With 33% of forest cover (64.8 million hectares according to FAO, 2010) Mexico is considered a highly biodiverse and culturally rich country. As outlined in Mexico’s Forest Resource Assessment, the net deforestation rate (including all forests, as well as other wooded lands) has decreased by 55% over the past 10 years; from 408,000 ha/year in 2000 to 187,000 ha/year in 2010. Using the FAO definition of forests, the net deforestation rate has decreased from 354,000 ha/year in 2000 to 155,000 ha/year in 2010 - also equivalent to a 55% reduction (FAO, 2010). Nevertheless, deforestation rates vary widely across the country, with some areas and ecosystems still subject to high rates of deforestation and forest degradation (CONAFOR, 2010a).
According to the World Bank, Mexico is currently the second largest economy in Latin America after Brazil. Drivers of deforestation are complex and vary from region to region (SEMARNAT, 2009a), with the most representative being those related to land use change for agriculture and livestock activities (CONAFOR, 2010a). Other important regional drivers include: tourism, mining, bioenergy, and urban growth (SEMARNAT, 2009a).
Mexico has developed important climate change and forestry policy instruments and is currently in its REDD readiness phase. Since 2001, policy instruments like the ProArbol program have been launched to promote sustainable forest management practices, reduce deforestation activities and restore forest ecosystems (CONAFOR, 2010a). A relevant example includes the Ecosystem Services Payments Program (Pago por Servicios Ambientales; PSA) launched in 2003, which provides compensatory payments to prevent deforestation in high priority areas (associated with water supply, overexploited aquifers or high biodiversity). Additionally, in 2008, agricultural policy was restructured with a stronger focus on sustainability (SAGARPA, 2009).
The 2007-2012 National Development Plan (Plan Nacional de Desarrollo 2007-2012, PND) included for the first time strategies and objectives related to climate change. In 2009, the Special Program on Climate Change (Programa Especial de Cambio Climático, PECC) incorporated REDD+ under the land use national policy chapter. Under the PECC, 30% of total expected GHG emission reductions for 2012 (equivalent to 15.3 MtCO2) are expected to come from agriculture, forests and other land uses (SEMARNAT, 2009b). The PECC also includes long-term, economy-wide aspirational goals including a 50% reduction in the country’s total GHG emissions by 2050 with technological and financial support from developed countries (SEMARNAT, 2009). During the sixteenth Conference of the Parties (COP 16) in Cancun, Mexico, the country’s REDD+ Vision (Visión de México sobre REDD+: Hacia una Estrategia Nacional, Vision) was presented. It includes goals for zero net emissions related to land use change and important reductions in degradation rates by 2020 (CONAFOR, 2010b). Currently, the National REDD+ Strategy (Estrategia Nacional REDD+, ENAREDD+) is under development and will be launched by the end of 2012 following a stakeholder consultation process. Mexico has also submitted four National Communications to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and is working on its fifth.
At the state level, in accordance with the General Law for Sustainable Forest Development, states are responsible for designing, developing and implementing forestry policies and programs in line with national objectives. Currently there are many important initiatives underway. These include the development of State Level Action Programs on Climate Change (Programas Estatales de Acción ante el Cambio Climático, PEACC) which will engage state and local governments on climate change mitigation and adaptation initiatives and will promote alignment with national policies (CONAFOR, 2010a).
REDD+ implementation and planning in Mexico will be undertaken at a national level, with sub-national and local projects nesting into the national approach. At the national level, Mexico has been implementing forestry related programs for many years and is devoting significant national resources, as well as multilateral and bilateral funding, to implement activities related to the development of the National REDD+ Strategy (ENAREDD+). These include readiness management arrangements, consultation and participation processes, land use evaluations, public policy and governance, social and environmental impact assessments, reference level development and monitoring reporting and verification (MRV) methodologies (SEMARNAT, 2010). Through CONAFOR and other government agencies, including the National Ecology Institute (Instituto Nacional de Ecologia, INE) and the National Commission for Protected Areas (Comision Nacional de Areas Naturales Protegidas, CONANP), Mexico is also working closely with governments from other countries and international agencies on technical support for carbon accounting and monitoring. Mexico is a member of the FCPF and a Policy Board observer in the UN-REDD process. Under the FCPF, its R-PIN was accepted in 2008 and its R-PP was evaluated by the Participants Committee and Technical Assessment Panel in 2010, authorizing US$3.6 million for the country’s readiness preparation, which is expected to be implemented during 2012. Mexico has also been selected as a pilot country by the Forest Investment Program (FIP).
