CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 77Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource ManagementCommunity and Sustainable DevelopmentRegional Development and Innovation

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Making place-based sustainability initiatives visible in the Brazilian Amazon

Open access
Brondizio, Eduardo S, Andersson, Krister, de Castro, Fábio, Futemma, Célia, Salk, Carl, Tengö, Maria, Londres, Marina, Tourne, Daiana CM, Gonzalez, Taís S, Molina-Garzón, Adriana, Russo Lopes, Gabriela, Siani, Sacha MO·2021·Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability
DOI 10.1016/j.cosust.2021.03.007
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

From state-based developmentalism to community-based initiatives to market-based conservation, the Brazilian Amazon has been a laboratory of development interventions for over 50 years. The region is now confronting a devastating COVID-19 pandemic amid renewed environmental pressures and increasing social inequities. While these forces are shaping the present and future of the region, the Amazon has also become an incubator of local innovations and efforts confronting these pressures. Often overlooked, place-based initiatives involving individual and collective-action have growing roles in promoting regional sustainability. We review the history of development interventions influencing the emergence of place-based initiatives and their potential to promoting changes in productive systems, value-aggregation and market-access, and governance arrangements improving living-standards and environmental sustainability. We provide examples of initiatives documented by the AGENTS project, contextualizing them within the literature. We reflect on challenges and opportunities affecting their trajectories at this critical juncture for the future of the region.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cosust.2021.03.007

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 71

  1. Burke, 2010, Cooperatives for “fair globalization”? Indigenous people, cooperatives, and corporate social responsibility in the Brazilian Amazon, Latin Am Perspect, 37, 30, 10.1177/0094582X10382098 · DOI
  2. Futemma, 2020, Farmers and social innovations in rural development: collaborative arrangements in eastern Brazilian Amazon, Land Use Policy, 99, 10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104999 · DOI
  3. Falcão, 2015, Efficiency of different planted forests in recovering biodiversity and ecological interactions in Brazilian Amazon, For Ecol Manag, 339, 105, 10.1016/j.foreco.2014.12.007 · DOI
  4. Sanches, 2019, Seeds network and collective action for the restoration and conservation of Xingu River’s springs (Mato Grosso, Brazil), Desenvolv Meio Ambient (UFPR), 50, 127
  5. Yamada, 2002, An evaluation of agroforestry systems as a rural development option for the Brazilian Amazon, Agrofor Syst, 55, 81, 10.1023/A:1020523107243 · DOI
  6. Humphries, 2020, Searching for win-win forest outcomes: learning-by-doing, financial viability, and income growth for a community-based forest management cooperative in the Brazilian Amazon, World Dev, 125, 10.1016/j.worlddev.2018.06.005 · DOI
  7. Kainer, 1992, Tapping women’s knowledge: plant resource use in extractive reserves, Acre, Brazil, Econ Bot, 46, 408, 10.1007/BF02866513 · DOI
  8. Baggio, 2018, Determinants in value appropriation in smallholder farming innovations, Ciênc Rural, 48, 10.1590/0103-8478cr20170291 · DOI
  9. Espada, 2018, Manejo florestal comunitário em parceria na Amazônia Brasileira: o caso da flona do Tapajós, Rev Bras Gestão Desenvolv Reg, 14, 135
  10. Caetano, 2021, Political activity in social media induces forest fires in the Brazilian Amazon, Technol Forecast Soc Change, 167, 10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120676 · DOI
  11. Bennett, 2016, Bright spots: seeds of a good Anthropocene, Front Ecol Environ, 14, 441, 10.1002/fee.1309 · DOI
