Index:

SOUTH AMERICA

Brazil

Community-Based Forest Management in the Brazilian Amazon

Over the past few years, an increase in the participation of rural producers' families and their economic and representative organisations has been noted in activities relating to management and conservation of resources in the Brazilian Amazon. Mainly for traditional peoples --whom the enormous socio-environmental deficit of the Brazilian State has left to economic subordination by capital destroying natural resources-- development alternatives based on resistance and the struggle to improve their living and working conditions, involve the appreciation of forest resources and therefore, their management.

The Federation of Social and Educational Assistance Bodies (FASE), has implemented a project for local development in the estuary zone of the River Amazon, with the rural communities of the municipality of Gurupá in the State of Para. Working in collaboration with the trade union movement and other local organisations, its objective is to contribute to the generation of development alternatives based on social justice, environmental conservation and citizenship enhancement. For this purpose, its working methodology is based on education of the people through direct action with the beneficiary peoples, the strengthening of grassroots organisations and autonomous collective actors, proposals for public policies, legal defence actions in the public sphere and implementation of relevant projects having a multiplier effect.

Located in the area known as the "Island Region", between the cities of Belén and Santarén, on the estuary of the River Amazon, the Municipality of Gurupá is very similar to so many other riparian Amazon cities, where isolation and the water regime still determines the rhythm of the social and economic relationships of the people who traditionally inhabit the forest. Gurupá covers a total area of 8,578 km2 and has a population of close on 23,589 inhabitants (IBGE, 2001), with 6,729 people living in the urban area and 16,860 in the rural area.

Social indicators show that the development of Gurupá --in spite of having been an important financial market during the rubber boom at the beginning of the last century-- is far from having achieved decent living conditions for the majority of its population. The IDH-M (the Municipal Index of Human Development) of Gurupá is 0.396, with levels of human development similar to countries such as Gambia (0.398) or Rwanda (0.395). The average number of years of schooling in the municipality is 1.29, while in Brazil the average is about 5.8 per inhabitant. Gurupá has less than one hospital bed per thousand inhabitants (the number recommended by the World Health Organisation (WHO) is four), and one doctor for every ten thousand inhabitants (WHO recommends ten).

Thanks to the vigorous social movement and to the great variety of forest products --Brazil nuts, timber, Açaí (Euterpe oleraceae Mart.), hearts of palm, environmental services, among others-- the Municipality can potentially play a strategic role in the construction of sustainability references in the Amazon. Thus, over these three years of activity, the FASE Gurupá Project has worked, not only in the generation of these references, but also by adding participatory methodologies and concrete initiatives aimed at local development.

Forest management activities carried out by FASE with the Gurupá communities are pioneer activities in the Brazilian Amazon. In the first place by considering that these activities are part of a family and/or community production system, and therefore should be considered within the peasant rationale of production and reproduction. In this respect, it should be highlighted that the use of forest resources is not limited to timber exploitation, but involves the multiple use of the forest by these populations. Secondly, these activities are long-term activities and therefore, guaranteeing land to producer families is a basic condition for their sustainable development. Finally, the preparation, negotiation and adoption of a law that will include community organisations to legalise their forest management activities is necessary, as these were not contemplated in the Brazilian legal forestry system.

Regarding management methodology, FASE also introduced innovations in the planning of timber exploitation, adapting it to the situation of the producer families according to the extraction of the number of trees/species to be exploited per year and not according to the size of the plot, which is generally what forestry companies do and what is recommended by IBAMA. In this way, forest management is adapted to the amount of resources in Gurupá, and this can be replicated in other neighbouring municipalities.

The adoption of the Plan for Community Management of the Camuta del Pucurui Forests in the year 2001 --the first in the State of Pará-- led to other community-based management initiatives in the Eastern Amazon. Actions carried out since 1999 in order to regulate land tenure, preparation and implementation of Land Use Plans for planning, management and territorial control, the preparation of forestry inventories and their legalisation with the organisation regulating this activity (IBAMA), and planning of exploitation and marketing, have resulted in the forestry exploitation of 102 m3 of round wood timber during the first year (2002), marketed at an average price of 80 US dollars the cubic metre, representing an increase of 233% over the price obtained previously by the families undertaking this activity. In addition to the above, monitoring of impacts on the forest show that with the techniques used in the logging and extraction operations, the average number of trees damaged per hectare, having a diameter over 30 cm (DBH/diameter at breast height), was 11, which shows the sustainability of low impact exploitation recommended by FASE, as with conventional exploitation this figure amounts to 27 trees per hectare.

