Tapping into nature’s benefits: values, effort and the struggle to co-produce pine resin

References

• Arias-Arévalo P, Gómez-Baggethun E, Martín-López B, Pérez-Rincón M (2018). Widening the evaluative space for ecosystem services: a taxonomy of plural values and valuation methods. Environ Values. 27(1), 29–53. DOI: 10.3197/096327118X15144698637513
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arias-Arévalo P, Martín-López B, Gómez-Baggethun E (2017). Exploring intrinsic, instrumental, and relational values for sustainable management of social-ecological systems. Ecology and Society, 22(4). DOI: 10.5751/ES-09812-220443 4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bello Baltazar E, Naranjo Piñera EJ, Vandame R (editors.). (2012). La otra innovación para el ambiente y la sociedad en la frontera sur de México. San Cristóbal de Las Casas: El Colegio de la Frontera Sur.
   Google Scholar
• Bennett EM, Cramer W, Begossi A, Cundill G, Díaz S, Egoh BN, Woodward G, Krug CB, Lavorel S, Lazos E (2015). Linking biodiversity, ecosystem services, and human well-being: three challenges for designing research for sustainability. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 14, 76–85. DOI: 10.1016/j.cosust.2015.03.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berbés-Blázquez M, González JA, Pascual U (2016). Towards an ecosystem services approach that addresses social power relations. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 19, 134–143. DOI: 10.1016/j.cosust.2016.02.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braasch M, García-Barrios L, Cortina-Villar S, Huber-Sannwald E, Ramírez-Marcial N (2018). TRUE GRASP: actors visualize and explore hidden limitations of an apparent win-win land management strategy in a MAB reserve. Environ Model Softw, 105, 153–170. DOI: 10.1016/j.envsoft.2018.03.022
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braasch M, García-Barrios L, Ramírez-Marcial N, Huber-Sannwald E, Cortina-Villar S (2017). Can cattle grazing substitute fire for maintaining appreciated pine savannas at the frontier of a montane forest biosphere-reserve? Agric Ecosyst Environ, 250, 59–71. DOI: 10.1016/j.agee.2017.08.033
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carpenter SR, Mooney HA, Agard J, Capistrano D, Defries RS, Díaz S, Whyte A, Duraiappah AK, Oteng-Yeboah A, Pereira HM (2009). Science for managing ecosystem services: beyond the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 106(5), 1305–1312. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0808772106
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Celedon JM, Bohlmann J (2019). Oleoresin defenses in conifers: chemical diversity, terpene synthases and limitations of oleoresin defense under climate change. New Phytologist, 224(4), 1444–1463. DOI: 10.1111/nph.15984
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chan KM, Gould RK, Pascual U (2018). Editorial overview: relational values: what are they, and what’s the fuss about? Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 35, A1–A7. DOI: 10.1016/j.cosust.2018.11.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chazdon RL, Uriarte M (2016). Natural regeneration in the context of large-scale forest and landscape restoration in the tropics. Biotropica, 48(6), 709–715. DOI: 10.1111/btp.12381
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen F, Yuan Y, Yu S, Zhang T (2015). Influence of climate warming and resin collection on the growth of Masson pine (Pinus massoniana) in a subtropical forest, southern China. Trees, 29, 1423–1430. DOI: 10.1007/s00468-015-1222-3 5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CONAFOR [Comisión Nacional Forestal]. (2013). La producción de resina de pino en México. Zapopan (Mexico): Comisión Nacional Forestal.