  12. Pereira, 2018, Using futures methods to create transformative spaces: visions of a good Anthropocene in southern Africa, Ecol Soc, 23, 19, 10.5751/ES-09907-230119 · DOI
  13. Scoones, 2020, Transformations to sustainability: combining structural, systemic and enabling approaches, Curr Opin Environ Sustain, 42, 65, 10.1016/j.cosust.2019.12.004 · DOI
  14. Lam, 2020, Scaling the impact of sustainability initiatives: a typology of amplification processes, Urban Transform, 2, 1, 10.1186/s42854-020-00007-9 · DOI
  15. Olsson, 2017, The concept of the Anthropocene as a game-changer: a new context for social innovation and transformations to sustainability, Ecol Soc, 22, 10.5751/ES-09310-220231 · DOI
  16. Bunker, 1982, The cost of modernity: inappropriate bureaucracy, inequality, and development program failure in the Brazilian Amazon, J Dev Areas, 16, 573
  17. Toledo, 2017, Development paradigms contributing to the transformation of the Brazilian Amazon: do people matter?, Curr Opin Environ Sustain, 26, 77, 10.1016/j.cosust.2017.01.009 · DOI
  18. Nepstad, 2014, Slowing Amazon deforestation through public policy and interventions in beef and soy supply chains, Science, 344, 1118, 10.1126/science.1248525 · DOI · Paper page
  19. Godar, 2014, Actor-specific contributions to the deforestation slowdown in the Brazilian Amazon, Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 111, 15591, 10.1073/pnas.1322825111 · DOI · Paper page
  20. Bastos Lima, 2020, Commodity-centric landscape governance as a double-edged sword: the case of soy and the Cerrado Working Group in Brazil, Front For Glob Change, 3, 10.3389/ffgc.2020.00027 · DOI · Paper page
  21. Adams, 2020, Governança Ambiental no Brasil: Acelerando em direção aos objetivos de desenvolvimento sustentável ou olhando pelo retrovisor?, Cadernos Gestão Pública e Cidadania, 25, 1, 10.12660/cgpc.v25n81.81403 · DOI
  22. Seixas, 2020, Governança Ambiental no Brasil: Rumo aos objetivos de desenvolvimento sustentável?, Cadernos Gestão Pública e Cidadania, 25, 1, 10.12660/cgpc.v25n81.81404 · DOI
  23. Walker, 2018, Endangered Amazon: an indigenous tribe fights back against hydropower development in the Tapajós valley, Environ Sci Policy Sustain Dev, 60, 4, 10.1080/00139157.2018.1418994 · DOI
  24. Aldrich, 2020, Agronomic or contentious land change? A longitudinal analysis from the Eastern Brazilian Amazon, PLoS One, 15, 10.1371/journal.pone.0227378 · DOI
  25. Schwartzman, 2018, Chico Mendes, the rubber tappers and the Indians: reimagining conservation and development in the Amazon, Desenvolv Meio Ambiente, 48, 10.5380/dma.v48i0.58829 · DOI
  26. Maués, 2010, Comunidades "no sentido social da evangelização": CEBs, camponeses e quilombolas na Amazônia Oriental Brasileira, Relig Soc, 30, 13, 10.1590/S0100-85872010000200002 · DOI
  27. Le Tourneau, 2013, Assessing the impacts of sustainable development projects in the Amazon: the DURAMAZ experiment, Sustain Sci, 8, 199, 10.1007/s11625-013-0200-1 · DOI
  28. Le Tourneau, 2015, The sustainability challenges of indigenous territories in Brazil’s Amazonia, Curr Opin Environ Sustain, 14, 213, 10.1016/j.cosust.2015.07.017 · DOI
  29. De Lima, 2019, Conditional cash transfers in the Amazon: from the nutrition transition to complex dietary behavior change, Ecol Food Nutr, 59, 130, 10.1080/03670244.2019.1678032 · DOI
  30. Brown, 2002, Innovations for conservation and development, Geogr J, 168, 6, 10.1111/1475-4959.00034 · DOI
  31. Dana, 2014, An unusual empirical pattern in an indigenous setting: cooperative entrepreneurship among Brazil nut (Bertholletia excelsa) harvesters, Int J Entrepreneurship Small Bus, 22, 137, 10.1504/IJESB.2014.062498 · DOI
  32. Gouvea, 2014, Sustainability and entrepreneurship: fostering indigenous entrepreneurship in the Brazilian Amazon region, Int J Soc Ecol Sustain Dev, 5, 48, 10.4018/ijsesd.2014070105 · DOI
  33. Hiedanpää, 2017, Emerging forest ecosystem service entrepreneurship in Finland and Peru, Int For Rev, 19
  34. Brondizio, 2009, Connectivity and the governance of multilevel social-ecological systems: the role of social capital, Ann Rev Environ Resour, 34, 253, 10.1146/annurev.environ.020708.100707 · DOI
