REDD in PeruPDF translation: Spanish
The main agency responsible for REDD+ activities in Peru is the Ministry of Environment (Ministerio del Ambiente; MINAM), which serves as the focal point for climate change considerations at the national level. MINAM delegates its activities through different General Directions, including the National Service of Natural Protected Areas (El Servicio Nacional de Áreas Naturales Protegidas por el Estado; SERNANP) and the National Forest Conservation Programme for the Mitigation of Climate Change (PNCBMCC). REDD+ also involves the Ministry of Agriculture (Ministerio de Agricultura y Riego; MINAG) as the national forest authority, which implements its activities primarily through Regional Agrarian Directorates (Direcciones Regionales Agrarias) and the Forestry and Wildlife Agency (La Dirección General Forestal y de Fauna Silvestre; DGFFS), which is in the process of being replaced by the newly established National Forest Service (Servicio Forestal Nacional; SERFOR).
Regional Governments also play a crucial role in the administration of forests at the subnational level and therefore in the implementation of REDD+ activities in regional territories. As a result of a process promoting decentralisation, the roles of Regional Governments have changed as they have been transferred some of the functions previously conducted centrally by MINAG. The main functions transferred to the Regional Governments in terms of forestry are the development of surveillance and control actions to ensure the sustainable use of natural resources under their jurisdiction; the issuance of permits, authorisations and forest concessions inside their regions; and, the promotion of, and control for strict compliance with, the National Forest Policy. The Ministry of Economy and Finance (MEF), the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MINRE), the Ministry of Culture, and the Presidency of the Council of Ministers (PCM), through the Forestry and Wildlife Resources Supervisory Body (OSINFOR), and the National Centre for Strategic Planning (CEPLAN) also have roles in this process.
Other government agencies whose policies and functions are linked with deforestation and forest degradation, and therefore who have a role to play in REDD+, are the Ministry of Housing, Construction and Sanitation, through the Organismo de Formalización de la Propiedad Informal (COFOPRI), the Ministry of Energy and Mines (MEM), the Ministry of Transport and Communications (MTC) and the Ministry of Foreign Trade and Tourism (MINCETUR). These ministries are not actively involved in REDD+ activities but are considered important indirect actors as their activities and policies are related to deforestatio, for example, the promotion of the Initiative for the Integration of the Regional Infrastructure of South America (IIRSA) in the case of the MTC and land certification, in the case of COFOPRI, among others.
Other organisations that are currently driving the preparation process for REDD+ include various public and private institutions, as well as civil society organisations, such as the National Climate Change Committee (CNCC), the REDD+ Technical Group (GTREDD), the REDD Group Peru and indigenous REDD+ committees.
National and international non-governmental organisations (NGOs) are also important actors within the REDD+ process. They work mainly in the implementation of projects and in providing training, but are also engaged in the international negotiation process. They are also supporting MINAM and MINAG with technical guidelines or in the drafting of policies and standards.
The institutional arrangements embodied in Peru’s Readiness Preparation Proposal (R-PP) show the government's intention to implement the National REDD+ Strategy. Although this is not yet in place, MINAM and MINAG are the two main institutions leading the preparation process. The R-PP also outlines a work plan for the management of the National REDD+ Strategy, which contemplates the strengthening of working groups in MINAM and MINAG, as well as broader institutional development and strengthening for REDD+ implementation.
Finally, it is important to mention that beyond the National Forest Conservation Programme, that pursues broad forestry mitigation objectives, no other institution has been created to date for REDD+ preparation. The R-PP, presented in March 2011, mentions the creation of a Coordinating Office for Forests and REDD+ (OCBR) which was speculated to be under MINAM as a specialised technical agency or as part of the Presidency of the Council of Ministers (PCM). However as of late 2013, there has been no progress made in this respect.
Stakeholder engagement and participation
Peru’s Readiness Preparation Proposal (R-PP) proposes a Participation and Consultation Plan that contains guidelines for the process of information sharing, and the participation and consultation of indigenous people interested in REDD+. Furthermore, the Forest Investment Program (FIP) contains the Actors Involvement and Participation Plan (PIA) for Peru's FIP’s investment strategy. Both documents serve to ensure the involvement of stakeholders in the design and implementation of the future National REDD+ Strategy and support citizen participation and prior consultation processes where relevant. Principles for participation include access to information and transparency, good faith by those involved, respect for human rights and cultural diversity, inclusion and representation, and effective governance.