   Google Scholar
• CONASAMI [Comisión Nacional de los Salarios Mínimos]. (2020). Tabla de Salarios Mínimos Generales y Profesionales por Áreas Geográficas. 2020 Nov 26, Retrieved from https://www.gob.mx/conasami/documentos/tabla-de-salarios-minimos-generales-y-profesionales-por-areas-geograficas?idiom=es
   Google Scholar
• CONEVAL [Consejo Nacional de Evaluación de la Política de Desarrollo Social]. (2020). Líneas de pobreza por ingresos. 2020 Nov 28, Retrieved from http://sistemas.coneval.org.mx/InfoPobreza/Pages/wfrLineaBienestar
   Google Scholar
• Cord AF, Bartkowski B, Beckmann M, Dittrich A, Hermans-Neumann K, Kaim A, Volk M, Locher-Krause K, Priess J, Schröter-Schlaack C (2017). Towards systematic analyses of ecosystem service trade-offs and synergies: main concepts, methods and the road ahead. Ecosystem Services, 28, 264–272. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.07.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Costanza R, De Groot R, Braat L, Kubiszewski I, Fioramonti L, Sutton P, Grasso M, Grasso M (2017). Twenty years of ecosystem services: how far have we come and how far do we still need to go? Ecosystem Services, 28, 1–16. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.09.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Costanza R, De Groot R, Sutton P, Van Der Ploeg S, Anderson SJ, Kubiszewski I, Turner RK, Turner RK (2014). Changes in the global value of ecosystem services. Global Environmental Change, 26(1), 152–158. DOI: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.04.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cruz Morales J, García Barrios LE (2017). Reservas de la Biosfera en Chiapas, México: análisis de las interacciones sociales locales para la conservación y el desarrollo, ¿exclusión y clientelismo? In: García García A (editors.), Extractivismo y neoextractivismo en el sur de México: múltiples miradas (pp. 255–290). Texcoco: Universidad Autónoma Chapingo.
   Google Scholar
• Daily GC (editors.). (1997). Nature’s services: societal dependence on natural ecosystems. Washington (DC): Island Press.
   Google Scholar
• De Janvry A, Gordillo G, Sadoulet E, Platteau J-P (editors.). (2001). Access to Land, Rural Poverty, and Public Action. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Díaz S, Demissew S, Carabias J, Joly C, Lonsdale M, Ash N, Zlatanova D, Adhikari JR, Arico S, Báldi A (2015). The IPBES Conceptual Framework — connecting nature and people. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 14, 1–16. DOI: 10.1016/j.cosust.2014.11.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Díaz S, Pascual U, Stenseke M, Martín-López B, Watson RT, Molnár Z, Shirayama Y, Chan KMA, Baste IA, Brauman KA (2018). Assessing nature’s contributions to people. Science, 359(6373), 270–272. DOI: 10.1126/science.aap8826
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dvorak WS, Potter KM, Hipkins VD, Hodge GR (2009). Genetic Diversity and Gene Exchange in Pinus oocarpa, a Mesoamerican Pine with Resistance to the Pitch Canker Fungus (Fusarium circinatum). Int J Plant Sci, 170(5), 609–626. DOI: 10.1086/597780
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Egloff P (2019). Tapping Pinus oocarpa: assessing drivers of resin yield in natural stands of Pinus oocarpa [thesis]. Wageningen: Wageningen UR.
   Google Scholar
• ESP [Ecosystem Services Partnership]. (2020). Biome Working Group 9 - Rural landscapes. 2020 Jul 6, Retrieved from https://www.es-partnership.org/community/workings-groups/biome-working-groups/bwg-9-rural-landscapes/
   Google Scholar
• Faye P, Ribot J (2017). Causes for adaptation: access to forests, markets and representation in Eastern Senegal. Sustainability (Switzerland), 9(2), 1–20. DOI: 10.3390/su9020311
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fedele G, Locatelli B, Djoudi H (2017). Mechanisms mediating the contribution of ecosystem services to human well-being and resilience. Ecosystem Services, 28, 43–54. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.09.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fick SE, Hijmans RJ (2017). WorldClim 2: new 1‐km spatial resolution climate surfaces for global land areas. International Journal of Climatology, 37(12), 4302–4315. DOI: 10.1002/joc.5086
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fox J, Weisberg S (2019). An R Companion to Applied Regression (Third). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• García Barrios L, Álvarez Solís D, Brunel Manse C, Cruz Morales J, Gacría Barrios R, Hernández Ramírez F, Ejidatarios participantes de la CART. (2012). Innovación socioambiental en la Cuenca Alta del río El Tablón (CART), Sierra de Villaflores, Chiapas. Objetivo, estrategia y métodos de investigación-acción participativa. In: Bello Baltazar E, Naranjo Piñera EJ, Vandame R (editors.), La otra innovación para el ambiente y la sociedad en la frontera sur de México (pp. 145–170). San Cristóbal de Las Casas: El Colegio de la Frontera Sur.