As a result of this action, another timber management plan was adopted, the first for the Gurupá quilombolas(*) (ARQMG) in the community of Camatá de Ipixuna. In this plan the offer of products was broadened and for the 2003 harvest it is hoped to obtain 800 m3 of timber, that already has a buyer. At the same time, IBAMA approved plans for the management of the native Açai Palm by two other associations, who are considering the associated extraction of hearts of palm and Açai. It should be noted that the management plans for the Açai Palm recommended by IBAMA are aimed at the exploitation of hearts of palm only, which has generated severe devastation of this palm in the region. Associated extraction of hearts of palm and Açai has made it possible to increase up to 30% the production of the fruit, generating an average gross income per family/month of 124 US dollars, against the 65 US dollars previously earned without this management.

Factors hindering increased community-based forest management, such as the lack of markets and training of producer families, high costs to satisfy legal requirements and regularise land-tenure, still exist. Although the issue of community-based forest management is being discussed and efforts are being made to successfully implement the initiatives in this respect, it is still necessary to overcome the political, institutional and financial obstacles still in force. In this respect, the State carries out a key role, mainly regarding revision of legal requirements for the adoption of management plans, instrumentation of a forest-promotion programme and establishment of special lines of credit for community-based forest management in the Amazon. Furthermore, it should also promote projects that, like the one carried out by FASE in Gurupá, are submitted as isolated, but relevant initiatives, and include them in strategic actions within the regional development programme.

(*) This was the name given to the run-away slaves who took refuge in places of difficult access known as quilombos (Translator's note).

By Paulo Oliveira, Executive Coordinator of FASE Gurupá, e-mail: gurupa@amazon.com.br

Source: WRM's bulletin Nº 63, October 2002.

Chile

Community forestry as an alternative model

The Chilean forestry model is known in Latin America because of its use of frontline technology in large scale pine and eucalyptus plantations, the rapid growth of wood-related exports and State subsidies for the promotion of plantations. Little is said of the social and environmental impacts of these fast growing plantations.

The challenge of finding alternatives to this model, having a higher level of sustainability from the economic, environmental and social standpoints and a greater level of cultural relevance leads us to examine other ways of forest management practised by peasant and indigenous communities.

Since pre-Hispanic times, the indigenous communities used their forests to satisfy a wide range of needs. Many products were harvested and gathered including fruit, mushrooms, stems, medicinal plants, firewood, wood and forage. The forests were also part of a cultural landscape where traditional rules regulated access to forest resources, leaving excluded zones and avoiding the problems of what has been called "the tragedy of the commons."

Following the colonisation of indigenous territories, only a small part of the native forests remained under community control and deforestation spread extensively in the Centre and South of Chile. In spite of this, there are still wide areas of forest inhabited by indigenous and peasant communities who have inherited part of the tradition for multiple forest use. In a silent way with very little external support, community forestry continues to be practiced and has contributed to the persistence of the communities and of their native forests.

In the multiple use of forests and in the community rules for controlling and accessing this resource, we can find some keys to the sustainability of community forestry. To obtain various products and services from the forests, biodiversity needs to be maintained in addition to healthy ecosystems. If rules exist regulating access to various forest zones and areas, conservation and equity in the distribution of benefits will be easier to achieve.

The continuity of this way of using the forest is no longer guaranteed, particularly in the present context of strong external pressure on forests. The cities in the South of Chile are increasingly demanding firewood for domestic and industrial use, forestry plantations are widespread, surrounding communities and replacing native village forests and major projects are established for the exploitation of native forests for boards or chips.

Furthermore, the indigenous and peasant communities themselves have undergone severe changes. Obtaining income and employment based on the forests is in stronger demand than in the past. The traditional rules for forest use are weaker in the new generations.

The subject is even more complex if we consider the demands made by national and global society for communities to continue preserving their forests because of their increasing value as a source of environmental services such as landscape values, biodiversity, production of water and carbon storage.

In response to this situation, over the past 5 years various initiatives have arisen, supporting community forestry in Chile from international cooperation agencies associated to national governmental and non-governmental organizations. The idea is to set up a different forestry development model that will contribute to forest conservation and improve community quality of life.

This is an incipient movement compared to the predominant model, and requires much systematisation of experience, participatory research, dissemination and promotion. If this initial effort is successful, it will demonstrate the urgent need of support for community forestry, both by the State and by individual citizens. The universities should include it in their curricula and research programmes and consumers should start to prefer forest products and services that are sustainably managed by the communities.