At the sub-national level, CONAFOR is implementing early action activities (acciones tempranas) in Chiapas, Jalisco and the Yucatan Peninsula. These activities are not considered as full REDD+ demonstration projects but they will aim to assess various environmental, social and cultural conditions under which institutional arrangements, governance structures, monitoring and financial mechanisms can be tested. They will also deliver REDD+ relevant results in the process, but carbon accounting will be implemented gradually. Furthermore, at the state level, many initiatives are already underway with state government support, and a number of activities are being developed and implemented by non-governmental organizations at the local level. Some of these include forestry carbon projects that already trade carbon offsets on the voluntary market.
Management and coordination
In 2005, the Federal Government implemented an Interministerial Climate Change Commission (Comisión Intersecretarial de Cambio Climático, CICC) comprised of representatives from ten Federal Ministries. The CICC, following a horizontal organizational structure, is presided by the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources (Secretaria de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales, SEMARNAT) and is responsible for the development of climate change programs and strategies as well as being a discussion forum to help reach public policy consensus (SEMARNAT, 2010). Once it is completed, it will also be responsible for implementation of the national REDD+ strategy, the ENAREDD+. The CICC includes a REDD Working Group (Grupo de Trabajo REDD, GT-REDD) that is responsible for coordinating REDD+ issues among the different Ministries and a Climate Change Advisory Council (C4) that provides guidance on public policy matters. In the agricultural sector, the Federal Government has also implemented the Interministerial Rural Sustainable Development Commission (Comisión Intersecretarial para el Desarrollo Rural Sustentable, CIDRS), which is presided by the Ministry of Agriculture, Rural Development, Fisheries and Food (Secretaría de Agricultura, Ganadería, Desarrollo Rural, Pesca y Alimentación, SAGARPA), and is responsible for establishing, coordinating and monitoring sustainable rural development programs. As stated in the country’s REDD+ Vision, sustainable rural development is central to the development of the national REDD+ strategy and as such coordination between the CICC and CIDRS is fundamental in the development of the ENAREDD+.
The National Forestry Commission (Comision Nacional Forestal, CONAFOR), a SEMARNAT agency, is the entity responsible for designing and implementing national policies in the forest sector. It co-chairs the CICC’s GT-REDD+ and is the focal point of many REDD+ initiatives, including the FCPF. Additionally, under the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and in coordination with other government entities, which include the Under-Secretary of Planning and Environmental Policy, CONAFOR leads the REDD+ UNFCCC negotiations. CONAFOR is also currently coordinating the development of the ENAREDD+ in close collaboration with the GT-REDD+ and the REDD+ Task Force (Comité Técnico Consultivo REDD+, CTC-REDD+) (CONAFOR, 2010a).
Since Mexico will focus on developing a nested REDD+ framework, state and local level participation will be key in the design and implementation of the ENAREDD+. To this effect, several states have already established Interministerial Climate Change Commissions.
Stakeholder engagement and participation
Mexico’s REDD+ readiness process has included broad participation from numerous and diverse stakeholders, although involvement by some local stakeholders has been limited since most national meetings take place in Mexico City. In 2008, the Environmental Services Program Technical Advisory Committee created a subgroup to address REDD+ issues, including the development of the R-PP. In 2010, the REDD+ Task Force (Comité Técnico Consultivo REDD+, CTC-REDD+) was established as an independent REDD+ Technical Advisory Committee to discuss and promote a dialogue regarding the country’s REDD+ process. The CTC-REDD+ is comprised of stakeholders from government agencies, non-profit organizations, academia, the private sector, financing institutions, landowners and indigenous groups. At the state level, there are also initiatives underway for stakeholder engagement and participation. Chiapas, Jalisco and the Yucatan Peninsula’s states are in the process, or have recently established, REDD+ committees to collaborate in the development of a REDD+ framework at regional and local levels. These committees, such as the National CTC-REDD+, will be comprised of stakeholders from state government agencies, non-profit organizations, academia, landowners and indigenous groups.
