Private sector perception of reducing deforestation in brazil: analysis of challenges from 2010 to 2019




REDD+, stakeholder, policy network analysis, governance, policy domain, Brazil


Purpose: This paper aims to shed light on the private sector's perspective on REDD+ in Brazil, and how this perspective has evolved over time. Methodology/Approach: This research is part of the Global Comparative Study on REDD+ (GCS REDD+) on policies and political processes from the Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR).  Findings: Our results indicate that national business organizations believe that REDD+ is an affordable way to mitigate climate change. However, it suggests that while this sector is seeking financial benefits from REDD+ activities, it is taking a very cautious and risk-averse approach. The private sector is not engaged and does not self-identify within the operational challenges that REDD+ policymakers are grappling with as they seek to embrace the possibilities of this mechanism. Research Limitation/Implication: To explore how these private sector actors perceive REDD+, whether such a perspective has changed from 2010 to 2019, and its implications for further REDD+ design in the national context. Originality/Value of the paper: private actors' positions on key statements about financing, benefit sharing and equity, governance, and challenges over three different time periods. A better understanding of how the private sector perceives REDD+ will contribute to national framing and more effective multi-level governance.


Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Patricia Gallo, BluoVerda Deutschland

PhD in forest governance and management, she is a forest engineer, social and environmental researcher from Brazil with many years of experience in project development and policy advice, working with different actors (from traditional communities to private sector and government, for example). Patrícia has always been interested in multi-disciplinary topics that affect environmental and development issues, particularly because they are highly relevant and intimately connected in her home country. The focus of her work is related to green measures to reduce climate change and deforestation, and social behavior changes towards sustainable development and valorization of natural resources.

Maria Fernanda Gebara, Center for International Forestry Research

Graduated in Law from the Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro (2005), master's degree in Environment and Development from the London School of Economics and Political Sciences (2009) and doctorate in Institutions, Markets and Regulation from the Graduate Program in Development, Agriculture and Society of the Federal Rural University of Rio de Janeiro (2015). Working with indigenous peoples, traditional communities, small and large producers in the Amazon since 2004. The focus of my work is on issues related to traditional knowledge, indigenous spirituality, ontologies, cosmopolitics, other than human beings and climate change. I have also worked as a consultant for different organisations such as the Ministry of Environment in Brazil, the Inter-American Development Bank and the Nature Conservancy. 

Tatiane Micheletti, The University of British Columbia

Bachelor in Biology from the University of Vale do Itajaí, Master in Veterinary Sciences from the Federal University of Paraná, and Master in Sustainable Management of Tropical Forests from the Universities of Bangor and Technical University of Dresden (Double-degree held in Europe). He holds a Full Doctorate Abroad with a full CNPq scholarship in Forest Zoology. Postdoctoral fellow in ecological modeling at the University of British Columbia / Pacific Forestry Center (Canada). He has experience in zoology, with an emphasis on wildlife conservation and management, and already works with endocrinology and non-invasive hormone monitoring.

Alice Dantas Brites, University of São Paulo

Biologist and postdoctoral researcher at Geolab, Escola Superior de Agricultura Luiz de Queiroz. PhD in Environmental Science from the University of São Paulo with an internship period at the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (Spain), Master in Environmental Science from the University of São Paulo and Bachelor and Degree in Biology from the Institute of Biosciences of the University of São Paulo. Winner of the Dow-USP Sustainability Award in 2011 and selected by the Latin American and Caribbean Environmental Economics Program (LACEEP) to participate in the Experimental Economics course offered at the Centro Agronómico Tropical de Investigación y Enseanza (CATIE, Costa Rica) in 2013.


[Brazilian REDD+ Alliance] (2020). Programa Floresta+ and voluntary carbon markets. Acessed 24 April 2021.

[CIF] Climate Investment Funds. (2013). Incentivizing the involvement of the private sector in REDD+: a review of early experiences and lessons learned in the Forest Investment Program. Accessed 14 June 2020.

[GEF] Global Environmental Facility. (2011). Revised strategy for enhancing engagement with the private sector. GEF Council, GEF/C.41/09/Rev.01.

[IETA] International Emissions Trading Association. (2018). Guidance and Conditions for Attracting Private Sector Investments to National REDD+. International Position Paper. Accessed 14 June 2020.

