Obra de Alfredo Meneses
EL 68 EN LA MEMORIA ESTUDIANTIL Y POPULAR Por Mario Ramírez Centeno
This systematic map gives an overview of current evidence base on social-ecological impacts of agroforestry and the efforts to promote it. It presents the body of current literature as an easily navigable, systematic database to find the literature relating to different agroforestry practices and outcomes and different productivity, ecosystem service, and human well-being outcomes. I plan to submit this work for publication in scientific journals. I also plan to develop a website for the complete systematic map with interactive features to allow easy access and use of the database. This website will likely be similar to or integrated with the Evidence for Data and People Data Portal (https://www.natureandpeopleevidence.org/). The complete SM highlights linkages for further systematic review and identifies where additional primary research needed. However, while such evidence synthesis useful, it is currently very labor intensive, so we need to develop and refine tools to make the process more efficient (Cheng et al., 2018). Overall, a main take away is simply that further evidence synthesis is needed to evaluate what practices work, where, and why.
In this thesis, I identified gaps and concentrations in literature. I found that agroforestry practices are well-studied, but agroforestry interventions are not. There are also clear gaps in knowledge on the economic and human well-being outcomes of agroforestry. I created network graphs that allowed us to visualize and analyze the current state of agroforestry research, finding that the literature is fragmented and dispersed, but with concentration in a few journals. I found that the multiple outcomes are interdependent and co-studied (either as win-win scenarios, or as tradeoffs), and I found that local publications often missed by larger body of research.
reviews of available evidence. We found only 19 systematic reviews completed, which do not cover all the concentrations of evidence or cover all the global regions. Another major gap in the literature is impact evaluations of agroforestry interventions, which are needed to identify what types of policies and programs to support the adoption and implementation of agroforestry practices work, where, why, and how effective they are towards meeting social-ecological objectives. More research in general is urgently needed on economic and human well-being outcomes. These social-ecological outcomes may be key to understanding the current low rates of agroforestry adoption in HICs and help understand what types of programs and policies are necessary to advance the implementation of agroforestry practices. Furthermore, a suitability map of agroforestry practices would be useful to display geographically where agroforestry is a suitable option and what types of agroforestry practices should be considered. Modelling the potential impacts of such practices to create targeted programs and policies to help implement agroforestry practices and interventions more efficiently would also be useful.
I found that the agroforestry impact literature is highly fragmented and dispersed. It therefore may be necessary to reference context- or language-specific journals and publications when implementing agroforestry interventions for context-specific research. These local journals may not be cited in larger literature, so referencing them can help us avoid unintentional
duplication of studies and knowledge creation. Furthermore, we can broaden the audience by framing agroforestry research towards achieving sustainability and SDGs by targeting high- impact journals.
I believe that from this we can identify several possible paths forward to help bring agroforestry into the mainstream as a solution to help address food insecurity and health and nutrition through diversifying farm products and improving soil fertility, address poverty through
diversified income sources and tree-based market, and provide biodiversity and ecosystem services by providing habitat, sequestering carbon, and improving soil and water quality. Some key takeaways are that there is room to broaden the audience for agroforestry research by framing agroforestry impact studies to publish in journals with more diverse readers, extend the focus of agroforestry by bringing attention to economic and social dimensions of agroforestry since the emphasis is currently on environmental services (biodiversity, soil quality,
conservation), and create an environment of collaborative engagement to bridge the gap between individual research groups and disciplines to help bring the field together across the diverse array of interests. Agroforestry addresses a wide range of issues and has potential to address global human and environmental issues. Currently, agroforestry remains low on the policy agenda and is often overlooked by policy- and decision-makers. By working to synthesize the evidence on the impacts of agroforestry and joining efforts to create a more united voice for agroforestry, agroforestry may enter the international stage as a viable option to help address our current problems as a cost-effective “win-win” solution.
REFERENCES
Aleixandre-Benavent, R., Aleixandre-Tudó, J. L., Castelló-Cogollos, L. & Aleixandre, J. L. 2017. Trends in scientific research on climate change in agriculture and forestry subject areas (2005–2014). Journal of Cleaner Production, 147, 406-418.
Aleixandre, J. L., Aleixandre-Tudó, J. L., Bolaños-Pizarro, M. & Aleixandre-Benavent, R. 2015. Mapping the scientific research in organic farming: a bibliometric review. Scientometrics, 105, 295-309.
