Peasant Reserve Zones (Zonas de Reserva Campesina, or ZRCs in Spanish) constitute a legal framework established to organize territories historically inhabited by peasant communities in Colombia. Designed as part of agrarian reform efforts, these zones are intended to promote environmental conservation and socioeconomic sustainability in rural areas. The ZRCs provide peasant organizations with a set of tools to structure their social, economic, political, and environmental governance. However, their effectiveness in achieving social and environmental objectives remains a subject of ongoing research across disciplines such as ecology, sociology, and economics. Existing studies yield inconclusive results, instead highlighting the complexity of the dynamics surrounding this institutional mechanism.
Tourist boats to El Raudal del Guayabero, which provide transportation service to an ecological attraction on the Guayabero River.(Image by Author)
To better understand the functioning of ZRCs, this text examines Colombia’s Peasant Reserve Zones through the lens of techno-socio-environmental assemblages (DeGreiff, A.; Herazo, E.; & Soto, J.S., 2024). This framework conceptualizes ZRCs as systems in which environmental, social, and technological factors interact dialectically, mutually shaping one another in a constitutive relationship. Thus, their operation is determined by the ecological specificities of the territory, the social organization of its inhabitants, and the production and governance technologies employed within these spaces.
This analytical approach was adopted to facilitate a more precise interpretation of findings from a broader PhD research project assessing the effectiveness of ZRCs in mitigating deforestation. The images accompanying the text were captured during fieldwork in ZRCs across different regions of the country. As such, they portray ecosystems including páramos, high Andean forests, sub-Andean forests, tropical forests, and piedmont plains. Initially, this approach to the territories emerged as a strategy to understand the causes of forest cover change in various ZRCs from 1990 to the present, based on interviews with members of the communities who inhabit them. However, during the early visits and interviews, two key elements emerged that led us to adopt a techno-socio-environmental perspective. The first was the need to observe, visit, and partially inhabit the territories in order to understand their ecosystems, tools, and knowledge—which blend premodern (pre-industrial), modern (industrial), and postmodern (post-industrial) forms of production— and the intricate relationships among multiple social groups. The second was a feeling of disorientation and awe when attempting to answer what factors might be causing changes in forest cover within the ZRCs.
These two concerns deepened our strategy of conducting partial immersions in various ZRCs across the country and engaging with the activities of the organizations that welcomed us. Although this was not part of the original plan, ethnographic and cartographic elements greatly influenced our research decisions. Thus, this strategy aligns with multi-sited ethnography, which focuses on describing how various objects are distributed within a dispersed social field, seeking to understand the complexity of assemblages that constitute local scenarios connected to a broader world-system (Marcus, 1995). This methodology required us to travel to diverse regions with distinct characteristics in order to understand how a single territorial framework operates in both environmental and social terms. Complementarily, socio-environmental mapping proved to be a key tool during interviews, allowing us to produce and analyze information about the relationship between ZRC actors and forest cover changes in their territories. This approach enabled us to focus on space as a dimension that encompasses complex dynamics between the social and the environmental (de la Torre, 2023).
At the intersection of these factors lie paradoxes, tensions, and synergies that demand an integrated analysis. In this sense, frameworks such as Complex Socio-Ecological Systems (Ostrom, 1990) and Socio-Technical Assemblages (Latour, 2007) offer useful tools, as they emphasize the articulation of multiple actors and objects in relation to ZRCs. More recently, Science and Technology Studies—specifically Actor-Network Theory—have been used to understand phenomena such as the development of agricultural economies (García Sánchez & Hernández Cortés, 2023), the use of agroecology (Castella et al., 2022; Skill, Passero & Farhangi, 2022), and socio-environmental resilience (Yao & Liu, 2022). From this perspective, territory is produced as an assemblage of human and non-human actants: physical characteristics of the ecosystem, communities and their actions, tools and technologies, channels of symbolic and material exchange, flora and fauna species, availability of mineral and water resources, and legal norms and institutions—all interacting across multiple scales such as institutional, social, economic, environmental and political scenarios
It is also worth noting that the images we collected reflect moments that evoked awe, confusion, or curiosity. These photographs do more than document the characteristics of the ZRCs—they also express how new questions and research approaches emerged in the process of understanding how landscapes change. The photoblog includes landscapes, food, animals, people, infrastructure, and objects that surprised, moved, frightened, or perplexed us as we sought to grasp the transformation of ZRC landscapes. These images are accompanied by reflections grounded in techno-socio-environmental analysis, informed by both our field experience and specialized literature. The photoblog is therefore organized into the following sections: 1) What are Peasant Reserve Zones and why are they important? 2) The environmental dimension of the ZRCs. 3) Technical factors related to socioeconomic development and environmental conservation. 4) Social organization and territorial governance. 5) Paradoxes, tensions, and synergies across environmental, technical, and social dimensions.