   Google Scholar
• García-Barrios L, Cruz-Morales J, Braasch M, Dechnik-Vázquez Y, Gutiérrez-Navarro A, Meza-Jiménez A, … Zabala A (2020). Challenges for Rural Livelihoods, Participatory Agroforestry, and Biodiversity Conservation in a Neotropical Biosphere Reserve in Mexico. In Baldauf C (editors.), Participatory Biodiversity Conservation (pp. 69–89). Cham: Springer International Publishing. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-41686-7_5
   Google Scholar
• Geels FW (2002). Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a multi-level perspective and a case-study. Res Policy, 31(8–9), 1257–1274. DOI: 10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00062-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Geels FW (2011). The multi-level perspective on sustainability transitions: responses to seven criticisms. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 1(1), 24–40. DOI: 10.1016/j.eist.2011.02.002
   Google Scholar
• Geilfus F (2008). 80 tools for participatory development: appraisal, planning, follow-up and evaluation. San José (Costa Rica): Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture (IICA). Retrieved from http://repiica.iica.int/docs/B1013I/B1013I.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Génova M, Caminero L, Dochao J (2014). Resin tapping in Pinus pinaster: effects on growth and response function to climate. Eur J For Res, 133, 323–333. DOI: 10.1007/s10342-013-0764-4 2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• González-Espinosa M, Ramírez-Marcial N, Galindo-Jaimes L (2006). Secondary Succession in Montane Pine-Oak Forests of Chiapas, Mexico. In Kappelle M (editors.), Ecology and Conservation of Neotropical Montane Oak Forests (pp. 209–221). Berlin (Heidelberg): Springer Berlin Heidelberg. DOI: 10.1007/3-540-28909-7_16
   Google Scholar
• Gutiérrez Navarro A, García Barrios LE, Parra Vázquez M, Rosset P (2017). De la supresión al manejo del fuego en la Reserva de la Biosfera La Sepultura, Chiapas: perspectivas campesinas. Región y Sociedad, 29(70), 31–70. DOI: 10.22198/rys.2017.70.a329
   Google Scholar
• Haines-Young R, Potschin M (2010). The link between biodiversity, ecosystem services and human well-being. In: Raffaelli DG, Frid CLJ (editors.), Ecosystem Ecology: a New Synthesis (pp. 110–139). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hebbali A (2018). olsrr: tools for Building OLS Regression Models. Retrieved from https://cran.r-project.org/package=olsrr
   Google Scholar
• Hervé MET, Renault M, Plaas E, Schuette R, Potthoff M, Cluzeau D, Nicolai A (2020). From Practices to Values: farmers’ Relationship with Soil Biodiversity in Europe. Sociol Ruralis, 60(3), 596–620. DOI: 10.1111/soru.12303
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hicks CC, Cinner JE (2014). Social, institutional, and knowledge mechanisms mediate diverse ecosystem service benefits from coral reefs. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(50), 17791–17796. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1413473111
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huffman MR (2010). Community-based fire management at La Sepultura Biosphere Reserve, Chiapas [thesis]. Fort Collins (U.S.A.): Colorado State University.
   Google Scholar
• Husch B, Beers TW, Kershaw JAJ (2003a). Forest Mensuration (4th ed.). Hoboken (NJ): John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• INE [Institutio Nacional de Ecología]. (1999). Programa de Manejo de la Reserva de la Biósfera La Sepultura. Mexico City: Instituto Nacional de Ecología.
   Google Scholar
• IPBES [Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services]. (2019). Summary for policymakers of the global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. (Díaz S, Settele J, Brondizio ES, Ngo HT, Guèze M, Agard J, Zayas CN, editors.). Bonn (Germany): IPBES.
