post-boom logging in amazonia

P1: MRM/RKP P2: MRM

Human Ecology [huec] PP120-300696 April 25, 2001 10:13 Style file version Nov. 19th, 1999

Human Ecology, Vol. 29, No. 2, 2001

Post-Boom Logging in Amazonia

Miguel Pinedo-Vasquez,1 Daniel J. Zarin,2 Kevin Coffey,3

Christine Padoch,3 and Fernando Rabelo4

Recent analyses of timber exploitation in Amazonia conclude that a varietyof socioeconomic and ecological factors in the region make a stable and prof-itable logging industry virtually impossible. Most of these studies focus onlarge-scale timber industries and their dependence on over-exploitation of asmall number of high-value timbers. In this article we discuss the economic,ecological, and social aspects of Amazonian logging in a region where thetimber industry appeared to have collapsed after stocks of high-value timberwere exhausted. We show that forestry in a post-boom phase, currently foundin many areas of Amazonia, differs from the better-described “boom” periodin its scale of operations, in the range of timbers cut, in management practicesemployed, and in the costs and benefits of production. Results of a seven-year study show that when sawtimber, poles and firewood are produced in amanagement system that combines forestry and agriculture they can providesignificant additional income for Amazonian smallholders.

KEY WORDS: Forestry; Amazonia; smallholders; Brazil.

INTRODUCTION

Shortlived economic booms created by the extraction of high-gradetimber from old-growth forests, can be observed throughout Amazonia and

1Center for Environmental Research and Conservation—CERC, Columbia University, 1200Amsterdam Avenue, MC5557, New York, NY 10027, Fax: (212) 854-8188, E-mail: [email protected]

2School of Forest Resources and Conservation, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL.3Institute of Economic Botany, New York Botanical Garden, Bronx, NY.4Instituto de Pesquisa Ambiental da Amazonia, Belem, Brazil.

219

0300-7839/01/0600-0219$19.50/0 C© 2001 Plenum Publishing Corporation

P1: MRM/RKP P2: MRM


220 Pinedo-Vasquez, Zarin, Coffey, Padoch, and Rebelo

have been the focus of many studies. These spurts in timber exploitationare part of a long history of economic booms fueled by the extractionof Amazonian resources (Hall, 2000; Schmink & Wood, 1992; Hecht &Cockburn, 1989; Mahar, 1988). Like the rubber boom, they were shapedby market incentives as well as government policies promoting the exportof specific resources (Barham & Coomes, 1996; Browder, 1987).

Several recent case studies have clarified the processes and impacts oftimber activities in Amazonia (Uhl et al., 1997; Barros & Uhl, 1999; Rice et al.,1997). Researchers have identified critical environmental and economic fac-tors that explain why timber extraction practices lead to the depletion ofhigh-grade timber from Amazonian forests and the rapid migration of indus-tries to new sites (Dickinson et al., 1996; Putz & Viana, 1996; Browder, 1987).Research suggests that export markets for Amazonian wood are highly se-lective and limited to slow-growing species such as mahogany (Swieteniamacrophylla) (Plumptre, 1996; Browder, 1987). For large-scale timber in-dustries, investing time and money in these slow growers was economicallyunattractive, requiring long-term investments in what are often unfavorableand risky political environments (Rice et al., 1997). Amazonian governmentslack policies such as tax breaks, credit and other economic incentives thatpromote sustainable extraction methods to deter loggers and timber en-terprises from unsustainable practices (Uhl et al., 1997). It has also beensuggested that land and resource tenure policies in Amazonian countriesdo not encourage long-term forest management practices (Barbier, 1995;Pinedo-Vasquez et al., 1992).