In addition to this, there are opportunities for inter-institutional dialogue at the national, regional and local level. The main spaces for dialogue are the REDD Group, Peru, the National Indigenous REDD+ Roundtable, the Regional REDD+ Roundtables, the Inter-regional Amazon Council (CIAM), the Regional Environmental Commission (CAR), the Municipal Environmental Commission (CAM) and the Forestry and Wildlife Management Committee (CGFFS). Natural resource management initiatives are articulated within these groups. These spaces therefore promote the involvement of public and private institutions and indigenous people in the decision-making process for climate change issues, including REDD+, for example, by offering the opportunity for feedback into strategies and planned regional REDD+ activities.
However, not all spaces for dialogue necessarily include representatives from each of the above sectors. Each space for dialogue is targeted to specific audiences, with different membership bases, which tend to be between peers. The only groups that include different types of actors are the Regional REDD+ Roundtables and the REDD Group, Peru. It is also worth mentioning that although these spaces exist formally, as of November 2013, few are active in practice.
The REDD Group, Peru is one of the most important spaces for dialogue. It was created by NGOs in 2008 as a space for the exchange of views and experiences by different organisations (public, private and civil society) in order to improve REDD+ implementation in Peru (Peru REDD Group, 2011). The REDD Group, Peru has three specific roles: advocacy, consultation and raising awareness of the national REDD+ process.
Likewise, at the regional level different REDD+ roundtables have been organised. These are considered important for the implementation of regional REDD+ activities and are found in the Regional Governments of Madre de Dios, San Martín, Piura, Loreto, Ucayali and Cusco. These are developing regional REDD+ programmes or strategies, complementing the work being done as part of the national REDD+ process. For example, the REDD and Environmental Services Roundtable of Madre de Dios has prioritised the establishment of regional reference levels, and the San Martín REDD Roundtable has prioritised stakeholder engagement and the participation of indigenous people, as well as the preparation of a REDD+ strategy for the region.
It is important to mention that in August 2013, the Inter-Ethnic Association for the Development of the Peruvian Amazon (AIDESEP) and the Amazon National Confederation Peru (CONAP) were incorporated into the FIP’s Steering Committee. This was greeted positively by both organisations whose participation in the REDD+ process is critical. Further to this, AIDESEP and CONAP have formed the Indigenous REDD+ Group; a self-built organisation created as part of an agreement between MINAM and AIDESEP, supported by CONAP. The Indigenous REDD+ Group is active in the Madre de Dios, San Martín, Ucayali and Loreto regions (AIDESEP, 2012). This group provides indigenous organisations with an avenue for direct dialogue with the Peruvian state and international, public or private institutions involved in REDD+ processes regarding their concerns about the implementation of REDD+ initiatives and the positive and negative effects on indigenous people. Among the group’s main objectives is to articulate and express the interests, rights, overall perspectives and proposals of indigenous organisations in the preparation and implementation of national REDD+.
CONAP and AIDESEP have also been invited to take part in the project: “Building Capability for Indigenous People and Other Stakeholders for an Informed Participation in the Design and Implementation of REDD+ in Peru”, endorsed by the Ministry of Environment (MINAM). This project aims to strengthen the capabilities and informed participation of indigenous peoples and other groups or civil society organisations in the design of mechanisms and tools in the preparatory phase of REDD+, thereby ensuring their fair involvement throughout REDD+ implementation.
Land tenure arrangements and carbon rights
The Peruvian Political Constitution is the country’s main policy document. It contains guidelines in relation to the environment and natural resources and determines that natural resources belong to the nation and that the “State is sovereign in their utilisation” (CONGRESS OF THE REPUBLIC, 2009). This means that the Peruvian government has the power to decide how, with whom and under what conditions natural assets can be leveraged (SNOECK & RAMOS, 2012). Consequently, the Peruvian State has the power to grant usage rights, such as forest concessions, to third parties on request. In such cases the State transfers only the rights of use and/or management of forest resources, and maintains ownership over forest lands.