   Google Scholar
• Jacobs S, Dendoncker N, Martín-López B, Barton DN, Gomez-Baggethun E, Boeraeve F, Washbourne C-L, Vierikko K, Geneletti D, Sevecke K (2016). A new valuation school: integrating diverse values of nature in resource and land use decisions. Ecosystem Services, 22(December), 213–220. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.11.007
   Google Scholar
• Jones L, Norton L, Austin Z, Browne AL, Donovan D, Emmett BA, Willis GF, Howard DC, Jones JPG, Kenter JO (2016). Stocks and flows of natural and human-derived capital in ecosystem services. Land Use Policy, 52, 151–162. DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.12.014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Katz EG (2000). Social Capital and Natural Capital: a Comparative Analysis of Land Tenure and Natural Resource Management in Guatemala. Land Econ, 76(1), 114. DOI: 10.2307/3147261
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keeley JE (2012). Ecology and evolution of pine life histories. Ann For Sci, 69(4), 445–453. DOI: 10.1007/s13595-012-0201-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kenter JO (2018). IPBES: don’t throw out the baby whilst keeping the bathwater; Put people’s values central, not nature’s contributions. Ecosystem Services, 33(August), 40–43. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.08.002
   Google Scholar
• Kumar P, editor. 2011. The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity: ecological and economic foundations. 1st ed. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781849775489
   Google Scholar
• Lazos-Chavero E (2013). Resistencias de las sociedades campesinas: ¿control sobre la agrodiversidad y la riqueza genética de sus maíces? In Padilla T. (editor.), El campesinado y su persistencia en la actualidad mexicana (Primera ed, p. 507). Ciudad de México: Fondo de Cultura Económica, Consejo Nacional para la Cultura y las Artes.
   Google Scholar
• Leach M, Mearns R, Scoones I (1999). Environmental entitlements: dynamics and institutions in community-based natural resource management. World Dev, 27(2), 225–247. DOI: 10.1016/S0305-750X(98)00141-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lele S, Springate-Baginski O, Lakerveld R, Deb D, Dash P (2013). Ecosystem Services: origins, Contributions, Pitfalls, and Alternatives. Conservation and Society, 11(4), 343. DOI: 10.4103/0972-4923.125752
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loft L, Lux A, Jahn T (2016). A social-ecological perspective on ecosystem services. In: Potschin M, Haines-Young R, Fish R, Turner RK (editors.), Routledge handbook of ecosystem services (pp. 88–92). Oxon & New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Martín-López B, Gómez-Baggethun E, García-Llorente M, Montes C (2014). Trade-offs across Value-domains in Ecosystem Services Assessment. Ecological Indicators, 37(PARTA), 220–228. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.03.003
   Google Scholar
• MEA [Millenium Ecosystem Assessment]. (2005). Ecosystems and Human Well-being: synthesis. Washington D.C.: Island Press.
   Google Scholar
• Meza Jiménez A, Parra Vázquez MR, Barrios LG, Verschoor G, Estrada Lugo EIJ (2020). Socio-Environmental Regimes in Natural Protected Areas: Case Study A, Reserve LSB, Arce Ibarra M, Parra Vázquez MR, Bello Baltazar E, Gomes De Araujo L (editors.), Socio-Environmental Regimes and Local Visions (pp. 291–312). Cham: Springer International Publishing. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-49767-5_15
   Google Scholar
• Mouchet MA, Lamarque P, Martín-López B, Crouzat E, Gos P, Byczek C, Lavorel S (2014). An interdisciplinary methodological guide for quantifying associations between ecosystem services. Global Environmental Change, 28(1), 298–308. DOI: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.07.012
   Google Scholar
• Neis FA, De Costa F, De Almeida MR, Colling LC, De Oliveira Junkes CF, Fett JP, Fett-Neto AG (2019). Resin exudation profile, chemical composition, and secretory canal characterization in contrasting yield phenotypes of Pinus elliottii Engelm. Ind Crops Prod, 132 (Dec 2018), 76–83. DOI: 10.1016/j.indcrop.2019.02.013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Palomo I, Felipe-Lucia MR, Bennett EM, Martín-López B, Pascual U (2016). Disentangling the pathways and effects of ecosystem service co-production. In: Woodward G, Bohan DA (editors.), Adv. Ecol. Res. 54:245–283. London: Academic Press. DOI: 10.1016/bs.aecr.2015.09.003
   Google Scholar
• Papadopoulos AM (2013). Resin Tapping History of an Aleppo Pine Forest in Central Greece. The Open Forest Science Journal, 6, 50–53. DOI: 10.2174/1874398601306010050 1
   Google Scholar