Educational infrastructure in the lower part of the Buenos Aires rural settlement, located in the Upper Venecia Peasant Reserve Zone. Image by authors.
What are Peasant Reserve Zones?
Although ZRCs were formalized by Law 160 in 1994, the figure itself has roots in failed agrarian reforms and struggles over land access in Colombia. Starting in the 1970s, land concentration in the hands of drug traffickers and large landowners displaced thousands of peasants, who then resettled in agricultural frontier areas in the Amazon and Andean valleys (CNMH, 2018; LeGrand, 1988; Molano, 2011). In the early 1990s, peasant settlers across different regions mobilized to demand public goods and land ownership rights (FAO, 2018). This mobilization intensified after the state began aerial fumigation of coca crops, on which many marginalized peasants depended for survival (Fajardo, 2014; Molano, 2011).
In this context, the peasant movement proposed the creation of ZRCs as geographically defined areas designed to support small-scale agriculture and promoting sustainable development (FAO, 2018). ZRCs were legally recognized by Law 160 of 1994 and Decree 1777 of 1996 as instruments of agrarian reform and land-use planning, intended to stabilize peasant economies and prevent the expansion of the agricultural frontier. These regulations require ZRCs to formulate Sustainable Development Plans in collaboration with local communities, allowing them to identify development projects, agree on the use of natural resources, and define territorial guidelines, including limits on rural land ownership (Chohan, 2019; FAO, 2018).
Between 1997 and 2002, six ZRCs were established (FAO, 2018), but their expansion was halted by political opposition that associated them with insurgent groups (Chohan, 2019). It was not until the 2016 Peace Agreement that ZRCs regained prominence within the framework of integral rural reform, allowing new zones to be created and reaching a total of 21 ZRCs by 2025 (ANT, 2024). Currently, the government promotes ZRCs as an alternative to extractivist rural development models, combining food sovereignty, popular economies, and environmental conservation (MADR, 2023).
Historical Memory Mural on the Waterfront Promenade, Puerto Concordia, Meta.(Image by Author)
Environmental Dimensions of the ZRCs
In the field of environmental conservation, the relationship between peasant communities and their surroundings has been emphasized, as it offers an alternative vision to extractivism. It has been observed that Indigenous, Afro-descendant, and peasant communities do not view nature solely through a utilitarian lens focused on agricultural production; instead, their relationship with nature is also shaped by deep spiritual and cultural values. (Allen et al., 2024; IPBES, 2022). These alternative visions diverge from economic-centric approaches that conceive ecosystems merely as sources of resources, aligning more closely with a holistic “eco-nomic” perspective in which popular knowledge plays a central role.
Research on ZRCs has placed particular emphasis on issues such as soil and water quality (Vallejo-Cabrera, Salazar-Villarreal & Díaz, 2021; Vallejo-Cabrera, Salazar-Villarreal, Giraldo-Díaz, et al., 2021), inventories of plant and animal species (Giraldo-Díaz et al., 2021; Millán-Parra & Villanueva-Tamayo, 2022; Trujillo-Arias et al., 2023), and environmental sustainability (Acevedo-Osorio & Chohan, 2020; Montenegro-Gómez et al., 2022; Salazar-Villarreal et al., 2020). These studies show that ecosystem conservation is closely tied to the efforts of peasant communities, whose sustainable practices support ecological stability and ecosystem services. Caring for ecological factors is crucial not only for agriculture but also for community subsistence and territorial preservation.
Paradoxically, in the face of the climatic and social crises confronting humanity, the knowledge and experiences of the most vulnerable communities may represent some of the most effective strategies for environmental protection and the safeguarding of basic conditions for life. One may hypothesize that such knowledge has emerged in response to profound cultural, environmental, political, and economic challenges—challenges that these communities have faced through the development of popular and socio-environmental economies.