[MMA] Ministry of Environment. (2016). ENREDD+ Estratégia Nacional para Redução das Emissões Provenientes do Desmatamento e da Degradação Florestal, Conservação dos Estoques de Carbono Florestal, Manejo Sustentável de Florestas e Aumento de Estoques de Carbono Florestal. Accessed 03 February 2020.

[MMA] Ministry of Environment. (2018). REDD+ results-based payments for results achieved by Brazil in the Amazon biome in 2014 and 2015. GCF Documentation Funding Proposal, pdf version. Accessed 26 April 2020.

[NORAD] - Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation. (2011). Real-Time Evaluation of Norway's International Climate and Forest Initiative. Contributions to National REDD+ Processes 2007-2010: country report Brazil. Evaluation Report 13/2010. Evaluation Department, Oslo, Norway.

[PRODES] Projeto de Monitoramento do Desmatamento na Amazônia Legal por Satélite (Program to Calculate Deforestation in the Amazon). (2020). Observação da Terra. Accessed 22 June 2021.

[PRODES] Projeto de Monitoramento do Desmatamento na Amazônia Legal por Satélite (Program to Calculate Deforestation in the Amazon). (2016). Observação da Terra. Accessed 22 June 2021.

[UNFCCC] United Nations Framework on Climate Change. (2019). Forest protection in Brazil boosted through REDD-plus. Accessed 14 June 2020.

Adler, N.J. (1991). International Dimensions of Organizational Behavior. MA: PWSKENT Publishing Company, 2nd edition, pp. 63-91, Boston, USA.

Agrawal, A., Nepstad. D., Chhatre, A. (2011). Reduced emissions from deforestation and forest degradation. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 36, 373-396.

Agrawal, S., Ambury, H., Parida, D., & Joshi, N. (2022). Understanding risk communication in practice: Insights from municipalities in Alberta, Canada. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 79, 103175.

Angelsen, A., Martius, C., De Sy, V., Duchelle, E., Larson A.M. & Pham T.T. (eds.). (2018). Transforming REDD+: Lessons and new directions. CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia.

Assunção, J., & Chiavari, J. (2015) Towards efficient land use in Brazil. The New Climate Economy, 28 pp.

Atmadja S., Arwida, S., Martius, C., & Pham, T.T. (2018). Financing REDD+: A transaction among equals, or an uneven playing field? In Angelsen A, Martius C, De Sy V, Duchelle AE, Larson AM and Pham TT, eds. Transforming REDD+: Lessons and new directions. Bogor, Indonesia: CIFOR. 29-39.

Azevedo, A., Rajão, R., Costa, M. Stabile, M., Macedo, M., Reis, T., Alencar, A., Soares-Filho, B., & Pacheco, R. (2017). Limits of Brazil's Forest Code as a means to end illegal deforestation. PNAS, 114, 7653-7658.

Azevedo-Ramos, C. & Moutinho, P. (2018). No man's land in the Brazilian Amazon: Could undesignated public forests slow. Amazon deforestation? Land Use Policy 73, 125-27.

Bernard, F., Mcfatridge, S. & Minang, P. (2012). The private sector in the REDD+ supply chain: trends, challenges and opportunities. IISD Report, 62 pp.

Bidone, F., & Kovacic, Z. (2018). From nationalism to global climate change: analysis of the historical evolution of environmental governance in the Brazilian Amazon. International Forestry Review, 20(4), 420-435.

Böcher, M., & Toller, A.E. (2003). Conditions for the emergence of alternative environmental policy instruments, Paper presented at the Second European Consortium of Political Research Conference (ECPR), Marburg, Germany, 18-21 September.

Bodin, Ö., Sandström, A., & Crona, B. (2016). Collaborative Networks for Effective Ecosystem-Based Management: A Set of Working Hypotheses. Policy Studies Journal, 45(2), 289-314.

Brockhaus, M., & Di Gregorio, M. (2014). National REDD+ policy networks: From cooperation to conflict. Ecology and Society, 19(4), 14.

Brockhaus, M., Di Gregorio, M., & Carmenta, R. (2014). REDD+ policy networks: Exploring actors and power structures in an emerging policy domain. Ecology and Society, 19(4), 29.