The Chilean situation would not appear to be an exception among the countries with forests in the Southern Hemisphere. In the same way as the industrial forestry model which builds international networks enabling it to exist, community forestry should advance in setting up networks that will effectively contribute to generating a movement having an impact in this field, becoming incorporated into public and private agenda and entering the universities and research centres and installing itself in citizen awareness.

By: Rodrigo Catalán, e-mail: catalanr@terra.cl

Source: WRM's bulletin Nº 50, September 2001

Is Community-Based Forest Management Possible in the Context of a Neoliberal Economy?

In Chile, 25 years of implementation of the neo-liberal economy model have had a strong impact on native forests and indigenous and local communities in the South. Over two million hectares of pine and eucalyptus plantations feed a large cellulose industry, geared for export. Over this period, hundreds of thousands hectares of native forests were converted into monoculture tree plantations. An accelerated concentration of land ownership, aided by State subsidies to plantations has led to serious territorial conflicts with the Mapuche indigenous communities, still continuing today. Major projects for hydroelectric dams, highways and cellulose plants have multiplied, together with projects for widespread forestry exploitation with significant private investment, affecting forest territories inhabited by indigenous and peasant communities.

Land ownership and access to natural resources by the communities have undergone considerable changes. At the beginning of the eighties, the community lands of many of the Mapuche communities in the valleys and part of the coastal cordillera were divided into individual properties. In other areas, more isolated and covered by primary forests, the process for regularisation of indigenous lands is still taking place and some communities have chosen community ownership systems, while others are requesting individual deeds and many still live on government lands or on lands of private owners who have never inhabited them.

In spite of the changes, the communities have continued to operate as such, keeping up the exchange of labour, seeds, medicinal plants and traditional knowledge as well as the unity to face threats from the outside. They also maintain diversified use, traditional knowledge systems and a vision integrating productivity, culture and spirituality in their relationship with the forest.

However, their contact with global society has had impacts; the need for income in the communities has been generated, traditional organisation systems have been weakened and there is a marked absence of organisational continuity and a low representativity of the major indigenous and peasant organisations. In some areas, the weakening of these structures, the lack of opportunities and training, and unequal market relations have obliged the communities to destroy their forests to survive.

It was only during the last decade that programmes with support from international cooperation have started to promote forest management and conservation with indigenous and peasant communities. Finally, and as an expression of an international movement, the role of these communities in forest conservation has started to be valued. However, success is on a local scale and changes in mentality are slow in incorporating this new approach among politicians, legislators, public services and universities training professionals and carrying out research.

It is possible that in the medium term, the State will incorporate this approach of community-based forest management and that the university will train professionals and develop lines of research in this area. It is also possible that internationally funded assistance programmes will achieve co-ordination among themselves and with the public services. It is probable that forestry companies and in particular those working with native forests will genuinely associate themselves with village communities. Progress is being made towards community participation in the management of protected wildlife areas. In the medium-term, it can be expected that the National Corporation for Indigenous Development (CONADI) will increase its purchases to return lands to indigenous communities. However, it is worthwhile wondering if the pace of this process is not too slow with relation to the opposite trend of deforestation and forest degradation, inequitable sharing of forest profits and community weakening.

How do we face the inevitable clash of global society, through agents such as transnational companies and enable the communities to find a better standpoint for negotiation, with secure land-ownership and access to natural resources? Negotiation among involved people is a necessary path to be taken, but it requires a certain balance of power, presently lacking, to enable them to operate effectively without negatively affecting indigenous and local communities.

Some changes are faster than we would like, and the conditions to face them very often are not up to the challenge. The responsibility is great for those who have engaged themselves with the communities and the forests on which they depend (as does the rest of humanity). There is no place for divisions, false competence or inefficiency; it is fundamental to work from the grassroots, to have an influence on universities, at national and international political level in a co-ordinated and coherent way. A relationship of collaboration and alliances among the communities, conservationists and eventually, forestry and eco-tourism companies is needed. Creativity in seeking solutions is essential, but beyond this, community empowerment and participation in forest zones is even more important, as they are the first ones concerned by sustainable forest use. For them, community management is certainly desirable and possible, but to make this feasible, in addition to the above, important changes are required in the economic model, presently based on the support of private companies as a development strategy. The problem therefore does not lie in knowing if the communities can manage and conserve their forests --which they certainly can-- but in deciding if the State is willing to establish the rules of the game and provide support to make this possible, working in a co-ordinated way with civil society organisations.

By Rodrigo Catalán, e-mail: catalanr@terra.cl

Source: WRM's bulletin Nº 63, October 2002.

