Abstract This article explores the potential of Amazon indigenous agroforestry practices and forest understandings for making global forest governance more nuanced and thus rethinking the value of forests in the context of multiple global crises. Indigenous forest practices and their inherent knowledge are included in current global governance in very limited ways. Onto-epistemological openings in forest policies are needed in the face of converging climate, food and health crises. The indigenous forest relations and practices analyzed here may offer possibilities for such onto-epistemological openings. The current FAO and UNFCCC forest definitions are contrasted with indigenous forest understandings. While the current national and global definitions of forests contain a wide range of discrepant definitions, making the application of a shared forest policy difficult and even impossible, most institutional definitions share a positivist and technical approach to forest defining and governance. National and global discrepancies in definitions exist within the politics-as-usual process of forest defining, politics that could be challenged by the political ontology of forests that questions the deeper level of how forests should be conceptualized, placing greater emphasis on care, reciprocity, and the type of relational approach present among Amazon indigenous communities.

中文翻译：

---

亚马逊土著农林业实践和本体论在重新思考全球森林治理方面的潜力

摘要 本文探讨了亚马逊土著农林业实践和森林理解在使全球森林治理更加细微方面的潜力，从而在多重全球危机的背景下重新思考森林的价值。土著森林做法及其固有知识以非常有限的方式包含在当前的全球治理中。面对汇聚的气候、粮食和健康危机，需要在森林政策中进行认识论上的开放。这里分析的土著森林关系和实践可能为这种本体认识论的开放提供了可能性。当前的粮农组织和联合国气候变化框架公约森林定义与土著森林理解形成对比。虽然目前国家和全球对森林的定义包含大量不一致的定义，使共享森林政策的应用变得困难甚至不可能，大多数制度定义都采用实证主义和技术方法来定义和治理森林。定义的国家和全球差异存在于森林定义的常规过程中，政治可能受到森林政治本体论的挑战，该政治本体质疑森林应该如何概念化的更深层次，更加强调关怀、互惠、以及亚马逊土著社区中存在的关系方法类型。