According to the land use capacity classification , 80.1% of the total national territory is suitable for forest production and protected lands. Of these, territorial planning has been applied to two-thirds of the forest surface, which have been categorised as: permanent production forests (20 million hectares); protected areas (16.3 million hectares); indigenous communities’ lands (10.9 million hectares); and more than 6 million hectares of forest surface in other categories (CHE PIU & MENTON, 2013). Regarding access to land, overlaps exist between original rights of access (mainly of indigenous people) and other legally- (for example, through securities settlement projects) or illegally-acquired rights of access (past and recent invasions), as well as other types of occupation and rights (DOUROJEANNI ET AL. 2010).
There is still uncertainty about the percentage of forests or forest lands in Peru that have some kind of usage right, although it is estimated that it could represent about a third of the Amazon (MINAM, 2013). Such a situation, which would result in a lack of clarity in the allocation of carbon rights and in the assignment of responsibilities for the conservation of ecosystems, could impede the implementation of REDD+ in Peru (CHE PIU & MENTON, 2013). In addition, more than 22 million hectares, located mostly in the more isolated areas of the country, predominantly in the Loreto Region, are unclassified (CHE PIU & MENTON, 2013).
Furthermore, the lack of a legal framework to regulate carbon rights has created some obstacles for REDD+ projects. In late 2013, a bill on the Promotion of Compensation Mechanisms for Ecosystem Services that had been put off during the 2011-2012 term was in the Peruvian Congress. This bill recognises the holders of forest rights (indigenous peoples, forest concessionaires, managers of protected areas, government, etc.) as having the right to the economic benefits from activities that contribute effectively to the restoration, maintenance or enhancement of forest ecosystem services (CHE PIU & MENTON, 2013), and could be applied in the implementation of REDD+ schemes.
 According to the Ministry of Agriculture, Peru’s land use capacity classification is based on permanent soil limitations to maintain agricultural, livestock or forestry activities within economic margins and without causing resources to degrade. It also takes into account the references indicated in the Ministry of Agriculture’s Regulation of land use capacity classification (DS No. 017-2009-AG).
The implementation of strategies and management plans for protected areas and forest concessions is the responsibility of the National Service of Natural Protected Areas (SERNANP) and the Forestry and Wildlife Resources Supervisory Body (OSINFOR), respectively.
SERNANP is a specialised public organisation affiliated to the Ministry of Environment (MINAM) that has the main function of managing the National System of Protected Natural Areas (SINANPE). It regulates rights to environmental services and other similar mechanisms generated in protected areas nationwide. OSINFOR is responsible for supervising and monitoring the sustainable use and conservation of forest resources, wildlife, and forest environmental services.
Various studies have shown the need for greater efforts to ensure genuine rule of law and compliance with the existing regulatory framework in Peru, such as the National Forest Strategy (MINAG & FAO, 2002). A 2012 report on illegal logging in Peru highlighted that despite international support for REDD+ activities in the country, there is low institutional capacity for adequate law enforcement, monitoring of forest concessions and the prevention of illegal logging (EIA, 2012).
Having said this, MINAM has made significant progress in establishing incentives for forest preservation with the formulation of a strategy for evaluating, assessing and financing national heritage areas, which places natural forests as a priority (MINAM, 2011b). Another example is the National Forest Conservation Programme for the Mitigation of Climate Change (PNCBMCC), which involves an incentive system for forest conservation.
MINAM and the Ministry of Prosecution (the public entity in charge of persecuting crime) are responsible for implementing the sanctions for violating environmental crimes found in the Criminal Code, modified in 2008. Environmental crimes include illegal logging, the misuse of farmland, habitat or landscape alteration, and other crimes that threaten a healthy environment for all Peruvian citizens. According to the Criminal Code, illegal logging and forest destruction are punishable with imprisonment and ecological and economic repair, which implies granting monetary compensation, determined by a judge, for the reparation of the affected area as well as the implementation of activities to restore the affected ecosystem to its original state. It is important to note that in 2009 prosecutor’s posts (executive arms of Public Prosecutions) specialising in the treatment of environmental crimes were created.
The judicial strengthening on environmental crime arises from the Free Trade Agreement signed with the United States of America (U.S.A.). The Forestry Appendix on this Trade Promotion Agreement with the U.S.A. includes the State's responsibility to improve law enforcement and criminal sanctions in the forestry sector.