• Parker KA (1996). Pragmatism and environmental thought. In: Light A, Katz E (editors.), Environmental pragmatism (pp. 21–37). London & New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Pascual U, Balvanera P, Díaz S, Pataki G, Roth E, Stenseke M, Yagi N, Başak Dessane E, Islar M, Kelemen E (2017). Valuing nature’s contributions to people: the IPBES approach. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 26–27, 7–16. DOI: 10.1016/j.cosust.2016.12.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peluso NL (2012). What’s Nature Got To Do With It? A Situated Historical Perspective on Socio-natural Commodities. Dev Change, 43(1), 79–104. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-7660.2012.01755.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peluso NL, Ribot J (2020). Postscript: a Theory of Access Revisited. Soc Nat Resour, 33(2), 300–306. DOI: 10.1080/08941920.2019.1709929
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peterson MJ, Hall DM, Feldpausch-Parker AM, Peterson TR (2010). Obscuring Ecosystem Function with Application of the Ecosystem Services Concept. Conservation Biology, 24(1), 113–119. DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01305.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Potschin M, Haines-Young R (2016). Defining and measuring ecosystem services. In: Potschin M, Haines-Young R, Fish R, Turner RK (editors.), Routledge handbook of ecosystem services (pp. 25–41). Oxon & New York: Routledge. Retrieved from https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/9781317687047
   Google Scholar
• Potschin M, Haines-Young R (2017). From nature to society. In: Burkhard B, Maes J (editors.), Mapping Ecosystem Services (pp. 39–41). Sofia: Pensoft Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Potschin-Young M, Haines-Young R, Görg C, Heink U, Jax K, Schleyer C (2018). Understanding the role of conceptual frameworks: reading the ecosystem service cascade. Ecosystem Services, 29, 428–440. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.05.015
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pretty J (2003). Social Capital and the Collective Management of Resources. Science, 302(5652), 1912–1914. DOI: 10.1126/science.1090847
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pronatura Sur. (2018). Sistematización del proceso de aprovechamiento de resina en Chiapas. San Cristóbal de Las Casas: Pronatura Sur, A.C.
   Google Scholar
• Quinn CE, Halfacre AC (2014). Place Matters : an Investigation of Farmers ’ Attachment to Their Land. Human Ecology Review, 20(2), 117–132. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/24707629
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R Core Team. (2020). R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna (Austria): R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved from https://www.r-project.org/
   Google Scholar
• Reyers B, Biggs R, Cumming GS, Elmqvist T, Hejnowicz AP, Polasky S (2013). Getting the measure of ecosystem services: a social-ecological approach. Front Ecol Environ, 11(5), 268–273. DOI: 10.1890/120144
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ribot JC, Peluso NL (2003). A Theory of Access. Rural Sociol, 68(2), 153–181. DOI: 10.1111/j.1549-0831.2003.tb00133.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodríguez-Trejo DA, Fulé PZ (2003). Fire ecology of Mexican pines and a fire management proposal. International Journal of Wildland Fire, 12(1), 23. DOI: 10.1071/WF02040
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenthal SB, Buchholz RA (1996). How pragmatism is an environmental ethic. In: Light A, Katz E (editors.), Environmental pragmatism (pp. 38–49). London & New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Schwartz SH (2012). An Overview of the Schwartz Theory of Basic Values. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1). DOI: 10.9707/2307-0919.1116 1
   Google Scholar
• SEMARNAT [Secretaría de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales]. NORMA Oficial Mexicana NOM-026-SEMARNAT-2005, Que establece los criterios y especificaciones técnicas para realizar el aprovechamiento comercial de resina de pino (2006). Mexico: Diario Oficial de la Federación, 2006 de septiembre 28. Retrieved from http://www2.inecc.gob.mx/publicaciones/libros/402/cuencas.html
   Google Scholar
• SEMARNAT [Secretaría de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales]. (2020). Anuarios Estadísticos Forestales. 2020 Oct 16, Retrieved from https://www.gob.mx/semarnat/documentos/anuarios-estadisticos-forestales
   Google Scholar