Furthermore, it is very difficult for government agencies to curtail un-controlled logging by timber enterprises (Roberts & Gilliam, 1995; Gullison& Hardner, 1993). Historically, large-scale timber exploitation in Amazoniahas concentrated on the extensive extraction of six high-value timber species(Swietenia macrophylla, Cedrela odorata, Ceiba pentandra, Maquira core-aceae, Virola surinamensis, and Carapa guianensis). The economic and polit-ical pressure for profits from timber make it impossible to place regulationson tree size or intensity of extraction (Dickinson et al., 1996; Rice et al., 1997).In many regions of Amazonia, uncontrolled logging has inhibited the nat-ural regeneration of mahogany (Swietenia macrophylla) and tropical cedar(Cedrela odorata) (Dickinson et al., 1996; Rice et al., 1997). The extractionof adult trees (individuals ≥ 54 cm dbh) of high-value species removes seedsources and greatly reduces regeneration capacity (O’Connell, 1996). Thispractice requires continuous migration of the industry to new unexploitedregions (Barros et al., 1999). As a result, some have concluded that a stableand profitable logging industry in Amazonian forests may never be a reality(Uhl et al., 1997; Anderson & Ioris, 1992).

P1: MRM/RKP P2: MRM


Post-Boom Logging in Amazonia 221

While we do not quarrel with these characterizations of Amazonianlogging, we suggest that most researchers have focused on a boom period.Here, we present a case study of logging after the boom. We discuss theeconomic, ecological, and social aspects of logging in floodplain areas of theBrazilian state of Amapa, a region where the timber industry appeared tohave collapsed after stocks of high-value timber were exhausted (Fig. 1).We show that this post-boom logging, currently found in many areas ofAmazonia, differs from the better-described “boom” phase in its scale ofoperations, in the range of timbers cut, in management practices employed,and in the costs and benefits of production. In the post-boom phase, loggingprovides an important source of income for many rural people in Amazonia(Padoch & Pinedo-Vasquez, 1996).

Others have attempted to understand the processes of timber extractionafter the boom passed and have outlined methods and policies to promoteconservation of forests (e.g., Uhl et al., 1997), including limiting the intensityand frequency of logging, and the implementation of low-impact loggingprocedures. In the case of Amapa, these suggestions are not particularlyrelevant to the radical social and ecological transformation that occurred inthe timber industry after large-scale extractors left the region. The result wasnot only a shift in the scale of timber extraction and milling, but an entirelynew form of timber management, processing, and marketing. Logging afterthe boom is not an isolated economic activity conducted by an extractive in-dustry, but an integrated part of complex and dynamic smallholder resourcemanagement.

Our data indicate that sustainable forest management, while perhaps amyth for large “boom”-dependent logging companies, is a reality for manyrural smallholders who now log forests in the floodplains of Amapa. Overex-traction of highly-valued timber species and the subsequent closing of largeindustrial sawmills facilitated rather than restricted timber production bythese smallholders. In this article we quantify, analyze and discuss eco-nomic inputs and outputs from logging activities to show that forest man-agement for wood production—sawtimber, poles, and firewood—is bothprofitable and sustainable for Amazonian loggers in this post-boomperiod.

As an integrated component of smallholder management systems, ac-tivities associated with wood production are not carried out in isolationfrom activities related to farming and non-timber forest product (NTFP)extraction and cultivation. However, we focus our analysis here on woodproduction only, in order to emphasize the significance and viability of thissector of the smallholder economy, which has received scant attention incomparison to the farming and NTFP sectors.

P1: MRM/RKP P2: MRM


Fig

.1.M

apof

stud

ysi

te.

222

P1: MRM/RKP P2: MRM



RESEARCH METHODS AND DATA COLLECTION

Data collection on smallholder logging operations and sales in the es-tuarine floodplain areas formed by the Amazon, Mazagao, Ajudante, andMutuaca rivers in Amapa State, Brazil (0.02N, 51.03W), began in 1991 and isongoing. Mapping and surveys were conducted in fields, house gardens, fal-lows, and forests5 owned by 140 households of the total 185 families living inthe study area in 1991. Members of each household were interviewed con-cerning their production, extraction, and resource management activities.Data collection on specific inputs and outputs related to timber activitiesbegan in 1992 with 35 selected households; the total sample declined to 12households by the end of the third year of the study and has since remainedconstant.6 Data on sales of sawlogs, poles, and firewood by the 12 householdsand on sales of sawn timber by six small sawmills in the area is limited totwo years, 1996 and 1998.