Atangana, A., Khasa, D., Chang, S. & Degrande, A. 2014a. Definitions and Classification of Agroforestry Systems. Tropical Agroforestry. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands. Atangana, A., Khasa, D., Chang, S. & Degrande, A. 2014b. Tropical agroforestry, Dordrecht,
Springer.
Batáry, P., Dicks, L. V., Kleijn, D. & Sutherland, W. J. 2015. The role of agri-environment schemes in conservation and environmental management. Conservation Biology, 29, 1006-1016.
Bernes, C., Jonsson, B. G., Junninen, K., Lõhmus, A., Macdonald, E., et al. 2015. What is the impact of active management on biodiversity in boreal and temperate forests set aside for conservation or restoration? A systematic map. Environmental Evidence, 4, 25.
Bernes, C., Macura, B., Jonsson, B. G., Junninen, K., Müller, J., et al. 2018. Manipulating ungulate herbivory in temperate and boreal forests: effects on vegetation and invertebrates. A systematic review. Environmental Evidence, 7, 13.
Brown, S. E., Miller, D. C., Ordonez, P. J. & Baylis, K. 2018. Evidence for the impacts of agroforestry on agricultural productivity, ecosystem services, and human well-being in high-income countries: a systematic map protocol. Environmental Evidence, 7, 24. Buck, L. E. 1995. Agroforestry policy issues and research directions in the US and less
developed countries: insights and challenges from recent experience. Agroforestry Systems, 30, 57-73.
CEE. 2018. Guidelines and Standards for Evidence synthesis in Environmental Management. Version 5.0 [Online]. Available: www.environmentalevidence.org/information-for- authors [Accessed 19 November 2018].
Cheng, S. H., Augustin, C., Bethel, A., Gill, D., Anzaroot, S., et al. 2018. Using machine learning to advance synthesis and use of conservation and environmental evidence. Conservation Biology, 32, 762-764.
Cheng, S. H., MacLeod, K., Ahlroth, S., Onder, S., Perge, E., et al. 2019. A systematic map of evidence on the contribution of forests to poverty alleviation. Environmental Evidence, 8, 3.
Cohen, J. 1960. A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 37-46.
De Stefano, A. & Jacobson, M. G. 2018. Soil carbon sequestration in agroforestry systems: a meta-analysis. Agroforestry Systems, 92, 285-299.
De Stefano, D., Giordano, G. & Vitale, M. P. 2011. Issues in the analysis of co-authorship networks. Quality & Quantity, 45, 1091-1107.
den Herder, M., Moreno, G., Mosquera-Losada, R. M., Palma, J. H. N., Sidiropoulou, A., et al. 2017. Current extent and stratification of agroforestry in the European Union.
Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 241, 121-132.
European Environment Agency (EEA). 2017. The Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES) [Online]. Available: http://cices.eu [Accessed 19 November 2018].
Fagerholm, N., Torralba, M., Burgess, P. J. & Plieninger, T. 2016. A systematic map of
ecosystem services assessments around European agroforestry. Ecological Indicators, 62, 47-65.
Faulkner, P., Owooh, B. & Idassi, J. 2014. Assessment of the adoption of agroforestry technologies by limited-resource farmers in North Carolina.
Feld, C. K., Fernandes, M. R., Ferreira, M. T., Hering, D., Ormerod, S. J., et al. 2018. Evaluating riparian solutions to multiple stressor problems in river ecosystems — A conceptual study. Water Research, 139, 381-394.
Feliciano, D., Ledo, A., Hillier, J. & Nayak, D. R. 2018. Which agroforestry options give the greatest soil and above ground carbon benefits in different world regions? Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 254, 117-129.
Ferrarini, A., Serra, P., Almagro, M., Trevisan, M. & Amaducci, S. 2017. Multiple ecosystem services provision and biomass logistics management in bioenergy buffers: A state-of- the-art review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 73, 277-290.
Foley, J. A., DeFries, R., Asner, G. P., Barford, C., Bonan, G., et al. 2005. Global Consequences of Land Use. Science, 309, 570-574.