According to the country’s REDD+ Vision and R-PP, all activities will require national, regional and local consultation processes. There are currently a number of important consultation bodies that will also be utilized in the REDD+ readiness and implementation stages. These include Advisory Councils for Sustainable Development, the National Commission for Indigenous Development’s Technical Consultation Body and the National Forest Council (CONAFOR, 2010a), among others.
Rights and tenure
There are three broad categories of land tenure in Mexico: federal, communal (ejidos and local communities) and small private landowners. Currently, 53% of Mexico’s land is owned by ejidos and local communities, representing 70% of the country’s total forest cover (CONAFOR, 2011).
After the 1917 Land Distribution Reform, the federal government held ownership of all land, allocating only usufruct rights to owners (USAID, 2011). In 1992, Article 27 of the Mexican Constitution was reformed and the Agrarian Law was published, removing primordial rights over forestland from the Federal Government (Cronkleton, P., Barton D., & Medin G., 2011) and providing legal recognition to ejidos and communities over their land. Mexico’s Agrarian Law therefore regulates land ownership and ejido user rights with the aim of improving transparency on land tenure rights. A major program to certify land titles was also established in the 1990s known as the Ejido Land Rights and Urban House Plot Certification Program (Programa de Certificación de Derechos Ejidales y Titulación de Solares, PROCEDE). Concerning indigenous rights, Article 2 of the Mexican Constitution recognizes the right of indigenous communities to exploit any natural resources existing on their land. To this effect, implementation of the National REDD+ strategy will not alter land ownership or local community rights since this is provided for in the Constitution, as well as international treaties ratified by Mexico (CONAFOR, 2010b). Nevertheless, land use rights may be affected by carbon ownership regulations to be established in the future. Accordingly, and as part of the preparation of the ENRAREDD+, different forms of carbon property rights are currently being analyzed.
Ejidos and local communities in Mexico are governed by their own set of rules, which need to be registered with the National Agrarian Registry. A General Assembly (considered as the highest local authority) is usually created by members of the community, which has the power to decide whether or not to adopt collective management practices (Article 5 of the General Law for Sustainable Forest Development states that forest resources belong to land owners) and define mechanisms which guarantee an equitable distribution of future profits (Felicani, F & Peskett, L. 2011).
Currently carbon is included as an environmental service under the General Wildlife Law and General Law for Sustainable Forest Development. The latter states that forest owners should be adequately compensated for environmental services and indicates that environmental goods and service bonds could be issued to compensate landowner for services provided (Vhugen, D., Miner J., & Aguilar S. 2011). However, the current national legal framework does not specifically consider forest carbon rights per se. CONAFOR has developed payment mechanisms for hydrological and biodiversity services, and although these mechanisms have provided subsidies that do not represent real environmental markets, they offer some understanding of how carbon rights could be established and how such systems could be applied to a REDD+ framework. Some programs have also been established in the past to support communities wishing to explore opportunities in the existing voluntary carbon markets.
Compliance (incentives and enforcement)
In Mexico, federal institutions oversee regulation, protection and surveillance of forest resources (USAID, 2011). SEMARNAT, through its General Forestry and Soil Management Office (Dirección General de Gestión Forestal y de Suelos) and the Environmental Protection Agency (Procuraduría Federal de Protección al Ambiente, PROFEPA) is responsible for enforcing environmental laws, regulating forest activities and authorizing the use of forest resources. All ejidos, communities and private properties wishing to develop a forest management plan and implement timber-harvesting strategies are required to obtain authorization from SEMARNAT. Although many ejidos and communities already comply with existing rules and requirements, many are not able to secure proper authorization due to burdensome requirements. Additionally, relatively long permitting cycles often create disincentives to manage forests legally, in detriment of the Mexican forest sector (CCMSS, 2008).
A lack of financial and human resources, as well as limited operational capabilities have resulted in the emergence of a large illegal timber market in Mexico. This market is fueled largely by the demand of urban timber distributors and retailers (CCMSS, 2007). Insecurity in many regions of the country due to drug-related conflicts is adding further challenges to proper enforcement efforts (USAID,2011). Given the current tenure structure, strengthening community governance and resource management capacities would complement law enforcement efforts.