Peru’s Readiness Preparation Proposal (R-PP) states that Peru has chosen to adopt a nested approach to REDD+. This approach should allow for different rates of implementation, as technical capacities are developed, from the subnational to national level. It is expected that reference scenarios and the national forest monitoring system will be developed in line with this approach. The baseline scenario will therefore be developed with the subnational (regional) level as the unit of analysis, and firstly in regions with the highest technical capacity and data availability. Reference scenarios for deforestation are expected to be developed first, with those for forest degradation and the other components of REDD+ developed once technical capacity has been enhanced. The national reference level will therefore be developed using a ‘bottom-up’ approach with regional deforestation forecasts aggregated to the national level. This approach will allow for leakage of emissions between regions to be accounted for.
Historic and projected reference scenarios will be developed based on the national context, including national socio-economic circumstances. The R-PP highlights the need to strengthen capacities at the regional level for establishing subnational reference scenarios. The R-PP proposes a participatory approach to the development of regional reference scenarios, in which the regional REDD+ roundtables and other key stakeholders, will play a central role, and in which regional and local knowledge of deforestation processes are considered the most important. A variety of stakeholders will compile existing data, including on the drivers of deforestation, forest and carbon inventory data and socioeconomic data, in order to identify areas where more information is needed.
This approach should ensure that realistic projections are generated that, if applicable, can be subject to international review procedures. As the proposed approach will be participatory and rigorous, at least five years will be required for the country to define its national reference scenario, provided that during this period the technical, analytical, and financial processes required in each region are generated, and that the definitions for modalities and procedures for REDD+ are established.
Madre de Dios and San Martin have been selected as pilot regions for the development of regional reference scenarios, formulated according to MINAM guidelines. Subnational reference levels in these two regions will serve as the basis for the national reference level. Project developers require these benchmarks to establish baselines for their own projects, therefore methodologies and technologies are being defined through a process of discussion and consensus within regional roundtables.
There are a variety of different REDD+ programmes and projects in Peru, including multilateral and bilateral intiatives and activities at the national, subnational and project level. There is currently a lack of coordination and communication between these and there is no system in place for mutual learning and the exchange of information among these multiple processes. Improved coordination is needed to avoid unnecessary duplication and the possibility that different activities may be leading towards incompatible or even divergent results (CHE PIU & MENTON, 2013).
As of late 2013, Peru still lacks a national system to monitor, report and verify (MRV) REDD+ emissions reductions (CHE PIU & MENTON, 2013). However, several pilot initiatives related to MRV are underway, such as those supported by the German Development Bank (KfW), the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, and the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA).
As part of the planned national MRV system, Peru proposes a National System for the Inventory of Greenhouse Gases (Sistema Nacional de Generación de Datos para el Inventario Nacional de Gases de Efecto Invernadero; SNIGEI), which will generate sector-specific emissions data, with special attention given to Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF) (MINAM, 2011). According to the Readiness Preparation Proposal (R-PP), the Ministry of Environment (MINAM) is responsible for developing SNIGEI and is therefore currently concentrating its actions on developing a National Network for GHG Inventory Data Generation (INFORMAGEI). This will allow for the compilation of information and facilitate the production of reliable GHG inventories that can guide mitigation policies and improve the use of natural resources. The legal framework for the establishment of INFORMAGEI is currently under development and a draft regulation has been produced.
The Readiness Preparation Proposal (R-PP) proposes the design and implementation of a Strategic Environmental and Social Assessment (SESA) that aims to minimise the potential risks and possible social and environmental conflicts linked to REDD+ preparation and implementation and that promotes benefits that may result from the process. In addition, to accompany the implementation of the SESA, the R-PP defines the creation of a monitoring system called the Environmental and Social Management Framework.
Peru’s R-PP reiterates the social and environmental safeguards contained within the statements of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the guidelines of the World Bank. Added to these, it includes safeguards related to ILO Convention 169 and the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). Peru accepts these internationally identified safeguards for their incorporation into the future National REDD+ Strategy. Given the country’s characteristics (considering there are 52 indigenous peoples in Peru) it will pay specific attention to those related to indigenous peoples (MINAM, 2011).