Inventories and evaluations of natural regeneration of timber specieswere carried out in the four land-use types (house gardens, fallows, fields, andforests) of the 12 participant households during 1992, 1994, 1996, and 1998.Each year, 288 plots of 5 m× 5 m (24 in each of the 12 properties distributedamong 6 plots per land-use stage) were randomly selected to measure andrecord the density and frequency of timber species’ seedlings. All individu-als less than or equal to 1.2 m in height were identified, counted, and mea-sured as seedlings. Frequency and density of adult trees were estimated eachyear using inventoried data collected from 240 randomly selected plots of25 m × 25 m (20 in each of the 12 landholdings and distributed 5 per fallow,forest, field, and house garden patches). Timber trees equal or greater than15 cm dbh were classified, counted and measured as adults. Juveniles wereinventoried in 288 randomly selected plots of 10 m × 10 m (24 in each oneof the 12 properties distributed in 6 plots per land-use type). All inventoried

5Smallholders maintain agricultural fields an average of two years until production of maize,rice and other annual crops ceases. During this land-use stage farmers manage not only theirplanted crops but also the naturally regenerated seedlings of timber species. All areas aroundthe houses of smallholders where they plant and manage fruit, timber and other valuablespecies are classified as house gardens. Fallows were previously fields and are dominated byjuveniles of second-growth trees including timber species that were were managed as seedlingsin the field stage. Smallholders classify as forests all areas where adult individuals of timberand other tree species dominate the vegetation. These include both unmanaged and managedstands.

6We found the 12 households, although self-selected, to be a close representation of the larger140 household sample. Their average total area of landholdings was a little lower (25 ha)than the average of 27 ha in the larger sample from 1991. There was minimal variation in theaverage area of forests (15 ha) found in the landholdings of the 12 families. In the larger studythe average size of forests was 17 ha. All 40 timber species found on the property of the 140households were represented in the landholdings of the 12 self-selected households.

P1: MRM/RKP P2: MRM



individuals greater than 1.2 m in height and with a diameter at breast height(dbh) of less than 15 cm were classified, counted, and measured as juveniles.Trees selected and protected by each family as seed producers were counted,measured, and identified to species.

Management and marketing information was collected through partic-ipant observation techniques, including observation of daily activities andinterviews. Sales and labor statistics were self-reported by the householdsand cross-checked in group discussions. Changes in wood prices and theamount of wood sold by each selected household were also recorded. Pastlogging activities in the region were researched in the archives of the munic-ipalities of Macapa and Santana and by interviewing older residents livingin the area.

RESULTS

Historical Perspectives on Timber Extraction

Historical records indicate that substantial stocks of commercial timberspecies including Cedrela odorata, Ceiba pentandra, Virola surinamensis,and Maquira coriacea were identified in the estuarine floodplain forestsof Amapa by the early twentieth century, eventually leading to flourish-ing timber industries in Amazonia. Around 1970, seven large sawmills withan average daily output of 20,000 m3 and four plywood factories with a dailyoutput of 22,000 m3 were operating in or near the estuarine floodplain re-gions of the state of Amapa. These timber industries were a major sourceof employment for rural residents of the estuarine floodplain of the statesof Amapa and Para (Barros & Uhl, 1995). The stocks of Cedrela odorata,Ceiba pentandra, Virola surinamensis, and Maquira coriacea were, however,largely exhausted by the early 1970s, and all eleven mills closed down andmoved to other regions by the late 1970s and early 1980s.