One of the most notable incentive mechanism for forest conservation is the ecosystem services payments program (Pago por Servicios Ambientales; PSA) launched in 2003, which provides compensatory payments to prevent deforestation in high priority areas (associated with water supply, overexploited aquifers or high biodiversity). CONAFOR also has several other programs which offer forest owners a range of forest management subsides, including reforestation activities, commercial plantations and community planning processes, which represent incentives for participants to apply and stay in the programs.
Reference level
The reference level for Mexico will be based on historical data, as well as the assessment of deforestation and forest degradation risks (CONAFOR, 2010a). The historical deforestation data will be derived from several remote-sensing products that are being developed and assessed; taking advantage of significant number of historical ground truthing efforts. Other approaches are being considered for degradation and enhancement of carbon stocks, with community monitoring being one of the approaches to be explored.
At the state level and as part of the Governor’s Initiative between the States of California, Chiapas and Campeche may develop state and/or regional reference levels for REDD+.
Safeguards
As provided in Articles 2, 4 and 27 of the Mexican Constitution, as well as the Agrarian and Indigenous Development Commission Laws, the country has already established important social safeguard mechanisms and information systems which include biodiversity (CONAFOR, 2011). Nevertheless, Mexico has still not defined how social and environmental safeguards will be measured, as the issue is still being debated at the international and national levels through the development of the ENAREDD+. At the project level, there are examples where FSC and CCBA safeguards have been implemented.
In the context of the World Bank’s Forest Carbon Partnership Facility, Mexico is developing a Strategic Environmental and Social Assessment (SESA). The main objectives of SESA are to identify environmental and social impacts, as well as the legal implications of a REDD+ strategy. Two workshops have already been held, at regional and national levels (FCPF, 2011). The SESA process includes indigenous communities, forest ejidos, agrarian communities, women groups and non-governmental organization. Furthermore, the Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) will be used as a tool for the World Bank’s safeguards (CONAFOR, 2010a).
MRV
Mexico is relatively advanced in its capacity to monitor, report and verify (MRV) REDD+ based on its experience with the National Forest and Soils Inventory (Inventario Nacional Forestal y de Suelos, INFyS). Mexico is planning to implement a multi-functional (e.g., carbon, social and environmental safeguard) and multi-scale (e.g., national, subnational and local) MRV system that uses a combination of remote sensing and ground based forest inventory methodologies, as well as the integration of its existing social and environmental information systems. Once the country has compiled data for one year and established conservative estimates on carbon stocks, it will move towards an operational MRV system. The National MRV system design will follow the methodologies suggested in the GOFC-GOLD source book (CONAFOR, 2010a) and will include 1) a satellite land monitoring system, 2) a national forest inventory to assess carbon stocks and any changes, 3) a National GHG Inventory to estimate anthropogenic emissions by source and removals by sinks, 4) a reference emission level and reference level, and 5) an institutional framework to coordinate activities. A permanent monitoring system will also be implemented (based on satellite imagery and ground sampling). Mexico is currently receiving funding for this activity from the Norwegian Government.
Statistics
Mexico is a mega-diverse country and is ranked second globally in terms of ecosystem types and fourth in terms of total number of species (Sarukhán, 2009). Mexico’s forests are shaped by the country’s varied climatic characteristics and topography. Of the country’s 194.3 million hectares of land area, 64.8 million are considered forests, representing 33% of the total area (FAO, 2010).
Land use, land use change and forestry represent the fourth source of GHG emissions in the country, generating on average 80 Mt CO2/ year from 1990 to 2006 (SEMARNAT-INE, 2006). As indicated in the Fourth National Communication for the UNFCCC, land use changes from forests to croplands and grasslands were the most significant source of emissions from 1990 to 2006. Preliminary studies indicate that the main proximate causes of deforestation and forest degradation include 1) forest land converted to grassland, 2) slash-and-burn agriculture, 3) illegal logging and 4) natural occurrences (CONAFOR, 2010a). The underlying forces identified include 1) forest area use limitations, 2) a lack of investment in the forestry sector, 3) low income derived from forest activities, 4) agriculture and livestock activities in forest areas 5) uncertainty regarding use rights and 6) poverty/lack of opportunities for forest owners (CONAFOR, 2010a).