  35. Clement, 1999, 1492 and the loss of Amazonian crop genetic resources. I. The relation between domestication and human population decline, Econ Bot, 53, 188, 10.1007/BF02866498 · DOI
  36. Smith, 1996, Agroforestry trajectories among smallholders in the Brazilian Amazon: innovation and resiliency in pioneer and older settled areas, Ecol Econ, 18, 15, 10.1016/0921-8009(95)00057-7 · DOI
  37. Browder, 2005, Agroforestry diffusion and secondary forest regeneration in the Brazilian Amazon: further findings from the Rondônia Agroforestry Pilot Project (1992-2002), Agrofor Syst, 65, 99, 10.1007/s10457-004-6375-9 · DOI
  38. Castro, 2015, Farming knowledge building between migrant and local peasants in the eastern Amazon [Conference presentation, May 26]
  39. Hiraoka, 1995, Land use changes in the Amazon estuary, Glob Environ Change, 5, 323, 10.1016/0959-3780(95)00066-W · DOI
  40. Padoch, 1985, Amazonian Agroforestry: a Market-oriented system in Peru, Agrofor Syst, 3, 47, 10.1007/BF00045738 · DOI
  41. Schmink, 2011, Forest citizens: changing life conditions and social identities in the land of the rubber tappers, Lat Am Res Rev, 46, 141, 10.1353/lar.2011.0035 · DOI
  42. Souza, 2011, Cooperativismo e economia solidária: uma análise do ambiente político-institucional e do desempenho de organizações cooperativas na Amazônia paraense, Movendo Ideias, 16
  43. Sousa, 2019, Cooperativismo em Comunidades florestais na amazônia: o que dizem os não-membros?, Ambient Soc, 22
  44. Burke, 2012, Transforming power in Amazonian extractivism: historical exploitation, contemporary "fair trade", and new possibilities for indigenous cooperatives and conservation, J Polit Ecol, 19, 114
  45. Shanley, 2011, Brazil’s social movement, women and forests: a case study from the National Council of Rubber Tappers, Int For Rev, 13, 236
  46. Castro, 2016, Local politics of floodplain tenure in the Amazon, Int J Commons, 10, 1, 10.18352/ijc.472 · DOI
  47. Pezzuti, 2018, Commoning in dynamic environments: community-based management of turtle nesting sites on the lower Amazon floodplain, Ecol Soc, 23, 36, 10.5751/ES-10254-230336 · DOI
  48. Guariguata, 2017, Revisiting the ‘cornerstone of Amazonian conservation’: a socioecological assessment of Brazil nut exploitation, Biodivers Conserv, 26, 2007, 10.1007/s10531-017-1355-3 · DOI
  49. Londres, 2017, Population structure and fruit production of Carapa guianensis (Andiroba) in Amazonian floodplain forests: implications for community-based management, Trop Conserv Sci, 10, 10.1177/1940082917718835 · DOI
  50. Soriano, 2012, Implementing multiple forest management in Brazil nut-rich community forests: effects of logging on natural regeneration and forest disturbance, For Ecol Manag, 268, 92, 10.1016/j.foreco.2011.05.010 · DOI
  51. Medina, 2009, Community forest management for timber extraction in the Amazon frontier, Int For Rev, 11, 408
  52. Berkes, 2004, Rethinking community-based conservation, Conserv Biol, 18, 621, 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00077.x · DOI
  53. McGrath, 2008, Constructing a policy and institutional framework for an ecosystem-based approach to managing the lower Amazon floodplain, Environ Dev Sustain, 10, 677, 10.1007/s10668-008-9154-3 · DOI
  54. McGrath, 2015, Market formalization, governance, and the integration of community fisheries in the Brazilian Amazon, Soc Nat Resour, 28, 513, 10.1080/08941920.2015.1014607 · DOI
  55. Castello, 2014, Understanding fishing-induced extinctions in the Amazon, Aquat Conserv Mar Freshw Ecosyst, 25, 587, 10.1002/aqc.2491 · DOI
  56. Jacauna, 2018, Horizontal and vertical diffusion of environmental policy in the Amazon, Novos Cadernos NAEA, 21, 233
  57. Olsson, 2008, Navigating the transition to ecosystem-based management of the Great Barrier Reef, Australia, Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 105, 9489, 10.1073/pnas.0706905105 · DOI