When the timber industry left Amapa, many smallholders, who hadlearned the rudiments of wood processing, and others who had learned howsawmills and logging operations were effectively managed, were forced tofind other sources of income. Although most of these skilled workers movedto the cities of Santana and Macapa when the industry shut down, those thatremained in the rural area built small family-run sawmills using materialsfrom the abandoned large mills. All twelve sawmills that are currently locatedin the study site are owned and operated by former employees of the largermills. Because the stocks of the most valuable timber species have beenexhausted, the owners of the small sawmills began buying and processing abroader array of species.

P1: MRM/RKP P2: MRM



Diversification of Markets

Floodplain smallholders of the region have a long history of manag-ing trees in their fields, fallows, house gardens, and forests for householduses. The managed woodlands produced merchantable NTFPs—includingthatch, medicinals, and fruit—as well as wood products, including sawlogs,poles, and firewood of a limited number of species. The majority of residentstraditionally planted a few tropical cedars and other valuable timber treeson their land.

The new family-run sawmills helped create a market for many morespecies such as Calycophyllum spruceanum and made timber managementmore economically attractive for rural families. In addition, demand forthe expanded range of new tree species created by the small timber indus-tries shifted the dependence of the local timber market from slow-growingspecies, such as tropical cedar, to the second-growth species that include alarge number of fast as well as slow-growing species. Farmers now produce36 timber species for the market (Tables I and II). This compares with thesix that archival materials indicate were extracted during Amapa’s timberboom. Barros et al. (1999) found similar market shifts in other areas of theestuary.

Results of surveys conducted in six sawmills in 1996 and 1998 clearlyshow a trend of expanding sales of wood products processed from both fast-and slow-growing species managed by smallholders in their fallows, housegardens, and managed forests (Fig. 2). Most of the lumber processed by thesmall family-run sawmills is sold in regional and local markets. The ownersof four of the six sawmills sold some of their processed wood in the largeAmazonian cities of Belem and Santarem, while the other two sold mainlyin the local markets of Macapa and Santana during this period. Althoughthe volume sold on the international market is low in comparison to thatin regional and local markets, this sector experienced the highest rate ofincrease over the two year period (Fig. 2). Access to international markets isexpected to improve soon when paving of a road that connects Macapa withCayenne in French Guiana is completed. The broad range of markets thatAmapa smallholder foresters are supplying suggests a continuing robustnessof demand for their products.

Changes in agriculture have also been important in spurring timberactivities. Increasing integration of Amazonia into national market net-works has made commercial crop production in the northern regions lesseconomically rewarding (Almeida, 1996). Amazonian smallholders cannotcompete with the high quality and low prices of rice, corn, beans, and othercrops produced in the south of Brazil, which are now sold in Amazonian

P1: MRM/RKP P2: MRM



Table I. Timber Species Managed by the 12 Households in Their Forests, Fallows, HouseGardens and Fields. Data for Seedlings, Juveniles and Adults are Calculated Mean Densities(Individuals Per Hectare) Based on Our Sampling in 1996 and 1998 in Each of the 12 Land-holdings. Growth Rate is as Defined by Locals and is Influenced by Silvicultural Treatment.