Institutions
There are many institutions participating in the REDD+ process in Mexico. Under the Interministerial Climate Change Commission (Comisión Intersecretarial de Cambio Climático, CICC) CICC, numerous federal ministries are participating in the design and implementation of REDD+. The Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources (Secretaria de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales, SEMARNAT) leads the discussions on climate change and the National Forestry Commission (Comision Nacional Forestal, CONAFOR) – a SEMARNAT agency - is the focal point for many REDD+ initiatives in the country. The Ministry of Agriculture, Rural Development, Fisheries and Food (Secretaría de Agricultura, Ganadería, Desarrollo Rural, Pesca y Alimentación, SAGARPA),will also play an important role since agriculture and livestock activities are considered some of the most important drivers of deforestation and SAGARPA leads the Interministerial Commission for Sustainable Rural Development. Other relevant environmental agencies in the REDD+ process include the National Commission for the Knowledge and Use of Biodiversity and the National Commission for Protected Areas. At the state level, many governments have become very active in promoting climate change mitigation and adaptation strategies, including the States of Chiapas, Jalisco and the three States in the Yucatan Peninsula.
Non-governmental organizations, as well as academic and research institutions play a key role in the development and implementation of REDD+ in Mexico. In this sense, there are an important number of international, national, sub-national and local organizations currently involved in developing pilot projects and providing local capacity building services. Some of these organizations include the Mexican Civil Council for Sustainable Forestry (Consejo Civil Mexicano para la Silvicultura Sostenible, CCMSS) (National), Cooperativa Ambio (Chiapas), Servicios Ambientales de Oaxaca (Oaxaca), U’Yool’Che (Yucatan Peninsula), to mention only a few. The College of Postgraduates, the College of Mexico, the National Autonomous University of Mexico – Research Center for Environmental Geography and the College of the South Border (El Colegio de la Frontera Sur, ECOSUR) have played an important role in the development of the R-PP, Mexico’s REDD+ Vision and on the future national REDD+ Strategy, ENAREDD+. There are also several international governments and international governmental organizations (IGOs) participating in Mexico’s REDD+ process.
Legal framework
Even though in Mexico REDD+ doesn’t have a legal framework per se, the country has a comprehensive legal framework regarding the environment, natural resource management and rural sustainable development. Specifically, the General Law for Environmental Equilibrium and Protection (Ley General del Equilibrio Ecologico y la Proteccio al Ambiente, LGEEPA), approved in 1988, acts as the foundation for Mexico’s environmental laws (Enriquez, S. et al. n.d). Furthermore, over the last few decades, Mexico has designed and consolidated a number of legal instruments on forestry, including the General Law for Sustainable Forest Development (Ley General de Desarrollo Forestal Sustentable, LGDFS). The objectives and goals set by the Special Program on Climate Change (Programa Especial de Cambio Climático, PECC) will be addressed through this last law (Perron-Welch, F. 2011). The Law for Sustainable Rural Development (Ley de Desarrollo Rural Sustentable, LDRS) establishes the general framework for activities that help protect and restore forest cover within rural development programs (USAID, 2010). Mexico also has an Agrarian Law (Ley Agraria) that regulates land ownership and user rights.
Mexico has ratified the following international conventions and agreements: UNFCCC, Kyoto Protocol, CBD, UNCCD, International Tropical Timber Agreement (ITTA), CITES, Ramsar, World Heritage Convention, Non-Legally Binding Instrument (NLBI), UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) and the ILO Convention No. 169 on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples.
Plans and policies
Mexico’s REDD+ strategy is not expected to operate as a program or single policy instrument, but is expected to follow a comprehensive territorial approach where rural sustainable development will act as the foundation for REDD+ implementation. In this sense, a number of policies and activities will need to be developed with horizontal and vertical coordination.
Mexico’s REDD+ process started with the development of the R-PP in 2008. Since then, the Mexican Government has published its REDD+ Vision (2010) which forms the foundation for the national REDD+ strategy, the ENAREDD+, which is currently being developed. The ENAREDD+ will be designed following five strategic principles and is planned for implementation between 2012 and 2020. The ENAREDD+ will also include current public policy instruments and focus on promoting institutional alignment to stimulate rural sustainable development. The first draft is currently under development and is planned for completion by the end of 2011.
The country has many national plans relevant to climate change, natural resource management, land tenure and rural sustainable development as developed by various government agencies. These include the Special Program on Climate Change (Programa Especial de Cambio Climático, PECC), which was developed in 2009, the National Forestry Program 2025, the Special Concerted Program for Rural Sustainable Development 2007-2012, the Toward Gender Equality and Environmental Sustainability Program 2007-2012 and the Climate Change Strategy for Protected Areas, among others.