Technical Factors Related to Socioeconomic Development
From a technical perspective, the literature has addressed challenges such as access to work tools, availability of public infrastructure, agricultural technologies, and the implementation of both institutional and community regulations within ZRCs. Specific studies have analyzed four key areas: Conservation strategies, waste management, production efficiency, and territorial knowledge (Ortiz-Guengue, 2017); Community organization processes for the appropriation of agroecological knowledge in the Pradera ZRC (Vallejo-Cabrera, Salazar-Villarreal & Díaz, 2021; Vallejo-Cabrera, Salazar-Villarreal, Giraldo-Díaz, et al., 2021); Biodiversity assessments, identification of gardens, crops, and seed banks as tools to strengthen local food security (Acevedo Osorio et al., 2020; Acevedo-Osorio et al., 2024; Acevedo-Osorio & Chohan, 2020); Practices for reducing chemical inputs and promoting recycling in peasant production processes, as strategies for both economic and environmental sustainability (Buelvas, 2023). These studies demonstrate that peasant communities have developed agroecological production networks and appropriate technologies for territorial management that strengthen popular economies in these regions.
Social Organization and Territorial Governance
In terms of social, economic, and political organization, ZRCs tend to exhibit autonomous and unique ways of structuring activities related to production, exchange, coexistence, participation, recreation, and care (Hrynevych & Goncharenko, 2017). These forms respond to local logics and shared modes of inhabiting specific territories, such as peasant, popular, or solidarity-based economies, which coexist within both state regulations and market dynamics (Coraggio, 2020).
ZRCs have been analyzed as contested territories, where diverse actors with competing interests converge around land use, conservation, and agricultural production. From the perspective of territorial governance, studies such as those by Calvo-Pérez (2019) and Torres Quijano (2022) have examined conservation agreements in the Cimitarra ZRC and environmental zoning led by peasant organizations under Law 2. Other studies on peasant economic organization have explored models of productive association, such as the case documented by Rojas Suárez (2022), which describes a cooperative experience in dairy production linked to environmental conservation.
From an institutional standpoint, authors such as Buitrago-Salazar (2021) and Torres Quijano (2022) have analyzed the role of the state in consolidating ZRCs, emphasizing that these zones should guarantee social justice, participatory democracy, support for small-scale rural ownership, and environmental protection. They also note that, in the absence of consistent state support policies, peasant organizational structures have taken on a leading role in defining land-use practices and resisting economic interests that harm community well-being. Other studies, such as that by Riveros Gómez (2021), have shown how state neglect of rural areas and populations has negatively affected living conditions, development opportunities, and social mobility in these territories.
Tensions at the Environmental, Technical, and Social Levels
Since the 1930s, the effects of climate change and environmental degradation caused by an economic model based on industrial production and intensive hydrocarbon use have been widely recognized (Engler et al., 2024; Martinez-Alier, 2014). Today, this reality is more relevant than ever, as socio-environmental and political conditions pose serious challenges not only for local communities but also for private actors and governments, which have incorporated climate change as a central axis of their agendas (Grisales Bohórquez et al., 2024). In this context, Peasant Reserve Zones have been presented as a model for sustainable rural development that seeks to balance economic production with environmental conservation (FAO, 2018; Maestre-Másmela & Roa-García, 2023; Osejo-Varona et al., 2018).
However, peasant communities inhabiting these zones face serious socioeconomic and environmental challenges. Although ZRCs have existed legally since 1994, there is still limited research on how popular economies operate within these territories and how their economic practices intersect with environmental conservation and resistance to extractivism. Here, we offer reflections on the different ways of understanding the environment in these territories, the hybridization of multiple forms of production, and the governance relationships within the ZRCs that may help us better understand how they function.
Different Ways of Understanding the Environment in ZRCs
The climate crisis disproportionately affects socioeconomically vulnerable communities—particularly those living in rural and low-income areas of tropical or Global South countries (IPCC, 2023; Ngcamu, 2023). In this sense, ZRCs are critical territories, as they are located in ecosystems that are especially threatened by development projects and extractive economies.
Even as alternative views of nature prevail, these coexist with powerful actors whose extractive approaches introduce friction into ZRC ecosystems. The presence of actors aligned with an extractivist economy, such as multinational corporations or large landowners, creates environmental tensions by profiting from extractive activities in ecosystems that ZRCs aim to protect.