• Shackleton C, Delang CO, Shackleton S, Shanley P (2011a). Non-timber Forest Products: concept and Definitions. In: Shackleton S, Shackleton C, Shanley P (editors.), Non-Timber Forest Products in the Global Context. Tropical Forestry, vol 7. (pp. 3–21). Berlin (Heidelberg): Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Shackleton S, Delang CO, Angelsen A (2011b). From Subsistence to Safety Nets and Cash Income: exploring the Diverse Values of Non-timber Forest Products for Livelihoods and Poverty Alleviation. In: Shackleton S, Shackleton C, Shanley P (editors.), Non-Timber Forest Products in the Global Context. Tropical Forestry, vol 7. (pp. 55–81). Berlin (Heidelberg): Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-17983-9_3
   Google Scholar
• Shono K, Cadaweng EA, Durst PB (2007). Application of Assisted Natural Regeneration to Restore Degraded Tropical Forestlands. Restoration Ecology, 15(4), 620–626. DOI: 10.1111/j.1526-100X.2007.00274.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sikor T, Lund C (2010). Access and Property: a Question of Power and Authority. In: Sikor T, Lund C, editors. The politics of possession (Vol. 40, pp. 1–22). Oxford (UK): Wiley-Blackwell. DOI: 10.1002/9781444322903.ch1
   Google Scholar
• Soliño M, Yu T, Alía R, Auñón F, Bravo-Oviedo A, Chambel MR, J. M. G, Del Río M, Justes A, Martínez-Jauregui M (2018). Resin-tapped pine forests in Spain: ecological diversity and economic valuation. Science of the Total Environment, 625, 1146–1155. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.01.027
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spangenberg JH, Görg C, Truong DT, Tekken V, Bustamante JV, Settele J (2014a). Provision of ecosystem services is determined by human agency, not ecosystem functions. Four case studies. International Journal of Biodiversity Science, Ecosystem Services & Management, 10(1), 40–53. DOI: 10.1080/21513732.2014.884166
   Google Scholar
• Spangenberg JH, Von Haaren C, Settele J (2014b). The ecosystem service cascade: further developing the metaphor. Integrating societal processes to accommodate social processes and planning, and the case of bioenergy. Ecological Economics, 104, 22–32. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.04.025
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spierenburg M (2020). Living on Other People’s Land; Impacts of Farm Conversions to Game Farming on Farm Dwellers’ Abilities to Access Land in the Eastern Cape, South Africa. Soc Nat Resour, 33(2), 280–299. DOI: 10.1080/08941920.2019.1584342
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• TEEB [The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity]. (2010). The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity: mainstreaming the Economics of Nature: a synthesis of the approach, conclusions and recommendations of TEEB. (Kumar P, editor.). London & Washington: Earthscan.
   Google Scholar
• Tomusiak R, Magnuszewski M (2009). Effect of resin tapping on radial increments of Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.). In: Kaczka RJ, Malik I, Owczarek P, Gärtner H, Heinrich I, Helle G, Schleser G (editors.), TRACE - Tree Rings in Archaeology, Climatology and Ecology, Vol. 7: Proceedings of the DENDROSYMPOSIUM 2008, April 27th – 30th (pp. 151–157). Zakopane (Poland): GFZ Potsdam, Scientific Technical Report.
   Google Scholar
• UN-HABITAT [United Nations Human Settlements Programme]. (2005). Land Tenure, Housing Rights and Gender in Mexico. Law, Land Tenure and Gender Review Series: latin America. Nairobi: UN-HABITAT.
   Google Scholar
• Van Der Maaten E, Mehl A, Wilmking M, Van Der Maaten-theunissen M (2017). Tapping the tree-ring archive for studying effects of resin extraction on the growth and climate sensitivity of Scots pine. Forest Ecosystems, 4(1), 7. DOI: 10.1186/s40663-017-0096-9
   Google Scholar
• Van Der Ploeg JD (2014). Peasants and the Art of Farming. Rugby (UK): Practical Action Publishing. 10.3362/9781780448763
   Google Scholar
• Van Oudenhoven APE, Petz K, Alkemade R, Hein L, Groot RSD. (2012). Framework for systematic indicator selection to assess effects of land management on ecosystem services. Ecological Indicators, 21, 110–122. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2012.01.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wieland R, Ravensbergen S, Gregr EJ, Satterfield T, Chan KMA (2016). Debunking trickle-down ecosystem services: the fallacy of omnipotent, homogeneous beneficiaries. Ecological Economics, 121, 175–180. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.11.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zas R, Touza R, Sampedro L, Lario FJ, Bustingorri G, Lema M (2020). Variation in resin flow among Maritime pine populations: relationship with growth potential and climatic responses. Forest Ecology and Management, 474(May), 118351. DOI: 10.1016/j.foreco.2020.118351
   Google Scholar