Wood Densities are Defined as soft < 0.55 < Hard

Species Seedlings Juveniles Adults Growth Density

Aniba amazonica 125 84 18 slow hardApeiba tibourbou 76 39 12 fast softBelluccia glossularioide 1077 410 24 fast hardCallycophyllum spruceanum 2110 624 78 fast hardCalophyllum brasilensis∗ 50 18 11 slow hardCampsiandra laurifolia 149 76 6 fast hardCarapa guianensis∗ 33 21 24 slow hardCedrela odorata∗ 15 6 8 slow hardCeiba pentandra∗ 16 9 11 slow softClinostemon mahuba 171 95 23 fast softConnarus sp. 55 27 28 fast hardCouratari guianensis 63 38 6 slow hardFicus sp. 36 24 19 fast softGuara sessiflora 143 105 20 fast hardGustavia augusta 317 112 13 fast softHernandia guianensis 210 102 11 fast hardHura crepitans 33 18 13 fast softLicania heteromorpha 256 114 42 slow hardMaquira coreacea∗ 192 110 15 slow softMora paraensis 600 270 33 fast softMouriri glandifolia 25 13 6 fast hardOrmosia sp. 28 16 32 slow hardPentachletra macrolloba 1096 704 76 fast hardPlatymiscium huberi 148 92 31 fast hardPouteria sp. 65 32 11 slow hardProtium sp. 446 257 31 slow softPseudolmedia maxima 134 82 15 fast softPterocarpus amazonico 100 45 11 fast hardQuararibea guianensis 42 29 12 slow softSaccoglottis guianensis 59 27 11 slow hardSapium guianensis 127 88 11 fast softSiparuma guianensis 268 110 9 slow hardSterculia speciosa 135 93 13 fast hardSwartzia acuminata 33 24 17 fast hardSwartzia racemosa 233 121 32 fast hardSymphonia globulifera 25 17 8 fast hardTabebuia sp. 128 77 7 slow hardVirola surinamensis∗ 217 115 29 slow softXylopia sp. 58 20 26 fast hard

∗Over-exploited species.

cities. In recent decades, Amapa smallholders became increasingly depen-dent on bananas as a source of household cash income enabling them tocompete with staple crops produced by southern agribusinesses. But, in thelast 15 years an epidemic of Moko disease (Pseudomonas solanacearum)has eliminated banana monocropping in the region and left smallholders

P1: MRM/RKP P2: MRM



Table II. Average Standing Commercial Volume (m3) Per Land-Use Stage EstimatedBased on Inventories Conducted in 1996 and 1998 in the Landholdings of the 12 Sampled

Households

Species Forest Fallow Field House garden

Aniba amazonica — 1.1 1.6 0.7Apeiba tibourbou 2.1 1.3 — —Bellucia glossularioide 1.3 0.7 0.2 —Callophyllum brasilensis — — — 0.4Calycophyllum spruceanum 19.4 6.3 3.4 —Campsiandra laurifolia — 0.1 — —Carapa guianensis 2.7 0.3 0.3 2.6Cedrela odorata — — — 0.9Ceiba pentandra — — — 3.9Clinostemon mahuba 1.6 0.8 0.9 —Connarus sp 2.6 0.3 1.4 1.5Couratari guianensis — — 1.4 —Ficus sp 7.0 0.8 — —Guara sessiflora 1.2 2.0 — —Gustavia augusta 0.2 0.3 — —Hernandia guianensis 1.1 — — —Hura crepitans 2.6 — 0.8 —Licania hetromorpha 5.2 0.9 1.7 —Maquira coriacea — — 1.6 4.2Mora paraensis 2.1 1.2 0.9 0.7Moriri glandifolia — 0.2 — —Ormosia sp 4.1 1.2 0.1 1.4Penthachleta macrolloba 1.4 3.5 — —Platymiscum huberi 3.3 0.9 0.4 —Pouteria sp 9.6 — — —Protium sp 1.4 0.3 — —Pseudolmedia maxima 1.1 2.8 1.1 0.6Pterocarpus amazonico 1.0 0.4 0.5 —Quaribea guianensis 0.7 — — —Saccoglotis guianensis 3.3 — — 0.2Sapium guianensis 0.3 2.7 — —Siparuma guianensis 1.5 — — —Sterculia speciosa — 0.5 1.0 —Swartzia acuminata — 0.8 0.7 —Swartzia racemosa 5.1 1.5 1.4 0.2Symphonia globulifera 0.6 — — —Tabebuia sp 0.3 — — —Virola surinamensis — — 1.9 3.2Xyllopia sp 2.2 1.3 0.6 —Zantoxylum rhoifolia 5.2 0.2 0.4 —

with few sources of household income. As a result of these changingconditions, timber production has become increasingly important to small-holder households.