Bureekul, T. (2000). Public participation in environmental management in Thailand. Center for the Study of Thai Politics and Democracy, King Prajadhipok's Institute, Thailand, pp. 67.

Cabello, J., & Gilbertson, T. (2012). A colonial mechanism to enclose lands: a critical review of two REDD+ focused special issues. Ephemera, 12, 162-180.

Carrer, M., Maia, A., Vinholis, M., & Filho, H. (2020). Assessing the effectiveness of rural credit policy on the adoption of integrated crop-livestock systems in Brazil. Land Use Policy, 92, 1044-1068.

Chesoh, S. (2010). Community perception, satisfaction and participation toward power plant development in Southernmost of Thailand. Journal of Sustainable Development, 3(2), 84-88.

Cleaver, F. (2012). Development through Bricolage: Rethinking Institutions for Natural Resource Management. London: Routledge, 224 pp.

Cotula, L. & Mayers, J. (2009). Tenure in REDD: start point or afterthought? Natural Resource Issues, No. 15. London, UK: International Institute for Environment and Development, 67 pp.

Da Silva A, Cenamo M & Chávez G. (2017). Mapeamento dos Fluxos Financeiros para REDD+ e Uso da Terra no Brasil: análise nacional e subnacional para período de 2009 a 2016. [In Portuguese]. Forest Trends/IDESAM Report, Brazil. pdf version, 33pp. Accessed 03 April 2020. publicacao/Mapeamento-fluxos-REDD.pdf

Dedeurwaerdere, T. (2005). The contribution of network governance to sustainable development. Idées pour le débat (ex-Les Séminaires de l'Iddri n° 13), 15pp.

DeShazo, J., Lal Pandey, C. & Smith, Z. (2016). Why REDD will fail. Studies in Environmental Policy. Published by Routledge Focus, Taylor and Francis Group, London, UK and New York, USA.

Di Gregorio, M. & Brockhaus, M. (2010). A brief overview: Component 1 on national REDD+ policies and processes. CIFOR Brief 13. CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia.

Di Gregorio. M., Brockhaus, M., Cronin, T., Muharrom, E., Mardiah, S., & Santoso, L. (2015). Deadlock or transformational change? Exploring public discourse on REDD+ across seven countries. Global Environmental Politics, 15(4), 63-84.

Duchelle, A., Simonet, G., Sunderlin, W. & Wunder, S. (2018). What is REDD+ achieving on the ground? Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 32:134-40.

Fatorelli, L., Gebara, M. F., May, P., Zhang, S., & Di Gregorio, M. (2015). The REDD+ governance landscape and the challenge of coordination in Brazil (Vol. 115). CIFOR.

Fosci, M. (2013). The Economic Case for prioritizing governance over financial incentives in REDD+. Climate Policy, 13:170-190.

Fujisaki, T., Hyakumura, K., Scheyvens, H., & Cadman, T. (2016). Does REDD+ Ensure Sectoral Coordination and Stakeholder Participation? A Comparative Analysis of REDD+ National Governance Structures in Countries of Asia-Pacific Region. Forests, 7(195), 1-17.

Gallo, P., & Albrecht, E. (2019). Brazil and the Paris Agreement: REDD+ as an instrument of Brazil's Nationally Determined Contribution compliance. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics Journal 19(1), 123-44.

Gallo, P., Brites, A., & Micheletti, T. (2020). REDD+ achievements and challenges in Brazil: Perceptions over time (2015-2019). Infobrief 288. CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia.

Gebara, M., & Agrawal, A. (2017). Beyond rewards and punishments in the Brazilian Amazon: Practical implications of the REDD+ discourse. Forests 2017(8), 66.

Gebara, M., Fatorelli, L., May, P., & Zhang, S. (2014). REDD+ policy networks in Brazil: constraints and opportunities for successful policy making. Ecology and Society 19(3), 53.

Gebara, M., Gallo, P., Brites, A. & Micheletti, T. (2020). The Pluriversality of Efforts to Reduce Deforestation in Brazil over the Past Decade: An Analysis of Policy Actors' Perceptions. Forests, 11, 1061-1079.

