community based forest management plans in the brazilian amazon current barriers and necessary...
DESCRIPTION
Isabel Garcia Drigo, USP/Agroparitech Marie Gabrielle Piketty, CIRAD UMR MOISA Wagner Pena, Emater, Para (Brazil) Plinio Sist, CIRAD UR 105 Presentation for the conference on Taking stock of smallholders and community forestry Montpellier France March 24-26, 2010TRANSCRIPT
Community-based forest management
plans in the Brazilian Amazon:
current barriers and necessary reforms
Isabel Garcia Drigo, USP/Agroparitech
Marie Gabrielle Piketty, CIRAD UMR MOISA
Wagner Pena, Emater, Para (Brazil)
Plinio Sist, CIRAD UR 105
Taking stock of smallholders and community forestry, Montpellier 24-26 April 2010
The Brazilian Amazon
9 States
5 217 420 km²
64% of forest
61% of Brazilian State
20 Million habitants
Potential Area of CFM
Source: Amaral and Verissimo 2007
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
FLONAS RDS RESEX APA QUIL COLONS TOTAL
263
101 118161
6
253
901
79 8195 80
4
126
465
TH
OU
SA
ND
S
Area MFC
Potential areas for CFM > 46 MhaIndigenous areas = 110MhaPotential areas for concession 43 Mha
Source SFB 2007
Community Forest Management Projects
in the Brazilian Amazon
1566 initiatives of CFM and smallholdersmanagement plans
Total area of 851,000 ha
Only 5459 families
First Conclusions on CFM in the Brazilian
Amazon
Large potential area more than 45 million ha
Still very few CFM plans
High diversity of situations (traditional populations, small farmers, common or individual forest land)
Large expectations
Large support from several entities : governmental bodies (Promanejo program), civil society (ONGs), foreign support….
Increase of CFM in the Amazon (17 plans in 1990
1566 initiatives in 2006*)
* source: Serviço Florestal Brasileiro 2007
The many problems and the focus
Many regulatory frameworks impose slow and costly permit granting processes.
Internal challenges, limited technical and business skills, quality and scale production, and potential internal conflicts
Long term economic viability poorly documented whereas it is expected that forest management of legal forest reserves (80 % of each land holding) generate a significant additional income
► Detailed analysis of economic results of 4 CFM (2 in Acre State – 2 in Para State)
The four case-studiesAPRUMA CANOR PORTO DIAS VIROLA-JATOBA
States Acre Para Acre Para
Land tenure Individual Individual Concession Concession
Participants 16 6 8 24/183
Area (ha) 640 364 2.400 23.000
Annual harvested area (ha)
64 74 40 500-1000
Harvesting method
CFMmechanized
CFMmechanized
CFMmechanized
Partnershiplogging company
Benefit sharing Individual Individual Among the 8 members
All families
Timber Production Performance
Production(m3/family/year)
(m3/year)
Case Study Planned Real
Pedro Peixoto 11 6
Canor 174 174 *
Porto Dias 400 170
Virola-Jatoba 8.000 4.000
* Not all sold
Main Limiting factors:
1. Lack of skill in forest inventories
2. Bad road conditions3. Lack of time dedication from farmers
to logging
Production Costs: the case of Canor
High transport costs (58%)Cost of Management Plan almost equal to all logging costsAgregated cost value similar with others case studies in the Amazon(50-100 US$/m3)
Economic results of CBFM
FAMILY NET INCOME(US$/family/year)
N years
Comments
Expected Real
Pedro Peixoto 869 800 10 Only 3 families
Canor 1100-2000 < 0? 8 Only 500 m3 sold
Porto Dias 2500 2125 30 Large public subsidies
Virola-Jatoba 1300 550 25
Main Limiting Factors1. No market for all harvested species2. Competition with illegal logging and authorized
deforestation3. In the best case scenario income is only 70% of brazilian
minimum wage
Conclusions -Discussion
The community-based forest management faces huge challenges to secure long term economic viability yet.
The current timber prices barely manage to secure long term economic viability
Bad road infrastructures have a significant impact on costs
Administrative costs are important
Conclusions -Discussion
Even if timber becomes scarce, if control is increasing, the illegal timber market still exists. The demand for « legal timber » is not that high
Timber demand for specific valorized species often requires to be able to produce high quality round or sawn wood
Not all the forest in the settlement are really that rich….(economically speaking)
CBFM economic returns from timber are not currently sufficient to sustain alone a family
Discussion for future policies and research
Invest in new forms of local governance of forest resources
Realize a full assessment of timber potential of legal reserves in the Amazon
Improve secondary road infrastructures
Invest in R&D to support the implementation of sustainable cattle ranching and agricultural activities in the limited area allowed to be deforested
Secure public markets (minimum prices ?) for timber from CBFM
Decrease administrative costs