Peru’s Forest Investment Program (FIP) similarly requires consideration of the social and environmental standards active in Peru and compliance with other relevant policies of multilateral partners, including: (i) the Inter-American Development Bank's Safeguards Policies (OP- 703), Risk Management Policy for Natural Disasters (OP 704), Forest Development Policy operating on Indigenous Peoples, Strategy for Indigenous Development (OP -765), Operational Policy on Gender Equality in Development (OP -761), Involuntary Resettlement Policy (OP -710) and Access to Information Policy (OP -102), as well as policies for Rural Development (OP 752) and Forestry Development (OP 723); and (ii) the World Bank, including its safeguards on Indigenous Peoples (OP/BP 4.10), Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12), Forests (BP 4.36), Physical and Cultural Heritage (OP/BP 4.11) and Natural Habitats (OP 4.04).
The state prioritises the mining, oil and agricultural sectors. Peru's legal framework therefore favours private sector investment in these activities, often at the expense of regulations related to forest harvesting (DOUROJEANNI, 2010). There are concerns that a lack of robust environmental and social safeguards could mean REDD+ has negative environmental and social impacts, in particular on the rights of indigenous and local people. REDD+ has consequently attracted some opposition in Peru.
To address the potential for negative social and environmental impacts, the Regional Government of San Martin, with the support of Conservation International Peru (CI-Peru), has decided to develop and implement social and environmental safeguards through the REDD+ Social and Environmental Standards (REDD+ SES) initiative. In order to ensure good practice within the REDD+ programme in the region, the safeguards aim to ensure the appropriate distribution of benefits, the protection of biological diversity, and the effective participation of all actors in the region. An official has been appointed within the Regional Government to ensure the proper and effective implementation of these safeguards and the REDD+ SES. This initiative supports the development of a national safeguards system. By providing a comprehensive framework of key issues regarding the social and environmental performance of REDD+, it contributes to the interpretation of safeguards at the national level. It can also be used to complement other relevant frameworks, such as the UNFCCC’s safeguards, those of individual donors, and UN-REDD’s Social and Environmental Principles and Criteria (SEPC).
The Peruvian ER-PIN (2014) identifies the marginalisation of women as a possible risk during project implementation activities, namely; decision-making, training, land titling, resource management and forest use. To reduce this risk (and other identified risks), the ER-PIN proposes several actions including: applying a capacity building programme at multiple levels, ensuring stakeholder participation and consultation, using a gender equality approach, and implementing a monitoring system to identify problems as they arise (Section 5.4). The Environmental Social Management Framework (ESMF) will ensure implementation and monitoring of REDD+ safeguards and plans to detail actions relating to the tenure of community land, with a particular consideration of gender issues. The result of the Strategic Environmental and Social Assessment (SESA) will form the basis of the ESMF (Section 13.1). Indicators for non-carbon benefits include rural and indigenous women’s participation in the decision–making processes of organisations to which they belong.
The Peruvian R-PP (2013) states that co-benefits should be delivered from a gender-equality perspective. The document lists the empowerment of women, in order to improve their living standards, as one of its intended co-benefits (Chart 2c.2). The design and implementation of the REDD+ National Strategy aims to be consistent with inter alia the Inter-American Development Bank’s policies, notably the Operational Policy on Gender Equality in Development (OP-761). The R-PP describes the information sharing and early stakeholder dialogue process, which included a meeting in 2011 called Climate Change and the Impact of Indigenous Populations (Annex 1b). The meeting was attended by several women’s organisations that are listed in the R-PP: La Coordinación del Enlace Continental de Mujeres Indígenas Región Sudamérica, Consejo Nacional de Mujeres Indígenas (CONAMI), Foro Internacional de Mujeres Indígenas (FIMI), Confederación Nacional de Mujeres Campesinas Indígenas Originarias de Bolivia (CNAMIB), Red de Mujeres Indígenas y Biodiversidad, Federación de Mujeres Altoandinas Sumaq T’Ikariq de la Provincia de Lampa, Organización Nacional de Mujeres Indígenas Andinas y Amazónicas del Perú (ONAMIAAP), and Red de Mujeres Indígenas Wayuu.