With the expansion of markets to include many more timber species,the stocks of commercial timber on smallholders’ properties increaseddramatically. Newly-marketable timbers included many fast-growing species,

P1: MRM/RKP P2: MRM



(a) (b)

Fig. 2. (a) Displays the average volume (m3) of sawn timber sold in 1996 and 1998 by sixfamily-owned sawmills to local, regional, and national markets. (b) Shows the percent increaseof timber sold between 1996 and 1998 in local, regional, and international markets. Markets inSantana and Macapa are considered local markets. The Brazilian cities of Belem and Santaremare categorized as regional markets. International markets are located in Cayenne, FrenchGuiana.

which are abundant in secondary forests. The average 15 ha of forest ownedby each of the 12 sampled households contained an average of 19.4 m3/haof standing commercial volume of Calycophyllum spruceanum (Table II).C. spruceanum also showed the highest number of seedlings (2110/ha), ju-veniles (624/ha), as well as adults (78/ha) (Table I). Because of the quality,durability, and density of the wood (0.78 gr/cm3) and the species’ capacityto naturally regenerate, grow quickly, and reach a commercial size in anaverage of eight years, C. spruceanum is considered by many foresters tobe “the eucalyptus of Amazonia.” Two species that were overexploited dur-ing the timber boom, Cedrela odorata and Ceiba pentandra, were presentin the smallholders’ plots, but account for the lowest number of seedlings(15 and 16) and juveniles (6 and 9), while the lowest number of adults perhectare—six—belonged to Couratari guianensis (Table I).

The processing of a plethora of newly-marketable species also allowedfarmers to market wood in many forms including sawlogs, poles, and evenfirewood. An average of 1895 poles were extracted and sold by each of the12 sample families in 1996 and 1998 (Table III). The sample families also har-vested, processed, and sold an average of 362 m3/y of firewood (Table III).The collection and processing of wood into poles and firewood were inte-grated into timber management operations.

P1: MRM/RKP P2: MRM



Table III. Average Volume of Poles and Number of Firewood (m3/y) Produced and Sold byEach of the 12 Sample Households in 1996 and 1998

Poles Firewood

Household 1996 1998 1996 1998

1 220 1840 672 7402 2170 5810 140 6443 610 420 80 2254 935 3920 110 3105 330 4950 516 2406 184 850 420 5507 3023 4730 94 1108 830 1910 182 2069 718 565 336 275

10 2310 6955 175 20211 180 350 467 83212 790 880 372 790

Total 12300 33180 3564 5124Average 1025 2765 297 427

An average of 46 m3 of sawlogs per year were extracted and sold bythe sample households (Table IV). The mean price of timber increased 50%between January 1996 (R$ 8 per m3) and January 1998 (R$ 12 per m3).All logs extracted by sample households were sold to family-run sawmills.

Table IV. Volume (m3/y) of Timber Sold by the 12 Sample Households in 1996 and 1998. EachFamily Extracted Logs from Their Forests, Fallows, and Fields During the Two Years. Logsfrom Fields were Those Harvested as Part of Conversion of Forest to Agricultural Field. TheSample Families Reported Sales of 36 out of the 40 Merchantable Timber Species Managed in

Their Landholdings

1996 1998

Household Forest Fallow Field Total Forest Fallow Field Total

1 17.6 11.0 23.8 52.4 15.3 13.5 0 28.82 32.2 21.2 11.4 64.8 13.5 18.0 16.5 48.03 28.0 19.3 0.0 47.3 12.8 9.3 21.7 43.84 21.1 12.9 0.0 34.0 15.8 11.7 21.6 49.15 28.6 9.7 0.0 38.3 19.7 14.4 0.0 34.16 36.7 14.3 19.4 70.4 12.6 13.9 24.1 50.67 32.9 9.6 0.0 42.5 26.5 16.9 0.0 43.48 24.7 10.2 0.0 34.9 18.7 13.9 15.3 47.99 25.2 11.0 21.1 57.3 13.2 12.6 20.2 46.0