Gebara, M.F., May, P., Carmenta, R., Calixto, B., Brockhaus, M., & Di Gregorio, M. Norman, Marigold & Nakhooda, Smita, The State of REDD+ Finance (May 2015). Center for Global Development Working Paper No. 378, Available at SSRN: or

Gibbs, H., Rausch, L., Munger, J., Schelly, I., Morton, D., Noojipady, P., Soares-Filho, B., Barreto, P., Micol, L., & Walker, N. (2015). Brazil's Soy Moratorium. Science, 347(6220), 377-378.

Graham, J., Amos, B., & Plumptre, T. (2003). Principles for good governance in the 21st Century. Institute on Governance, Policy Brief 15, 9 pp.

Greenpeace (2015). The Amazon's silent crisis: license to Launder. Greenpeace Brazil Report, pdf version.

Gregersen H., Lakany H. E., Karsenty A., & White A. (2010). Does the opportunity cost approach indicate the real cost of REDD+. Technical Report, Rights and Resources Initiative, Washington, DC, USA.

Guéneau, S. (2018). Neoliberalism and the emergence of private sustainability initiatives: the case of the Brazilian cattle value chain. Business Strategy and the Environment, 27, 240-251.

Guerra, R. & Moutinho, P. (2020). Challenges of Sharing REDD+ Benefits in the Amazon Region. Forests 11(9):1012

Hajjar, R., Newton, P., Adshead, D., Bogaerts, M., Maguire-Rajpaul, V., Pinto, L., McDermott, C., Milder, J., Wollenberg, E., & Agrawal, A. (2019). Scaling up sustainability in commodity agriculture: transferability of governance mechanisms across the coffee and cattle sectors in Brazil. Journal of Cleaner Production, 206: 124-132.

Henderson, I., Coello, J., Fischer, R., Mulder, I., & Christophersen, T. (2013). The Role of the Private Sector in REDD+: The Case for Engagement and Options for Intervention. UN-REDD Policy Brief, 4:12.

Hsieh, H., & Shannon, S. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277-1288.

Koch, N., Ermgassen, E., Wehkamp, J., Filho, F. & Schwerhoff, G. (2019). Agricultural productivity and forest conservation: evidence from the Brazilian Amazon. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 101(3), 919-940.

Laing, T., Taschini, L. & Palmer, C. (2016). Understanding the demand for REDD+ credits. Environmental Conservation, 43(4):389-396.

Lambin, E., Gibbs, H., Heilmayr, R., Carlson, k., Fleck, L., Garret, R., le Polain de Waroux, Y., McDemort, C., McLaughlin, D., Nweton, P., Nolte C., Pacheco, P., Rausch, L., Streck, C., Thorlakson, T., & Walker, N. (2018). The role of supply-chain initiatives in reducing deforestation. Nature Climate Change, Perspective. Macmillan Publishers, 8pp.

Larson, A.M., Corbera, E., Cronkleton, P., van Dam, C., Bray, D., Estrada, M., & Pacheco, P. (2010). Rights to forests and carbon under REDD+ initiatives in Latin America. CIFOR InfoBrief 33. CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia.

Leventon, J., Kalaba, F., Dyer, J.., Stringer, L., & Dougill, A. (2014). Delivering community benefits through REDD+: lessons from joint forest management in Zambia. Forest Policy and Economics, 44, 10-17.

Lima, P.G.B. (2014). Strengthening livelihood flows on Payment for Environmental Services through local lenses: evidences from the Bolsa Floresta Programme. Journal of Sustainable Development Studies 7(1), 52-83.

Lima. P.G.B. (2017). Brazil in the global forest governance: The Brazilian initiative of developing a national strategy on REDD+ policies [PhD Thesis]. Cottbus, Germany: BTU Cottbus-Senftenberg.

Lindsay, P. & Norman, D.A. (1977). Human information processing: An Introduction to psychology. 2nd edition, Academic Press Inc.

Loft, L., Ravikumar, A., Gebara, M. F., Pham, T. T., Resosudarmo, I. A. P., Assembe, S., Tovar, J. G., Mwangi, M., & Andersson, K. (2015). Taking stock of carbon rights in REDD+ candidate countries: concept meets reality. Forests, 6(4), 1031-1060.

Lubowski, R., & Rose, S. (2013). The potential for REDD+: Key economic modeling insights and issues. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy 7(1), 67-90.

Lujan, B., & Sliva-Chávez, G. (2018). Mapping Forest Finance: a Landscape of Available Sources of Finance for REDD+ and Climate Action in Forests. Environmental Defense Fund, Forest Trends, and International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Working Paper. New York, USA.