At the sub-national level, a number of states are developing their own State Level Action Programs on Climate Change (Programas Estatales de Acción ante el Cambio Climático, PEACC) and others have already signed agreements to promote REDD+ at the state level (e.g., Chiapas signed an MOU with Acre and the State of California, and the three States in the Yucatan Peninsula signed a general coordination agreement). Some states are also planning to develop their regional REDD+ visions and strategies in the near future.
Under the international negotiations, Mexico supports REDD+ and encourages the use of community forest management practices as a basis for REDD+ implementation. Mexico also supports REDD+ activities that engage forest owners and indigenous groups, while respecting their local traditions and knowledge (Perron-Welch, F. 2011). Mexico endorses the use of public funds for the readiness phase and advocates for an efficient mix of public and private market-based financing mechanisms to be used during the implementation stage. Mexico supports subnational implementation as an interim measure and proposes that REDD+ should be considered as a nationally appropriate mitigation action (NAMA), but that it should also be treated differently due to its complexity (Peña del Valle, A., Ramírez, G. & Madrid, S. 2010).
Activities
Nationally, Mexico is already implementing numerous activities related to REDD readiness and the development of its national strategy, including actions under the framework of the FCPF, development of the MRV system, public policy alignment (e.g. between SEMARNAT and SAGARPA), development of the reference level, and carbon monitoring, among others. The country is also coordinating a wide array of financing instruments designed to consolidate and enhance REDD+ related policies.
CONAFOR is currently implementing three “Early Actions” in Jalisco, the Yucatán Peninsula and Chiapas to explore different scalable institutional arrangements for future implementation of REDD+ (e.g., development of local governance mechanisms). There are also a number of regional, state and local initiatives being undertaken by state governments and their corresponding agencies. Moreover, there are a number of projects being designed and implemented by non-governmental organizations and individual landowners. Since few of these activities cover all aspects of REDD+, these will serve as examples and provide lessons learned for the future implementation of REDD+ at different levels. Two states - Chiapas and Campeche - are part of the Governors' Climate and Forests Task Force that seeks to integrate REDD+ and other forest carbon activities into emerging greenhouse gas (GHG) compliance regimes in the United States and elsewhere.
Financing
Financing for REDD+ activities in Mexico comes from a range of bilateral, multilateral and domestic sources. Bilateral sources include the Government of Norway (NOK$90 million ~ US$15.4 million), the French Development Agency (MX$2 million ~ US$165,000), the Spanish Agency for International Development Cooperation (EU$40,000 ~ US$55,000) and the United States Agency for International Development. Multilateral resources come mainly from the FCPF (US$3.6 million), the European Union’s Latin America Investment Facility (EU$2 million ~ US$2.8 million), as well as other related investments from UNDP, IDB, IBRD and the GEF. The country is currently exploring other funding alternatives that include the FIP (US$40 million to US$60 million).
CONAFOR has a budget that is disbursed through the Mexican Forest Fund, which is funding and co-financing a number of national REDD+ initiatives. At the sub-national level, many states are also using their own budgets to finance REDD+ related activities. Some projects developed by non-profit organizations are being funded through foundation grants, the private sector and internal budgets. There are also a number of successful environmental trust funds working in the forest sector that could serve as models for future REDD+ funding mechanisms.
External Links
References
CCMSS. 2007. El Mercado Ilegal De La Madera En México. Nota informativa número 16. Red de monitoreo de políticas pública. Consejo Civil Mexicano para la Silvicultura Sostenible. [Online] Available: http://www.ccmss.org.mx/biblioteca.php?Id=185 [Accessed: 13th October 2011]
CCMSS. 2008. Tramitología: un fuerte obstáculo para el sector forestal de México. Nota informativa número 19. Red de monitoreo de políticas pública. Consejo Civil Mexicano para la Silvicultura Sostenible. [Online] Availablehttp://www.ccmss.org.mx/biblioteca.php?Id=200. [Accessed: 13th October 2011]
CONAFOR. 2010a. Readiness Preparation Proposal (R-PP) Template (2010). Forest Carbon Partnership Facility, SEMARNAT-CONAFOR.
CONAFOR, 2010b. Visión de México sobre REDD+: Hacia una Estrategia Nacional. Author, Mexico.
FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS. 2010. Global Forest Resources Assessment 2010. FAO, Rome.
FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS. 2010.Evaluación de los Recursos Forestales Mundiales 2010. Informe nacional – Mexico. FAO, Rome. (FRA2010/132)
GOBIERNO FEDERAL MEXiICO. 2007. Plan Nacional de Desarrollo 2007-2012. [Online]. Available from http://pnd.calderon.presidencia.gob.mx/. [Accessed: 26th July 2011]
INEGI. 2011. Estadística–Economía. [Online]. Available from http://www.inegi.org.mx/Sistemas/temasV2/Default.aspx?s=est&c=23824[Accessed: 15th September 2011]
SAGARPA. 2009. Documento de Posición Institucional de la Evaluación Específica de Desempeño 2008. Mexico. [Online]. Available from: http://www.coneval.gob.mx/cmsconeval/rw/resource/coneval/eval_mon/3722.pdf?view=true. [Accessed: 5th November, 2011].
SEMARNAT. 2009a. La Economía del Cambio Climático. Mexico
SEMARNAT. 2009. Programa Especial de Cambio Climático 2009-2012. Mexico.
SEMARNAT-INE. 2009. Cuarta Comunicación Nacional ante la CMNUCC. Mexico.
VHUGEN, D., et al. 2011. Case studies on redd+ and carbon rights: Property rights and resource governance project (PRRGP). USAID.
ANON. 2011. (Unpublished) Reinforcing REDD+ Readiness in Mexico and enabling South-South cooperation [Project document].
CONAFOR. 2010a. Readiness Preparation Proposal (R-PP) Template (2010). Forest Carbon Partnership Facility. SEMARNAT-CONAFOR.
CONAFOR, 2010b. Visión de México sobre REDD+: Hacia una Estrategia Nacional. Mexico.
CONAFOR. 2011. Fondo Estratégico sobre el Clima. Programa de Inversión Forestal. SEMARNAT-CONAFOR [Unpublished]
CRONKLETON., P. et al. 2011. Community Forest Management and the Emergence of Multi-Scale Governance Institutions: Lessons for REDD+ Development from Mexico, Brazil and Bolivia. Forests 2, 451-473.
DOF. 1917. Constitución Política de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos. Mexico. (art. 2, 27)
DOF. 1992. Ley Agraria. [1992]. Mexico. (art. 9, 10, 11)
DOF. 2003. Ley General de Desarrollo Forestal Sustentable. Mexico. (art. 5, 7)
FCPF. 2011. REDD Readiness Progress Fact Sheet, Country: Mexico. Forest Carbon Partnership Facility.
FELICANI, F. & PESKETT, L. 2011. Carbon Rights in REDD+: The Case of Mexico.REDD net.
USAID. 2011. Country profile. Property rights and resource governance – Mexico.
CONAFOR. 2010a. Readiness Preparation Proposal (R-PP) Template (2010). Forest Carbon Partnership Facility. SEMARNAT-CONAFOR
FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS. 2010. Global Forest Resources Assessment 2010. FAO, Rome.
FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS. 2010.Evaluación de los Recursos Forestales Mundiales 2010. Informe nacional – Mexico. FAO, Rome. (FRA2010/132)
SARUKHAN, J. et al. 2009. Capital natural de México. Síntesis: conocimiento actual, evaluación y perspectivas de sustentabilidad. Comisión Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad. México.
SEMARNAT-INE, 2009. Cuarta Comunicación Nacional ante la CMNUCC. Mexico.
ENRIQUEZ, S. et al. nd. Assessment of Tropical Forest and Biodiversity Conservation in Mexico. USAID.
CEIBA-AID. 2010. Aplicación de mecanismos de REDD en ejidos y comunidades. USAID/Mexico Competitiveness Program.
USAID, 2010. Low emission development strategy: pre-scoping mission assessment Mexico.
PENA DEL VELLA, A., et al. 2010. Reducción de Emisiones por Deforestación, y Degradación en México: Iniciativas, territorios y actores de un proceso en marcha. Fundación Prisma.
PERRON-WELCH, F. 2011. REDD, Forest Biodiversity Conservation and Respect For Human Rights: Mexico’s Approach. International Development Law Organization and the Centre for International Sustainable Development Law.