10 22.9 13.1 15.8 51.8 17.0 15.1 13.0 45.111 25.1 18.1 21.0 64.2 19.3 14.5 0.0 33.812 29.2 14.4 0.0 43.6 16.5 7.2 9.4 33.1

Total 324.1 164.9 112.5 601.5 201 161.1 141.8 503.9Average 27.0 13.7 9.4 50.1 16.8 13.4 11.8 42.0

P1: MRM/RKP P2: MRM



The rise in the family-run sawmills’ demand for logs stimulated changes inmanagement practices.

Concurrent Management

Smallholders adapted to the market opportunities of “post-timber-boom” Amazonia, by integrating wood production into their existing man-agement systems including their swidden-fallow (or slash-and-burn) fieldsand house gardens. Small farmers of the Amapa estuary, like other ruralAmazonians, typically employ a complex and dynamic set of productiontechnologies to make a living (Padoch & de Jong, 1989; Hiraoka, 1992;Pinedo-Vasquez, 1995). Incorporating timber management into an exist-ing swidden-fallow agricultural system enhances the value of labor andinputs while increasing revenue and option value. Complex land-use sys-tems result in a highly patchy and changing landscape where house gardens,fields, fallows, and forests provide a variety of habitats and environmen-tal gradients maintaining agricultural yields and facilitating the regenera-tion, growth, and production of several fast- as well as slow-growing timberspecies. The nature of timber management and swidden-fallow agricultureallows for a harmonization of concurrent management activities into a suc-cessional and rotational management system for both timber and agricul-tural products (Pinedo-Vasquez, 1995; Pinedo-Vasquez & Padoch, 1996). Inthe study site, the successional land-use stages maintained by the samplehouseholds in their landholdings varied in size, shape, heterogeneity, andboundary characteristics (Table V). The average total area of the propertiesowned and managed by the 140 participating households in 1991 was 27 ha.This is approximately one-seventh the size of the average floodplain holding(190 ha) owned by local small cattle ranching families in the state of Amapa(INCRA, 1994). The three largest properties were 57.9, 56.8 and 55.8 ha,and the smallest landholding was 9.2 ha in size. Although the 140 sam-ple families employed similar land-use practices, the numbers andsizes of their forests, fallows, fields, and house gardens differed (Table V).The concurrent management techniques employed by the farmers requirean elaborate system, which takes advantage of the favorable aspects ofeach land-use stage, emphasizing the efficient use of both labor andinputs.

Most Amapa smallholders open a forested area each year to plant theirstaple crops, harvesting merchantable wood products from the clearing. Aconsiderable volume of logs are harvested while making fields (Table IV).All 12 sampled households extracted logs after slashing the vegetation andbefore burning it.

P1: MRM/RKP P2: MRM



Table V. Size and Distribution of Land-Use Types

Forests Fallow House garden Agricultural fields

A. All householdsTotal area (ha) 2399 752 351 270

(n = 140 households)Patch size (ha) 7 1.1 2.6 0.7Average number of patches 2 3 1 3

