[115]
Durán-Medina, E.; Mas, J.F.; Velázquez, A. Land use/cover change in community-based forest management regions and protected areas in Mexico. In The Community Forests of Mexico: Managing for Sustainable Landscapes; Bray, D.B., Merino-Pérez, L., Barry, D., Eds.; University of Texas Press: Austin, TX, USA, 2005; pp. 215–238.
[116]
Humphreys, D. The politics of ‘avoided deforestation’: Historical context and contemporary issues. Int. Forest. Rev. 2008, 10, 433–442.
[117]
Hall, A. 2008 Better RED than dead: Paying the people for environmental services in Amazonia. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. 2008, 363, 1925–1932.
[118]
Kosoy, N.; Corbera, E. Payments for ecosystem services as commodity fetishism. Ecol. Econ. 2010, 69, 1228–1236.
[119]
Kaimowitz, D. The prospects for Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD) in Mesoamerica. Int. Forest. Rev. 2008, 10, 484–495.
[120]
Johns, T.; Merry, F.; Stickler, C.; Nepstad, D.; Laporte, N.; Goetza, S. Three-fund approach to incorporating government, public and private forest stewards into a REDD funding mechanism. Int. Forest. Rev. 2008, 10, 458–464.
[121]
Terborgh, J. Requiem for Nature; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 1999.
[122]
Adams, W.N.; Hutton, J. People, parks and poverty: Political ecology and biodiversity conservation. Conserv. Soc. 2007, 5, 147–183.