Moreover, the fact that socioeconomic development often requires competing with extraction, processing, and distribution networks on a transnational scale forces peasant economies to adapt to these dynamics. Practices such as extensive cattle ranching, the use of agrochemicals, or monocultures may enable a degree of market integration, but they also generate negative environmental impacts, including deforestation, biodiversity loss, soil degradation, and water pollution.
Finally, it is important to emphasize that the relationship between human beings and their environment in ZRCs is not homogeneous. As previously noted, peasant communities in ZRCs relate to nature in diverse and layered ways—combining economic, cultural, and spiritual dimensions shaped by their specific territorial experiences. Rather, economic and non-economic dimensions are interwoven into locally specific forms through which different social groups interpret and relate to their territory.
Convergence of Modes of Production
In technical terms, it is possible to identify how ZRCs integrate premodern, modern, and postmodern forms and practices of production. Ancestral and traditional knowledge related to farming and artisanal transformation coexist with technologies stemming from the Green Revolution and agribusiness. At the same time, these assemblages also include digital technologies and agroecological innovations developed through on-farm experimentation.
The interaction among diverse production modes generates tensions and synergies that emerge from applying different forms of knowledge and techniques in the pursuit of social and economic reproduction. For example, intensive or non-intensive use of land and water for food production creates a tension between a conservation-oriented perspective and aspirations for economic development through competitive agriculture.
Another clear tension relates to the use of technical and scientific knowledge by peasant communities. Historically stereotyped as “premodern,” these communities now access “postmodern” sources and channels of information. The widespread use of electronic devices enables access to knowledge from other contexts. Applications for identifying flora and fauna species, platforms for remote meetings, social media, and audiovisual content have become part of traditional rural labor practices.
Simultaneously, these “postmodern” practices—typical of informational capitalism—coexist with structural conditions that persist despite national modernization processes. Although peasant communities today have access to agroindustrial and digital technologies, significant inequality remains in access to production-related knowledge and resources. Poor physical and digital connectivity between urban centers and rural peripheries, as well as the lack of efficient marketing networks for peasant products, places these communities at a disadvantage in the marketplace. This situation is reflected in the precarious state of social infrastructure, where basic elements of a modern economy—such as roads, schools, hospitals, or collection and processing centers—are often lacking.
The boats that depart from the Waterfront Promenade connect the urban center of Puerto Concordia with the rural settlements located between the Ariari and Guayabero rivers. (Image by Author)
Shared Governance and Autonomy
On a social level, tensions arise among the different groups that make up the ZRCs. As previously mentioned, peasant communities and organizations coexist within a complex network alongside actors who hold divergent visions of the territory. These visions are shaped by concrete situations affecting ecosystems and the ways they are inhabited. One of the main tensions stems from the presence of armed actors, state institutions, and market agents, each with specific interests in these areas. In this context, forms of territorial organization respond to broader dynamics linked to tensions between rural and urban areas, legality and illegality, or institutional dependence and autonomy.
A first source of territorial tension relates to the high demand for resources driven by accelerated urbanization. To meet the food and water needs of large urban centers, rural areas located in strategic ecosystems must strike a balance between producing what is necessary for subsistence and avoiding overexploitation of resources that would compromise environmental sustainability. In this context, more productivist visions often clash with conservationist approaches when it comes to determining activities, uses, and regulations for these ecosystems.
Another source of tension comes from the creation of extractive and semi-industrial peripheries around industrial and post-industrial urban centers (Brunner, 2005; Wallerstein, 2005). ZRCs are permeated by urban logics that may combine with—or conflict with—traditional ways of understanding territory. This dynamic is closely tied to population flows between rural and urban areas, allowing peasant communities to engage with urban processes that, in turn, transform both collective land governance and individual aspirations among peasants.
This rural–urban relationship has been linked to rural depopulation and a decline in available labor in these regions (CEPAL, 2012, 2024). Increasing labor demand in cities, along with inequality and precariousness in the countryside, has made urban migration an attractive alternative, particularly for young people. These migration dynamics not only reshape local demography but also introduce new visions of nature into ZRC territories—some oriented toward conservation, others driven by production, each potentially in tension with established peasant practices (McAuliffe & Oucho, 2024).