  58. Gelcich, 2010, Navigating transformations in governance of Chilean marine coastal resources, Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 107, 16794, 10.1073/pnas.1012021107 · DOI
  59. Abson, 2017, Leverage points for sustainability transformation, Ambio, 46, 30, 10.1007/s13280-016-0800-y · DOI
  60. Herrfahrdt-Pähle, 2020, Sustainability transformations: socio-political shocks as opportunities for governance transitions, Glob Environ Change, 63, 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2020.102097 · DOI
  61. Chan, 2020, Levers and leverage points for pathways to sustainability, People Nat, 2, 693, 10.1002/pan3.10124 · DOI
  62. Purcell, 2005, Against the local trap: scale and the study of environment and development, Prog Dev Stud, 5, 279, 10.1191/1464993405ps122oa · DOI
  63. Gebara, 2017, Beyond rewards and punishments in the Brazilian Amazon: practical implications of the REDD+ discourse, Forests, 8, 66, 10.3390/f8030066 · DOI · Paper page
  64. Sunderlin, 2005, Livelihoods, forests, and conservation in developing countries: an overview, World Dev, 33, 1383, 10.1016/j.worlddev.2004.10.004 · DOI
  65. Cunha, 2016, The implementation costs of forest conservation policies in Brazil, Ecol Econ, 130, 209, 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.07.007 · DOI
  66. Simmons, 2018, Discipline and develop: destruction of the Brazil nut forest in the lower Amazon Basin, Ann Am Assoc Geogr, 109
  67. Kohler, 2017, Considering the needs of indigenous and local populations in conservation programs, Conserv Biol, 31, 245, 10.1111/cobi.12843 · DOI
  68. Browder, 2002, Conservation and development projects in the Brazilian Amazon: lessons from the community initiative program in Rondônia, Environ Manag, 29, 750, 10.1007/s00267-001-2613-3 · DOI
  69. Andersson, 2008, Analyzing decentralized natural resource governance from a polycentric perspective, Policy Sci, 41, 1, 10.1007/s11077-007-9055-6 · DOI · Paper page
  70. Andersson, 2013, Local forest governance and the role of external organizations: some ties matter more than others, World Dev, 43, 226, 10.1016/j.worlddev.2012.09.001 · DOI
  71. Castro, 2020, The Brazilian Amazon in times of COVID-19: from crisis to transformation?, Ambient Soc, 23, 10.1590/1809-4422asoc20200123vu2020l3id · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Brondizio, E. S., Andersson, K., de Castro, F., Futemma, C., Salk, C., Tengö, M., Londres, M., Tourne, D. C., Gonzalez, T. S., Molina-Garzón, A., Russo Lopes, G., & Siani, S. M.
Affiliations
  • University of Colorado Boulder (US)
  • University of Amsterdam (NL)
  • Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP) (BR)
  • Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Alnarp (SE)
  • Stockholm University (SE)
  • Indiana University Bloomington (US)
Corresponding author
de Castro, Fábio
ORCID
Venue
Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-04
Volume
49
Pages
66-78
ISSN
1877-3435 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.cosust.2021.03.007
OpenAlex
W3163293840
Cited by
77
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 5
FWCI
1.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Epsilon Open Archive (Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet biblioteket (Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences)) (acceptedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Vetenskapsrådet
  • European Commission
  • Horizon 2020
  • Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo
  • International Science Council
  • National Science Foundation
  • Indiana University
  • Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
  • Social Sciences › Development › Community and Sustainable Development
  • Social Sciences › Development › Regional Development and Innovation
Keywords
Brazilian Amazon, development interventions, community initiatives, market-based conservation, state developmentalism, collective action, local innovation, value aggregation, market access, governance arrangements, environmental sustainability, social inequities, COVID-19 pandemic

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review