Ecuador:

The Awa Federation's Experience in the Management and Conservation of its Territory

The 21 Indigenous Communities comprising the Federation of Awa Centres in Ecuador (FCAE) have legal deeds for 120,000 hectares in the Northwest of Ecuador, a region of humid forests and great biological diversity, known as the Awa Territory and containing the last expanse of Chocoano forests remaining in Ecuador.
The territorial struggles by the Awa to defend their communal forests from pressure from the timber and mining industries and colonisation, benefited until a few years ago from the difficult access to the North Western part of the country. Over the past years, the opening up and paving of two new highways crossing the region facilitated the activities of several timber companies and the consequent disappearance of the forest.

In spite of this being an illegal activity, the timber companies started with offers to buy the timber. They managed to carry out business with some Awa families, causing organisational problems in several communities and within FCAE.

The Ministry of the Environment, responsible for monitoring forestry management and extraction, has not shown itself to have efficient control over these companies, nor over formal and informal buyers. Over the past two years, FCAE has lodged criminal action against various timber companies for having illegally entered their territory to extract timber. They have also denounced the illegal activities of some Ministry of the Environment officials before the Civic Commission for the Control of Corruption.

Because of this, FCAE decided to launch its own project for community-based forest management, with the aim of providing sustainable income to its communities, conserve its forests and counteract pressure by the companies. In the process of analysis of the forest situation and definition of proposals, the Awa communities established 3 basic items that have served in the development of this project: it must be administrated and led by FCAE; the use of heavy machinery in the extraction of timber from Awa territory will be prohibited; the benefits will be equitably shared on the basis of agreements that the communities will establish with FCAE.

The first task was to reach agreements and consensus over the delimitation of an area of 1980 hectares of communal forest in Mataje, containing a high diversity of endemic wood species. On the basis of forestry inventories, a first forestry management plan for this zone of communal forest was prepared. A group of young Awa were trained to become a forestry team, hoping that in the future they will be the managers of their own development. This team made an identification of botanical specimens and later prepared the Community Forestry Management Plan according to Ecuadorian forestry rules. The Plan takes into account the criteria for certification in the framework of the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC). The project has been visited twice by the Smartwood certifying company and is currently in the course of obtaining FSC certification. Other management plans for family zones in the Communities of Guadualito, Balsareño and Pambilar were developed.

The Awa started with a low intensity extraction of between 5 and 7 trees per month, using innovative extraction systems by aerial cable and preparing and marketing their timber directly to a company from Quito, the capital city, without using intermediaries. Various timber companies, with the intention of entering Awa Territory have increased their illegal attempts to put pressure on the Awa to sell wood to them.

In order to add more value to their forestry products, FCAE is seeking a market abroad for some products prepared by the Awa in Ecuador and they expect this to be possible in the year 2003. With this same objective, at the end of 2002, FCAE will be purchasing carpentry machinery to train their own people in this art and in making furniture for the national market.

The Awa experience has taught the following lessons:

1. The need to train community representatives right from the start in all aspects of forestry management.

2. The importance of a strong and representative organisation, able to manage a forestry project through all its stages and facilitate planning and assessment processes with its member organisations.

3. The community limits and its areas of forest management, either family or communal, must be agreed on and physically delimited in the forest.

4. The communities involved in the project must participate actively in the programming and assessment of activities related to forest management.

5. Care needs to be taken to avoid creating false expectations in the communities regarding the possible price of the timber extracted and the time and effort required to carry out a good forestry management plan. Transparency must prevail at all times.

6. Forestry management and timber marketing should not be considered as the only productive alternatives for the community, but rather as part of an integrated system for family and community maintenance including agro-forestry, animal breeding, handicraft production, etc.

7. The process for forestry certification is costly and complex. Although FCAE has managed to find resources to cover the costs of the visits by the evaluators, the question needs to be asked whether all the communities interested in certifying their forestry operations will manage to cover this cost.

From the above it is clear that community-based forest management is not exempt from problems, but it is also clear that these can be solved. The Awa's experience may be of great help to enable other communities to develop similar processes --adapted to their own conditions-- aimed at making forest conservation compatible with the improvement of the living conditions of all those who inhabit these areas.

Article based on information from: "Experiencias de la Federación Awá del Ecuador en el manejo y conservación de su territorio", a paper prepared by Hermes Cuasaluzán, Coordinator for the Federation of Awa Centres in Ecuador Projects and Jaime Levy; sent by Jaime Levy, ALTRÓPICO, e-mail: altropico@access.net.ec . The entire paper can be consulted at: http://www.wrm.org.uy/paises/Ecuador/Awa.html

Source: WRM's bulletin Nº 63, October 2002.

  top

next page