Glocalizing land-use and forest governance implies in advancing equitable research partnerships between institutions in the Global South and Global North, and strengthening a community of practice for critical enquiry and engagement in partnerships for sustainable development. Land-use, climate and forest governance mechanisms must redress power dynamics, and partnership models, and commit to improving well-being and sustainable livelihood outcomes.

Glocalizing land-use and forest governance implies in advancing equitable research partnerships between institutions in the Global South and Global North, and strengthening a community of practice for critical enquiry and engagement in partnerships for sustainable development. Land-use, climate and forest governance mechanisms must redress power dynamics, and partnership models, and commit to improving well-being and sustainable livelihood outcomes.

Glocalizing land-use and forest governance implies in advancing equitable research partnerships between institutions in the Global South and Global North, and strengthening a community of practice for critical enquiry and engagement in partnerships for sustainable development. Land-use, climate and forest governance mechanisms must redress power dynamics, and partnership models, and commit to improving well-being and sustainable livelihood outcomes.

Over the past two decades, growing recognition of forest-based Indigenous peoples and local communities (IPs and LCs) sparked forest tenure reforms to formalize IP and LC rights to forests and forest lands through a variety of mechanisms. Nevertheless, tenure security, an intended objective of such reforms, has received less attention, despite being integral to the life and livelihoods of IPs and LCs and important for forests.

Alliance successfully integrated the concepts of sustainable healthy diets and sustainable food systems into the Q&A guidelines for the Strategy for Sustainable Agriculture and Rural Development, Period 2021–2030 and Vision to 2050 led by IPSARD-MARD.

ICARDA a mené cette recherche dans le cadre de la plateforme GENDER (Generating Evidence and New Directions for Equitable Results, en français : Produire des données probantes et concevoir de nouvelles directions en vue de résultats équitables) et de l’initiative du CGIAR De la fragilité à la résilience en Asie centrale et occidentale et en Afrique du Nord. Nous aimerions remercier tous les bailleurs de fonds qui ont soutenu cette recherche par le biais de contributions au Fonds fiduciaire du CGIAR

Las comunidades shipibas cuyos territorios se ubican en la provincia de Coronel Portillo, región Ucayali, enfrentan múltiples amenazas a sus derechos territoriales y sus vidas: narcotráfico, tala ilegal. Pero no solo actividades ilegales, también concesiones forestales y agrícolas otorgadas por el Ministerio de Agricultura y Riego en sus territorios. Los menonitas han deforestado grandes extensiones.

Agriculture is widely recognized as a solution to food insecurity and poverty, especially in rural areas. However, 75% of the world’s poor live in rural areas, and agriculture is the primary source of their livelihood. One may wonder if the observed correlation between agriculture and poverty also suggests causation. If that is the case, then what such causal relationship might exist? Is agriculture a vehicle for poverty alleviation or a source of poverty trap?

Since the global crises in the 2000s, many foreign and domestic actors have acquired large tracts of land for food and biofuel crop cultivation and other purposes in Africa, often leading to the displacement of the African people living on customary land. The weak customary land rights of ordinary African people have been viewed as one of the main factors making it possible for various land-grabbers to exploit customary land with different purposes.

With over 14 million hectares allocated, Vietnam’s forest and forestland allocation has been one of the largest natural resource decentralization programs in the developing world over the last three decades. Given this remarkable achievement, critics are concerned about the low rates of household tree planting investment and question the roles and effects of land institutions on investment.