Maniatis, D., Scriven, J., Jonckheere, I., Laughlin, J., & Todd, K. (2019). Toward REDD+ Implementation. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 44, 8.1-8.26.

May, P. H., Millikan, B., & Gebara, M. F. (2011a). The context of REDD+ in Brazil: drivers, agents, and institutions. Occasional paper 55. CIFOR: Bogor, Indonesia. Revised edition.

May, P.H., Calixto, B., & Gebara, M.F. (2011b). REDD+ politics in the media: a case study from Brazil. Working Paper 55. CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia.

Mbatu, R. (2016). Redd + research: Reviewing the literature, limitations and ways forward. Forest Policy and Economics, 73, 140-152.

Moeliono, M., Brockhaus, M., Gallemore, C., Dwisatrio, B., Maharani, C., Muharrom, E., & Pham, T.T. (2020). REDD+ in Indonesia: A new mode of governance or just another project? Forest Policy and Economics 121, 102-316.

Myers, R., Fisher, M., Monterroso, I., Liswanti, N., Maryudi, A., Larson, A. M., ... & Herawati, T. (2022). Coordinating forest tenure reform: Objectives, resources and relations in Indonesia, Kenya, Nepal, Peru, and Uganda. Forest Policy and Economics, 139, 102718.

Nepstad D., McGrath, D., Stickler, C., Alencar, A., Azevedo, A., Swette, B., Bezerra, T., DiGiano, M., Shimada, J., Motta, R., Armijo, E., Castello, L., Brando, P., Hansen, M., McGrath-Horn, M., Carvalho, O., & Hess, L. (2014). Slowing Amazon deforestation through public policy and interventions in beef and soy supply chains. Science, 344(618), 1118-1123.

Newig, J., D. Günther, & C. Pahl-Wostl. (2010). Synapses in the network: learning in governance networks in the context of environmental management. Ecology and Society 15(4), 24.

Norman M. & Nakhooda S. (2015). The state of REDD+ finance. Center for Global Development Working Paper 378.

Norsworthy, L. A. (2000). Rural Development, natural resources and the environment: lessons of experience in Eastern Europe and Central Asia. World Bank, n. 20265, 136 pp. Washington, DC, USA.

OECD. (2012). Measuring regulatory performance: a practitioner's guide to perception surveys, OECD Publishing.

Ozinga, S. (2012) The Impact of REDD on Forest Governance. In: Moving Forward with Forest Governance. ETFRN news, 53, 141-148.

Peskett, L., & Brodnig, G. (2011). Carbon Rights in REDD+: Exploring the Implications for Poor and Vulnerable People. World Bank and REDD-net Working Paper. Accessed 14 June 2020.

Peters, B. G. (2018). The challenge of policy coordination. Journal Policy Design and Practice, 1(1):1-11.

Pham, T.T., Moeliono, M., Yuwono, J., Dwisatrio, B. & Gallo, P. (2021b). REDD+ finance in Brazil, Indonesia and Vietnam: Stakeholder perspectives between 2009-2019. Global Environmental Change, 70, 1023-1030.

Pham, T.T., Ngo, H.C., Dao, T.L.C., Hoang, T.L. & Moeliono, M. (2021a). Participation and influence of REDD+ actors in Vietnam, 2011-2019. Global Environmental Change, 68, 1022-1049.

Phan T.H.D., Brouwer, R., & Davidson, M. (2014). The economic costs of avoided deforestation in the developing world: a meta-analysis. J Forest Econ 20(1), 1-16.

Picoli, M., Rorato, A., Leitão, P., Camara, G., Maciel, A., Hostet, P., & Sanches, I. (2020). Impacts of public and private sector policies on soybean and pasture expansion in Mato Grosso - Brazil from 2001 to 2017. Land, 9(20),15. Basel, Switzerland.

Pierre, J. & Peters, G. (2000). Governance, politics, and the state. New York, St. Martin's Press.

Purnomo, H., Okarda, B., Puspitaloka, D., Ristiana, N., Sanjaya, M., Komarudin, H., ... & Brady, M. A. (2023). Public and private sector zero-deforestation commitments and their impacts: A case study from South Sumatra Province, Indonesia. Land Use Policy, 134, 106818.