Gao, J., Barbieri, C. & Valdivia, C. 2014. A socio-demographic examination of the perceived benefits of agroforestry. Agroforestry Systems, 88, 301-309.
Garrett, H. E. 2009. North American Agroforestry: An Intergrated Science and Practice, American Society of Agronomy.
Garrett, H. E., Buck, L. 1997. Agroforestry practice and policy in the United States of America. Forest Ecology and Management, 91, 5-15.
Garrity, D. P. 2004. Agroforestry and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals. Agroforestry Systems, 61, 5-17.
Garrity, D. P., Akinnifesi, F. K., Ajayi, O. C., Weldesemayat, S. G., Mowo, J. G., et al. 2010. Evergreen Agriculture: a robust approach to sustainable food security in Africa. Food Security, 2, 197-214.
Gordon, A. M., Newman, S. M. & Coleman, B. 2018. Temperate agroforestry systems, CABI. Haddaway, N. R., Brown, C., Eales, J., Eggers, S., Josefsson, J., et al. 2018. The multifunctional
roles of vegetated strips around and within agricultural fields. Environmental Evidence, 7, 14.
Haddaway, N. R., Brown, C., Eggers, S., Josefsson, J., Kronvang, B., et al. 2016. The multifunctional roles of vegetated strips around and within agricultural fields. A systematic map protocol. Environmental Evidence, 5, 18.
Holland, J. M., Douma, J. C., Crowley, L., James, L., Kor, L., et al. 2017. Semi-natural habitats support biological control, pollination and soil conservation in Europe. A review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 37, 31.
Holzmueller, E. J. & Jose, S. 2012. Biomass production for biofuels using agroforestry: potential for the North Central Region of the United States. Agroforestry Systems, 85, 305-314. Huxley, P. & van Houten, H. 1997. Glossary for Agroforestry. Nairobi, Kenya: World
IPES-Food 2016. From uniformity to diversity: a paradigm shift from industrial agriculture to diversified agroecological systems. International Panel of Experts on Sustainable Food Systems.
Jacobson, M. & Kar, S. 2013. Extent of agroforestry extension programs in the United States. Journal of Extension, 51.
James, K. L., Randall, N. P. & Haddaway, N. R. 2016. A methodology for systematic mapping in environmental sciences. Environmental Evidence, 5, 7.
Janssen, M. A., Schoon, M. L., Ke, W. & Börner, K. 2006. Scholarly networks on resilience, vulnerability and adaptation within the human dimensions of global environmental change. Global Environmental Change, 16, 240-252.
Jordan, N., Warner, K D 2013. Towards Multifunctional Agricultural Landscapes for the Upper Midwest Region of the USA. In: Steve Wratten, H. S., Ross Cullen and Robert Costanza (ed.) Ecosystem Services in Agricultural and Urban Landscapes. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Jose, S. 2009. Agroforestry for ecosystem services and environmental benefits: an overview. Agroforestry Systems, 76, 1-10.
Jose, S. & Bardhan, S. 2012. Agroforestry for biomass production and carbon sequestration: An overview. Agroforestry Systems, 86, 105-111.
Jose, S., Gold, M. A. & Garrett, H. E. 2012. The Future of Temperate Agroforestry in the United States. In: Nair, P. K. R. & Garrity, D. (eds.) Agroforestry - The Future of Global Land Use. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.
Kumar, P. 2010. The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) Ecological and Economic Foundations, London and Washington, Earthscan.
Lassoie, J. P., Buck, L. E. & Current, D. 2009. The Development of Agroforestry as an
Integrated Land Use Management Strategy. In: Gene Garrett, H. E. (ed.) North American Agroforestry: An Integrated Science and Practice, 2nd edition. 677 S. Segoe Rd.,
Madison, WI 53711, USA: American Society of Agronomy.
Leakey, R. R. B. 1996. Definition of agroforestry revisited. Agroforestry Today, 8, 5-7.
Li, J., Wang, M.-H. & Ho, Y.-S. 2011. Trends in research on global climate change: A Science Citation Index Expanded-based analysis. Global and Planetary Change, 77, 13-20. Li, T. 2016. Essays on Sustainability and Poverty. Ph.D., University of Virginia.
Liu, X., Zhang, L. & Hong, S. 2011. Global biodiversity research during 1900–2009: a bibliometric analysis. Biodiversity and Conservation, 20, 807-826.