Tensions also arise in the realm of institutional intervention, especially regarding the concept of conservation promoted by certain state agencies, which often contrasts with the vision of balance between production and conservation advocated by peasant communities. Institutions such as National Natural Parks or the Regional Autonomous Corporations tend to prioritize conservation models that exclude or restrict human activity in protected areas. This approach contradicts perspectives in which humans are active participants in the ecosystem and stewards of the territory as a common good.
Finally, the presence of armed groups involved in both legal and illegal economies is a decisive factor in territorial governance. Studies have shown that different armed groups hold particular views of the territory. The ways in which peasant communities negotiate, adapt to, or resist these actors depend on the logic of conservation or territorial control exercised by those groups. As such, there are cases where rules and conservation agreements are shared or adapted in negotiation with certain actors (such as guerrilla groups), as well as instances of resistance or denunciation in response to the environmental impacts of other actors, including paramilitaries or even the official security forces.
Final Considerations
Understanding the effectiveness of Peasant Reserve Zones in promoting both conservation and economic development requires an analysis that integrates their technical, social, and environmental dimensions. It is therefore essential to investigate the actors, networks, and forms of agency involved in the processes of care and territorial organization. However, this is no easy task—especially if one attempts to interpret land-use changes solely through statistical measurements.
To grasp the causes of these phenomena, it is necessary to formulate questions that allow for an in-depth understanding of ZRCs in all their complexity and specificity. Some of these questions include: What social, institutional, and market actors operate in these territories, and how do they do so? What visions of the human–nature relationship circulate within these spaces? How are the biotic, abiotic, anthropogenic, and symbolic factors that shape the ZRCs characterized? What dynamics, processes, and organizational forms of environmental care relate to the social and economic life of peasant communities? What technologies and forms of knowledge are involved in economic production, social reproduction, and environmental stewardship? What are the channels and circuits for the diffusion and exchange of products, knowledge, and capital that structure the material and energy flows in ZRCs?
The ferry or barge is the vehicle that transports cars and heavy machinery across the Ariari River. (Image by Author)
This post was curated by Contributing Editor Mauricio Rene Baez Alayon.
References
Acevedo-Osorio, Á., Cárdenas, J. S., & Martín-Pérez, A. M. (2024). Agroecological planning of productive systems with functional connectivity to the ecological landscape matrix: two Colombian case studies. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2024.1257540
Acevedo-Osorio, Á., & Chohan, J. K. (2020). Agroecology as social movement and practice in Cabrera’s peasant reserve zone, Colombia. Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems, 44(3), 331–351. https://doi.org/10.1080/21683565.2019.1623359
Allen, K. E., Ortiz-Przychodzka, S., Coelho-Junior, M. G., Herrmann, T., Atchley, M., Benra, F., Chavez, V., Darvin, E., McCabe, J., Nahuelhual, L., Rodrigues, C. H., & Muraca, B. (2024). Grassroots relational approaches to agricultural transformation in Latin America. Ecosystems and People, 20(1) https://doi.org/10.1080/26395916.2024.2390470
ANT. (2024). Zonas de Reserva Campesina | Agencia Nacional de Tierras. https://data-agenciadetierras.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/fd8b32c4098440e59d8df4dfa2bb92f3_0/about
Buelvas, M. (2023). Transición agroecológica en territorios campesinos de la Panamazonía – Estudio de Casos Múltiples: Asentamiento Joao Batista II, Pará y Zona de Reserva Campesina Cuenca de río Pato y Valle de Balsillas, Caquetá [Doctoral Thesis]. Universidade de Sao Paulo.
Brunner, J. J. (2001) Modernidad: centro y periferia. Estudios Públicos, (83).
Buitrago-Salazar, Y. A. (2021). Estrategias de Apropiación Ambiental de la Zona de Reserva Campesina El Pato Balsillas, desde el Imaginario de “Paz Territorial”, San Vicente del Caguan, Caquetá. Universidad de Manizales.
Calvo-Pérez, J. (2019). Ambiente y territorio en el Magdalena Medio. Prácticas y procesos ambientales de la Asociación Campesina del Valle del Río Cimitarra que aportan a la sustentabilidad territorial de la Zona de Reserva Campesina.
Castella, J. C., Lestrelin, G., Phimmasone, S., Tran Quoc, H., & Lienhard, P. (2022). The role of actor networks in enabling agroecological innovation: Lessons from Laos. Sustainability, 14(6), 3550.