Rao, V. S. P., & Narayana, P. S. (1998). Organisation theory and behaviour. Delhi: Konark Publishing Company, pp. 329-330.

Ravikumar, A., Larson, A., Myers, R. & Trench, T. (2018). Inter-sectoral and multilevel coordination alone do not reduce deforestation and advance environmental justice: Why bold contestation works when collaboration fail. Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space. SAGE, 36(8), 1437-1457.

Sanches, J. & Bataglia, W. (2015). The Legal institutional environment in Brazil and the collective and private guarantee mechanisms for economic transactions. 10th Research Workshop on Institutions and Organizations - RWIO Center for Organization Studies - CORS.

Sheng, J. (2020). Private sector participation and incentive coordination of actors in REDD+. Forest Policy and Economics, 118, 1-11.

Simonet G., Atmadja, S., Agrawal A., Bénédet F., Cromberg M., de Perthuis C., Haggard D., Jansen N., Karsenty A., Liang W., Morel, A., Newton P., Sales A-M, Satwika, A., Schaap B., Seyller C., Selviana, V., & Vaillant G. (2020). ID-RECCO, International Database on REDD+ projects and programs: Linking Economics, Carbon and Communities.

Skole, D., Chomentowski, W., Salas, W. & Nobre, A. (1994). Physical and human dimensions of deforestation in Amazonia. BioScience, 44(5), 314-22.

Skutsch, M., Torres, A. & Fuentes, J. (2017). Policy for pro-poor distribution of REDD+ benefits in Mexico: How the legal and technical challenges are being addressed. Forest Policy and Economics, 75, 58-66.

Sparovek, G., Reydon, B., Pinto, L., Faria, V., Freitas, F., Azevedo-Ramos. C., Gardner, T., Hamamura, C., Rajão, R., & Cerignoni, F. (2019). Who owns Brazilian lands? Land Use Policy 87, 1-3.

Thompson, M.C., Baruah, M., & Carr, E.R. (2011). Seeing REDD+ as a project of environmental governance. Environental Science Policy, 14, 100-110.

Tyler, T., & Fagan, J. (2008). Legitimacy and cooperation: Why do people help the police fight crime in their communities. Ohio State Journal Criminal Law, 6, 231-276.

Van der Hoff, R., Rajão, R., Leroy, P. & Boezeman, D. (2015). The parallel materialization of REDD+ implementation discourses in Brazil. Forest Policy and Economics, 55, 37-45.

Vatn, A. and Angelsen, A. (2009). Options for a national REDD+ architecture. In: Angelsen, A. with Brockhaus, M., Kanninen, M., Sills, E., Sunderlin, W. D. and Wertz-Kanounnikoff, S. (eds) 2009. Realising REDD+: National strategy and policy options. CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia, 5, 57-74.

Virah-Sawmy, M., Duran, A., Green, J., Guerrero, A., Biggs, D., & West, C. (2019). Sustainability gridlock in a global agricultural commodity chain: Reframing the soy-meat food system. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 18, 210-223.

Walker, N., Patel, S. & Kalif, K. (2013). From Amazon pasture to the high street: deforestation and the Brazilian cattle product supply chain. Tropical Conservation Science. Open Access Journal, Special Issue, 6(3), 446-467.

Wensing D. (2021). Why forest-based carbon trading is poised to go mainstream. Accessed 28 June 2021.

Wong, G., Luttrell, C., Loft, L., Yang, A., Pham, T., Naito, D., Assembe-Mvodo, S. & Brockhaus, M. (2019). Narratives in REDD + benefit sharing: examining evidence within and beyond the forest sector, Climate Policy, 19(8), 1038-1051.

Wunder, S., Duchelle, A., Sassi, C. Sills, E., Simonet, G. & Sunderlin, W. (2020) REDD+ in Theory and Practice: How Lessons From Local Projects Can Inform Jurisdictional Approaches. Frontiers in Forest and Global Change, 3(11), 1-17.




How to Cite

Gallo, P., Gebara, M. F., Micheletti, T., & Brites, A. D. (2023). Private sector perception of reducing deforestation in brazil: analysis of challenges from 2010 to 2019. Revista Produção E Desenvolvimento, 9(1).



Territorial Affairs