Lobao, L. & Meyer, K. 2001. The Great Agricultural Transition: Crisis, Change, and Social Consequences of Twentieth Century US Farming. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 103- 124.
Louah, L., Visser, M., Blaimont, A. & de Cannière, C. 2017. Barriers to the development of temperate agroforestry as an example of agroecological innovation: Mainly a matter of cognitive lock-in? Land Use Policy, 67, 86-97.
Lovell, S. T., Dupraz, C., Gold, M., Jose, S., Revord, R., et al. 2017. Temperate agroforestry research: considering multifunctional woody polycultures and the design of long-term field trials. Agroforestry Systems, 1-19.
Matson, P. A., Parton, W. J., Power, A. G. & Swift, M. J. 1997. Agricultural Intensification and Ecosystem Properties. Science, 277, 504-509.
Matthews, S., Pease, S. M., Gordon, A. M. & Williams, P. A. 1993. Landowner perceptions and the adoption of agroforestry practices in southern Ontario, Canada. Agroforestry Systems, 21, 159-168.
Mattia, C. M., Lovell, S. T. & Davis, A. 2018. Identifying barriers and motivators for adoption of multifunctional perennial cropping systems by landowners in the Upper Sangamon River Watershed, Illinois. Agroforestry Systems, 92, 1155-1169.
Mbow, C., Smith, P., Skole, D., Duguma, L. & Bustamante, M. 2014a. Achieving mitigation and adaptation to climate change through sustainable agroforestry practices in africa. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 6, 8-14.
Mbow, C., Van Noordwijk, M., Luedeling, E., Neufeldt, H., Minang, P. A., et al. 2014b.
Agroforestry solutions to address food security and climate change challenges in Africa. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 6, 61-67.
McKinnon, M. C., Cheng, S. H., Dupre, S., Edmond, J., Garside, R., et al. 2016. What are the effects of nature conservation on human well-being? A systematic map of empirical evidence from developing countries. Environmental Evidence, 5, 8.
McKinnon, M. C., Cheng, S. H., Garside, R., Masuda, Y. J. & Miller, D. C. 2015. Sustainability: Map the evidence. Nature News, 528, 185.
Melin, G., Persson, O. 1996. Studying research collaboration using co-authorships. Scientometrics, 36, 363-377.
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005. Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Synthesis, Washington, DC, Island Press.
Miller, D., Ordonez, P., Baylis, K., Hughes, K. & Rana, P. 2017. Protocol for an evidence and gap map The impacts of agroforestry on agricultural productivity, ecosystem services, and human well-being in low- and middle-income countries: an evidence and gap map. Campbell Collaboration [Online]. Available:
https://www.campbellcollaboration.org/library/agroforestry-impacts-on-agricultural- productivity-ecosystem-services-human-well-being.html.
Miller, D., Ordonez, P., Brown, S., Forrest, S., Nava, N., et al. (in review). The Impacts of Agroforestry on Agricultural Productivity, Ecosystem Services, and Human Well-Being in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: An Evidence Gap Map. 3ie Evidence Gap Map Report. London: International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie).
Miller, D. C. 2014. Explaining Global Patterns of International Aid for Linked Biodiversity Conservation and Development. World Development, 59, 341-359.
Montambault, J. R. & Alavalapati, J. R. R. 2005. Socioeconomic research in agroforestry: a decade in review. Agroforestry Systems, 65, 151-161.
Mosquera-Losada, M. R., Moreno, G., Pardini, A., McAdam, J. H., Papanastasis, V., et al. 2012. Past, Present and Future of Agroforestry Systems in Europe. In: Nair, P. K. R. & Garrity, D. (eds.) Agroforestry - The Future of Global Land Use. Dordrecht: Springer
Netherlands.
Mosquera-Losada, M. R., Santiago-Freijanes, J., Pisanelli, A., Rois, M., Smith, J., et al. 2016. Extent and Success of Current Policy Measures to Promote Agroforestry across Europe. Nair, P. K. R. & Garrity, D. 2012. Agroforestry - The Future of Global Land Use.
Newman, M. E. J. 2004. Coauthorship networks and patterns of scientific collaboration. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 101,
Ota, L., Herbohn, J., Harrison, S., Gregorio, N. & Engel, V. L. 2018. Smallholder reforestation and livelihoods in the humid tropics: a systematic mapping study. Agroforestry Systems, 92, 1597-1609.