The 2011 Forestry and Wildlife Law (Law 29763) guarantees equal access to resources, opportunities and benefits for all actors, placing a particular focus on gender. The law states that this should be achieved through the design and application of public forest policies that contribute to poverty eradication, reduce social and economic inequalities, and promote sustainable development of disadvantaged populations (Preliminary Heading, Article II, Clause 4). Through this law, the state also aims to promote forest and wildlife education delivered with a gender and multicultural focus (First Section, Clause 141).
The National Environmental Policy (2009) states the intention to promote mechanisms that evaluate and value gender and multicultural approaches in environmental processes (Policy Axis 3, Objective 3(b)). The Plan also aims to promote the participation of women in environmental management to enable women to exercise ‘effective environmental citizenship’ (Policy Axis 3, Objective 3(d)). The National Reforestation Plan (2005) aims to create 225,000 jobs on plantations and subsequently prioritise the employment of women and disadvantaged groups (Section 5.2.4).
The National Forest Strategy (2002) considers the equal participation of men and women in forest wealth generation, and the equitable sharing of benefits as fundamental principles (1.1). The Strategy recognises both the importance of gender within development processes with regard to assigned gender roles, responsibilities and expectations, and that women’s contributions exist both within and outside the household. The document lists the women’s organisations involved in the formulation of the National Forest Strategy, these being: the Ministry of Women and Social Development, Centro de la Mujer Peruana, Asociación de Mujeres Campesinas de Ucayali (AMUCAU), and Organización de Mujeres Indígenas de la Amazonia Peruana (OMIAP).
Research undertaken in the Bélgica and Infierno Native Communities, where REDD+ preparation is underway, highlights existing gender inequalities (Cahuana, 2013). The distribution of benefits from timber sales in the Bélgica community is inequitable in that women always receive less than men, a single mother or widow receives less than a male head of household, and married women receive no payment from timber revenues. Council members, those holding a position in public office, and their direct relatives receive a greater percentage of the timber revenues. However, a woman has never held a position of public office and they do not benefit from nepotistic practices. The research identifies the risk that REDD+ will perpetuate these inequalities if the same benefit-sharing mechanism used for timber sales is employed.
ASNER. G., POWELL, G., MASCARO, J., KNAPP, D., CLARK, J., JACOBSON, J., KENNEDY-BOWDOIN, T., BALAJL, A., PAEZ-ACOSTA, G., VICTORIA, E., SECADA. L., VALQUI, M. Y HUGHES, F. (2010) High-resolution forest carbon stocks and emissions in the Amazon. En: PNAS Early Edition. Available: here
AIDESEP (ASOCIACIÓN INTERÉTNICA DE DESARROLLO DE LA SELVA PERUANA). 2010. Análisis y Propuestas Indígenas Sobre el RPP (3era versión) del REDD Perú.
AIDESEP (ASOCIACIÓN INTERÉTNICA DE DESARROLLO DE LA SELVA PERUANA). 2013. Análisis y Propuestas Indígenas Sobre el PIF-Perú: Respetar los derechos y territorios indígenas y reducir el privatismo empresarial para lograr el éxito del PIF-Perú. (julio 2013)
CAHUANA, C. B. 2013. Participation and Representation: REDD+ in the Native Communities of Belgica and Infierno in the Peruvian Amazon. Thesis submitted to the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
CEPLAN, 2011: Plan Bicentenario el Perú hacia el 2021. Centro Nacional de Planeamiento Estratégico, Lima, Perú.
CHE PIU, H., AND MENTON, M. 2013. Contexto de REDD+ en Perú: Motores, actores e instituciones. Documentos Ocasionales 90. Bogor, Indonesia: CIFOR.
CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL. n.d. The Nested Approach to REDD+ in Peru: Readiness and Implementation at the Subnational Level in the Region of San Martin as a Model. Available: here [Accessed October 2013]
DERECHO, AMBIENTE Y RECURSOS NATURALES. Pueblos indígenas & REDD+ en el Perú. Análisis y recomendaciones para el cumplimiento de los derechos a la consulta, territorio y recursos naturales a la luz del Derecho internacional. Sébastien Snoeck, Irene Ramos Urrutia. Lima: DAR 2012. Available: here [Accessed October 2013]
DAR (DERECHO, AMBIENTE Y RECURSOS NATURALES). No Date. Estado de REDD en el Perú: Actores, proyectos y financiamiento. Available: here [Accessed June 2012]
DGFFS (DIRECCION GENERAL FORESTAL Y DE FAUNA SILVESTRE). No Date. Available: here [Accessed October 2013]
DOUROJEANNI, M. Amazonía peruana en 2021. Lima, 2010. Available: here [Accessed October 2013]
EDWARDS, G. AND ROBERTS, T. 2013. How can Peru make next year’s climate summit a success? Eco-Business. 2 December 2013. Available here. [Accessed December 2013]
EIA (ENVIRONMENTAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY). 2012. The Laundering Machine. Available: here [Accessed October 2013]
FAO (FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANISATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS). 2010. Global Forest Resources Assessment. FAO, Rome, Italy.
FCPF (FOREST CARBON PARTNERSHIP FACILITY). 2012. REDD Readiness Progress Fact Sheet. Country: Peru. May 2013. Available: here [Accessed October 2013]
FIP (FOREST INVESTMENT PROGRAM). n.d. Peru’s FIP Programming. Available: here [Accessed October 2013]
FPP (FOREST PEOPLES PROGRAMME). n.d. World Bank’s Forest Climate Fund Slammed for Side-lining Indigenous Peoples Rights and Failing to Protect Forests. Forest People’s Programme. Available: here [Accessed October 2013]
GRUPO REDD PERÚ. No Date. Available: here [Accessed October 2013]
MINISTERIO DE AGRICULTURA. December 2002. Estrategia Nacional Forestal. Available here.
MINISTERIO DE AGRICULTURA. 2011. Law 29763, Ley Forestal y de Fauna Silvestre. Dirección General Forestal y de Fauna Silvestre. Available here.
MINAM (MINISTERIO DEL AMBIENTE). n.d. [Online] Geoserver Website. Available: here [Accessed May 2012]
MINAM. 2009. Mapa de Deforestación de la Amazonía Peruana 2000.
MINAM. 2010a. Segunda Comunicación Nacional del Perú a la Convención Marco de las Naciones Unidas sobre Cambio Climático. Available: here [Accessed October 2013]
MINAM. 2010b. Programa Nacional de Conservación de Bosques para la Mitigación del Cambio Climático: Manual de Operaciones.
MINAM. 2011a. El Perú de los Bosques. Available: here [Accessed June 2012]
MINAM. 2011b. Readiness Preparation Proposal of Perú. Submitted to the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility. Available: here [Accessed June 2012]
MINAM. 2012. Presentaciones Primer Taller de Salvaguardas para REDD+ en el Perú. Available: here [Accessed October 2013]
MINAM. 2013a: Política Nacional Forestal y de Fauna Silvestre. Available: here [Accessed October 2013]
MINAM. 2013b: Forest Investment Program. Submitted to the Climate Investment Funds. Version 16.09.13
MINISTERIO DEL AMBIENTE. February 2014. Readiness Plan Proposal. Fondo Cooperativo Para El Carbono de los Bosques (FCPF) Plantilla de Propuesta para la Fase de Preparación para REDD+. Available here.
MINAM AND FONAM. 2008. The Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF) Readiness Plan Idea note (R-PIN) Template. Available: here [Accessed October 2013]
MINAM AND KfW. 2010. Apoyo a la implementación de REDD+ en el Perú. Documento de proyecto. Lima, 2010. Available: here [Accessed October 2013].
PUEBLOS INDÍGENAS & REDD+ EN EL PERÚ. Análisis y recomendaciones para el cumplimiento de los derechos a la consulta, territorio y recursos naturales a la luz del Derecho internacional. Sébastien Snoeck, Irene Ramos Urrutia. Lima: DAR 2012.
SERNANP (SERVICIO NACIONAL DE ÁREAS NATURALES PROTEGIDAS POR EL ESTADO). n.d. Available: here [Accessed October 2013]
VCS (VERIFIED CARBON STANDARD). n.d. Jurisdictional and Nested REDD+. Available: here [Accessed October, 2013]
WRI (WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE). 2011. Getting Ready. R-PP Analysis Peru. World Resources Institute. Available: here [Accessed October, 2013]