CEPAL. (2012). Población, territorio y desarrollo sostenible. https://www.cepal.org/es/publicaciones/22425-poblacion-territorio-desarrollo-sostenible
CEPAL. (2024). Observatorio Demográfico, 2024. Perspectivas poblacionales y cambios demográficos acelerados en el primer cuarto del siglo XXI en América Latina y el Caribe. www.issuu.com/publicacionescepal/stacks
Chohan, J. K. (2019). Incorporating and Contesting the Corporate Food Regime in Colombia: Agri-food Dynamics in Two Zonas de Reserva Campesina (Peasant Reserve Zones).
Coraggio, J. L. (2020). Economía social y economía popular: Conceptos básicos. Serie Consejeres, 1.
CNMH. (2018). Tierras: Balance del CNMH al esclarecimiento Histórico. http://www.centrodememoriahistorica.gov.co/informes/informes-2018/tierras-balance-de-la-contribucion-del-cnmh-al-esclarecimiento-historico
De la Torre, G. B. (2023). Social cartographies in Latin America. In Routledge Handbook of Latin America and the Environment (pp. 315-325). Routledge.
DNP. (2020). La Agenda 2030 en Colombia – Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible. https://www.ods.gov.co/es/about
Engler, J. O., Kretschmer, M. F., Rathgens, J., Ament, J. A., Huth, T., & von Wehrden, H. (2024). 15 years of degrowth research: A systematic review. Ecological Economics, 218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2023.108101
Fajardo, D. (2014). Estudio sobre los origenes del conflicto social armado, razones de su persistencia y sus efectos mas profundos en la sociedad colombiana. Comision Historica Del Conflicto y Sus Victimas. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10269-006-0508-x
FAO. (2018). Las zonas de reserva campesina retos y experiencias significativas en su implementación : aportes para una adecuada aplicación de la Ley 160 de 1994.
García Sánchez, E. I., & Hernández Cortés, C. (2023). Dinámica de la agricultura en territorios rurales que están en proceso de industrialización. Región y sociedad, 35.
Giraldo-Díaz, R., Nieto-Gómez, L., & Victorino-Ramírez, L. (2021). Inventarios e índices de diversidad vegetal en la Zona de Reserva Campesina de San Isidro, Pradera, Valle del Cauca, Colombia. Libre Empresa, 18(2), 117–130.
Grisales Bohórquez, C., Orjuela Gallo, E., Ortiz, D., & Gómez Zúñiga, S. (2024). Con la tierra en las manos: La dimensión ambiental del campesinado.
Hrynevych, O., & Goncharenko, O. (2017). La economía solidaria como un modelo alternativo del desarrollo económico nacional. In I Congreso Virtual Internacional Economía y contextos organizativos: nuevos retos.
IPBES. (2022). Summary for Policymakers of the Methodological Assessment Report on the Diverse Values and Valuation of Nature of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. In IPBES secretariat, Bonn, Germany. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6522392
IPCC. (2023). Climate Change 2023: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental (P. Arias, M. Bustamante, I. Elgizouli, G. Flato, M. Howden, C. Méndez-Vallejo, J. J. Pereira, R. Pichs-Madruga, S. K. Rose, Y. Saheb, R. Sánchez Rodríguez, D. Ürge-Vorsatz, C. Xiao, N. Yassaa, J. Romero, J. Kim, E. F. Haites, Y. Jung, R. Stavins, … C. Péan, Eds.). https://doi.org/10.59327/IPCC/AR6-9789291691647
Latour, B. (2007). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory. Oup Oxford.
LeGrand, C. (1988). Colonización y protesta campesina en Colombia (1850-1950). Centro Editorial, Universidad Nacional de Colombia.
MADR. (2023). Borrador de Decreto por el cual se sustituye el Título 13 de la Parte 14 del Libro 2 del Decreto 1071 de 2015.
Maestre-Másmela, D. M., & Roa-García, M. C. (2023). Peasant Reserve Zones (ZRC) Around National Natural Parks (PNN) in Colombia: Between Conservationism and Extractivism. Historia Ambiental Latinoamericana y Caribena, 13(1), 213–245. https://doi.org/10.32991/2237-2717.2023v13i1
Marcus, G. E. (1995). Ethnography in/of the world system: The emergence of multi-sited ethnography. Annual review of anthropology, 24(1), 95-117.