Ottoy, S., Angileri, V., Gibert, C., Paracchini, M. L., Pointereau, P., et al. 2018. Impacts of selected Ecological Focus Area options in European farmed landscapes on climate regulation and pollination services: a systematic map protocol. Environmental Evidence, 7, 10.
Park, K. J. 2015. Mitigating the impacts of agriculture on biodiversity: bats and their potential role as bioindicators. Mammalian Biology, 80, 191-204.
Power, A. G. 2010. Ecosystem services and agriculture: tradeoffs and synergies. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 365, 2959-2971.
Prevedello, J. A., Almeida-Gomes, M. & Lindenmayer, D. B. 2018. The importance of scattered trees for biodiversity conservation: A global meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Ecology, 55, 205-214.
Provan, K. G., Veazie, M. A., Staten, L. K. & Teufel-Shone, N. I. 2005. The Use of Network Analysis to Strengthen Community Partnerships. Public Administration Review, 65, 603- 613.
Pumariño, L., Sileshi, G. W., Gripenberg, S., Kaartinen, R., Barrios, E., et al. 2015. Effects of agroforestry on pest, disease and weed control: A meta-analysis. Basic and Applied Ecology, 16, 573-582.
Rahman, S. A., Sunderland, T., Kshatriya, M., Roshetko, J. M., Pagella, T., et al. 2016. Towards productive landscapes: Trade-offs in tree-cover and income across a matrix of
smallholder agricultural land-use systems. Land Use Policy, 58, 152-164.
Randall, N. P., Donnison, L. M., Lewis, P. J. & James, K. L. 2015. How effective are on-farm mitigation measures for delivering an improved water environment? A systematic map. Environmental Evidence, 4, 18.
Reed, J., van Vianen, J., Foli, S., Clendenning, J., Yang, K., et al. 2017. Trees for life: The ecosystem service contribution of trees to food production and livelihoods in the tropics. Forest Policy and Economics, 84, 62-71.
Reid, R. 2016. Developing farmer and community capacity in Agroforestry: is the Australian Master TreeGrower program transferable to other countries? Agroforestry Systems, 91, 847-865.
Rivest, D., Paquette, A., Moreno, G. & Messier, C. 2013. A meta-analysis reveals mostly neutral influence of scattered trees on pasture yield along with some contrasted effects depending on functional groups and rainfall conditions. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 165, 74-79.
Sharma, N., Bohra, B., Pragya, N., Ciannella, R., Dobie, P., et al. 2016. Bioenergy from agroforestry can lead to improved food security, climate change, soil quality, and rural development. Food and Energy Security, 5, 165-183.
Smith, J., Pearce, B. D. & Wolfe, M. S. 2012. Reconciling productivity with protection of the environment: Is temperate agroforestry the answer? Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems, 28, 80-92.
Snilstveit, B., Stevenson, J, Villar, PF, Eyers, J, Harvey, C, Panfil, S, Puri, J and McKinnon, MC 2016. Land-use change and forestry programmes: evidence on the effects on greenhouse gas emissions and food security. Evidence Gap Map Report 3. London.
Snilstveit, B., Vojtkova, M., Bhavsar, A. & Gaarder, M. 2013. Evidence Gap Maps A Tool for Promoting Evidence-Informed Policy and Prioritizing Future Research.
Takeuchi, K. 2010. Rebuilding the relationship between people and nature: the Satoyama Initiative. Ecological Research, 25, 891-897.
Thevathasan, N. V., Gordon, A. M., Bradley, R., Cogliastro, A., Folkard, P., et al. 2012.
Agroforestry Research and Development in Canada: The Way Forward. In: Nair, P. K. R. & Garrity, D. (eds.) Agroforestry - The Future of Global Land Use. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.
Thomas, J., Brunton, J. & Graziosi, S. 2010. EPPI-Reviewer 4.0: software for research synthesis. London: Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London: EPPI-Centre Software.
Tilman, D., Cassman, K. G., Matson, P. A., Naylor, R. & Polasky, S. 2002. Agricultural sustainability and intensive production practices. Nature, 418, 671.
Torralba, M., Fagerholm, N., Burgess, P. J., Moreno, G. & Plieninger, T. 2016. Do European agroforestry systems enhance biodiversity and ecosystem services? A meta-analysis. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 230, 150-161.
Tsonkova, P., Böhm, C., Quinkenstein, A. & Freese, D. 2012. Ecological benefits provided by alley cropping systems for production of woody biomass in the temperate region: A review. Agroforestry Systems, 85, 133-152.
Udawatta, R. P. & Jose, S. 2012. Agroforestry strategies to sequester carbon in temperate North America. Agroforestry Systems, 86, 225-242.
USDA 2011. USDA Agroforestry Strategic Framework, Fiscal Year 2011–2016, Washington, D.C., U. S. Department of Agriculture.
USDA 2013. Agroforestry USDA Reports to America, Fiscal Years 2011–2012— Comprehensive Version, Washington, D.C., U. S. Department of Agriculture. Valdivia, C., Barbieri, C. & Gold, M. A. 2012. Between Forestry and Farming: Policy and
Environmental Implications of the Barriers to Agroforestry Adoption. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, 60, 155-175.
Valdivia, C. & Poulos, C. 2008. Factors affecting farm operators’ interest in incorporating riparian buffers and forest farming practices in northeast and southeast Missouri. Agroforestry Systems, 75, 61-71.
Van Noordwijk, M., Duguma, L. A., Dewi, S., Leimona, B., Catacutan, D. C., et al. 2018. SDG synergy between agriculture and forestry in the food, energy, water and income nexus: reinventing agroforestry? Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 34, 33-42. Van Vooren, L., Reubens, B., Broekx, S., De Frenne, P., Nelissen, V., et al. 2017. Ecosystem
service delivery of agri-environment measures: A synthesis for hedgerows and grass strips on arable land. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 244, 32-51.
Waldron, A., Garrity, D., Malhi, Y., Girardin, C., Miller, D. C., et al. 2017. Agroforestry Can Enhance Food Security While Meeting Other Sustainable Development Goals. Tropical Conservation Science, 10, 1-6.
Williams-Guillén, K., Olimpi, E., Maas, B., Taylor, P. J. & Arlettaz, R. 2016. Bats in the
Anthropogenic Matrix: Challenges and Opportunities for the Conservation of Chiroptera and Their Ecosystem Services in Agricultural Landscapes. In: Voigt, C. C. & Kingston, T. (eds.) Bats in the Anthropocene: Conservation of Bats in a Changing World. Cham:
Wilson, M. & Lovell, S. 2016. Agroforestry—The Next Step in Sustainable and Resilient Agriculture. Sustainability, 8, 574.
Wolz, K. J., Lovell, S. T., Branham, B. E., Eddy, W. C., Keeley, K., et al. 2018. Frontiers in alley cropping: Transformative solutions for temperate agriculture. Glob Chang Biol, 24, 883-894.
World Bank. 2018. World Bank Country and Lending Groups [Online]. Available:
https://datahelpdesk.worldbank.org/knowledgebase/articles/906519-world-bank-country- and-lending-groups [Accessed 31 March 2018 2018].
APPENDIX A: LIST OF HIGH-INCOME COUNTRIES
List of high-income countries as of 2018, according to the World Bank classification scheme (World Bank, 2018).
Andorra Estonia Latvia Saudi Arabia
Antigua and
Barbuda Faroe Islands Liechtenstein Seychelles
Aruba Finland Lithuania Singapore
Australia France Luxembourg Sint Maarten
Austria French Polynesia Macao SAR, China Slovak Republic
The Bahamas Germany Malta Slovenia
Bahrain Gibraltar Monaco Spain
Barbados Greece Nauru St. Kitts and Nevis
Belgium Greenland Netherlands St. Martin
Bermuda Guam New Caledonia Sweden
British Virgin Islands
Hong Kong SAR,
China New Zealand Switzerland
Brunei Darussalam Hungary
Northern Mariana
Islands Taiwan
Canada Iceland Norway Trinidad and Tobago
Cayman Islands Ireland Oman
Turks and Caicos Islands
Channel Islands Isle of Man Palau United Arab Emirates
Chile Israel Poland United Kingdom
Curacao Italy Portugal United States
Cyprus Japan Puerto Rico Uruguay