Martinez-Alier, J. (2014). The environmentalism of the poor. Geoforum, 54, 239–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2013.04.019
McAuliffe, M., & Oucho, L. A. (2024). Informe sobre las Migraciones en el Mundo 2024. www.iom.int
Millán-Parra, L. F., & Villanueva-Tamayo, B. (2022). Evaluación de la biodiversidad del complejo de ciénagas de Caño Negro y Río Cimitarra en la zona de Reserva Campesina del Valle del Río Cimitarra, Colombia, ACVC (Asociación Campesina Valle Río Cimitarra). https://doi.org/10.15472/29SMSB
Molano, A. (2011). Coca | Keynote lecture “Amazonia Perdida”. Ciencia en Bicicleta (Parque Explora, Ed.). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEBf3eNx7Ms
Montenegro-Gómez, S. P., Nieto-Gómez, L. E., & Giraldo-Díaz, R. (2022). Efecto de prácticas agroecológicas en la conservación del suelo de la Zona de Reserva Campesina de San Isidro, Pradera, Valle del Cauca. Entramado, 18(2). https://doi.org/10.18041/1900-3803/entramado.2.8002
Ngcamu, B. S. (2023). Climate change effects on vulnerable populations in the Global South: a systematic review. In Natural Hazards (Vol. 118, Issue 2, pp. 977–991). Springer Science and Business Media B.V. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-023-06070-2
Ortiz-Guengue, P. L. (2017). Contribuciones metodológicas para evaluar la sustentabilidad de los agroecosistemas en Zonas de Reserva Campesina: el caso del Valle del río Cimitarra.
Osejo-Varona, A., Marín-Marín, W. J., Posada-Molina, V., Sánchez, S. A., & S. C. Torres-Quijano. (2018). Zonas de Reserva Campesina en el escenario del posconflicto: Una herramienta comunitaria para el manejo de la biodiversidad. In L. A. Moreno, C. Rueda, & G. I. Andrade (Eds.), Biodiversidad 2017. Estado y tendencias de la biodiversidad continental de Colombia. Instituto de Investigación de Recursos Biológicos Alexander von Humboldt.
Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge university press.
Riveros Gómez, C. (2021). Environmental analysis of deforestation in the Guaviare Peasant Reserve Zone [Master Thesis ]. Universidad Nacional de Colombia.
Rojas Suárez, Z. (2022). Nuevo panorama económico a través de la protección ambiental, transformación de lácteos y el manejo de la economía campesina en la localidad de Sumapaz 1. Espacio Público y Desarrollo Económico, 1–35.
Salazar-Villarreal, M. del C., Giraldo-Díaz, R., & Victorino-Ramirez, L. (2020). Prácticas agroecológicas de conservación del suelo en la Zona de Reserva Campesina – ZRC de Pradera, Valle del Cauca, Colombia. Revista Libre Empresa, 17(2), 75–88.
Torres Quijano, S. (2022). Análisis agroecológico de los procesos de zonificación ambiental en Zonas de Reserva Campesina: una reflexión desde el pensamiento ambiental [Master Thesis]. Universidad Nacional de Colombia.
Trujillo-Arias, N., Serrano-Cardozo, V. H., & Ramírez-Pinilla, M. P. (2023). Role of a Campesine Reserve Zone in the Magdalena Valley (Colombia) in the Conservation of Endangered Tropical Rainforest. Nature Conservation Research, 8(1), 26–40. https://doi.org/10.24189/ncr.2023.003
Vallejo-Cabrera, F., Salazar-Villarreal, M., & Díaz, R. (2021). Environmental citizenship and scaling of agroecology in the San Isidro Peasant Reservation Zone, Pradera, Valle del Cauca, Colombia. Revista Luna Azul, 52, 126–144. https://doi.org/10.17151/luaz.2021.52.7
Vallejo-Cabrera, F., Salazar-Villarreal, M., Giraldo-Díaz, R., Nieto-Gómez, L., & Ramírez, L. (2021). Cuidado del agua en Zona de Reserva Campesina – ZRC del corregimiento San Isidro, Pradera, Valle del Cauca, Colombia. IDESIA (Chile), 39(1), 37–44.
Yao, S., & Liu, K. (2022). Actor-Network Theory: Insights into the Study of Social-Ecological Resilience. International journal of environmental research and public health, 19(24), 16704.