per householdB. Sampled households

Total area (ha) (n = 12) 180 64 33 20Average patch size (ha) per 4.5 1.2 2.8 0.6

household in 1992Average number of patches 2 3 1 2

per household in 1992Average patch size (ha) 15 5.4 2.8 1.5

per household in 1994Average number of patches 3 2 1 3

per household in 1994Average patch size (ha) 15.4 5.4 3 0.9

per household in 1996Average number of patches 3 5 1 2

per household in 1996Number of timber species 29 26 13 21

inventoried in 1998

Farmers maintain fields for the production of annuals for an averageof two years until production of maize or rice declines. After the harvestof these annuals has ceased, management changes, and the fields are thenrecognized as fallows. While farmers are managing their swidden plots formaize, rice, beans, and a mix of other annuals and semi-perennials, they arealso encouraging or assisting any valuable tree seedlings that may appear inthe plot. Evidence of multi-purpose management in agricultural plots caneasily be mistaken for disorder. An agricultural plot in a concurrent manage-ment system represents production on multiple temporal scales. Clearing aplot for maize production also opens the forest canopy to allow regenerationof shade-intolerant timber species. And while weeding can help along a grainseedling that will be harvested in a few months, only a few inches away a tim-ber seedling can be managed for harvest by a future generation (Padoch &Pinedo-Vasquez, n.d.). Smallholders in Amazonia have developed complextechniques to maintain favorable environments for the growth of multiplespecies on different scales, while efficiently balancing labor and inputs in arotational system of successional land-uses. Farmers managed an average of21 timber species in their agricultural fields (Table II), while simultaneouslymaintaining agricultural yields.

Growth of timber and other useful woody species is encouraged duringthe transition from field to fallow. Fallows, as defined by smallholders, are

P1: MRM/RKP P2: MRM



land-use units that were previously agricultural fields and are dominatedby juveniles of second-growth tree species. Fallow management for timberproduction focuses on juveniles, and on the removal of selected vines, shrubs,and pioneer trees to create the gradients of light and humidity necessaryfor the natural regeneration of timber species. Members of the sampledhouseholds reported that approximately 80% of the poles they sold wereharvested while thinning fallows.

Although the 140 sampled households collectively maintained a largertotal area in forest (2399 ha) than fallow (752 ha), the number of fallowpatches were greater (653) than the number of forest patches (326). Theminimum number of fallows in any landholding was one (7 households)and five households maintained the maximum of ten. Table II shows the 26timber species found in fallows compared to 29 found in forest. The focus onthe growth of juvenile timber species in fallows was evident in the inventoryof the 12 households (Fig. 3).

House gardens serve as nurseries and experimental plots, where farmerstest selected varieties and species, including timbers. Timber managementin fields and house gardens also focuses on the protection of seed producertrees and seedlings to promote natural regeneration. Select seeds are plantedor transplanted into more hospitable environments. Seedlings are managedby weeding and protected from insects, rodents, and floods. In the case oftropical cedar, seedlings are fertilized with the seeds of the palm Euterpeoleraceae.

The vegetation of areas classified by smallholders as forests is domi-nated by adult trees and palms. In forest areas smallholders focus on themanagement of adult trees’ growth in height and diameter increment. Treesin the forest are managed mainly through the elimination of undesirableindividuals from stands using girdling techniques (Pinedo-Vasquez &Rabelo, 1999). Each year cleaning of vines and other noxious plants is donearound each selected timber tree. Control of pests and diseases is carried outby burning termite and ant nests. Almost half of the families (66 of the 140households) maintained just one patch of forest on their properties. How-ever, five households maintained seven patches of forest. Forests differed insize, although most (70%) were between 2 and 20 ha, only 4 patches werelarger than 40 ha.

Of the 40 timber species, 36 of which were sold in the market, individ-uals at commercial size were found in forest, fallow, field, and house gar-den land-use types. Forests contain the largest number of commercial-sizedtrees per hectare. While forests and fallows contain the highest standingcommercial volume of timber in the 12 properties, the majority of indi-viduals of commercial size that belong to the six overexploited species are

P1: MRM/RKP P2: MRM


Fig

.3.

Mea

nab

unda

nce

ofse

edlin

gs,

juve

nile

s,an

dad

ults

per

hect

are

ofti

mbe

rsp

ecie

sfo

und

info

rest

s,fa

llow

s,ho

use

gard

ens,

and

field

sof

the

12pa

rtic

ipan

thou

seho

lds

afte

rth

ree

inve

ntor

ies

(199

2,19

94,a

nd19

96).

233

P1: MRM/RKP P2: MRM



located in house gardens. None of these trees were extracted by the sampledhouseholds during the period of research, instead all were protected as seedproducers or kept as sources of emergency cash that might be needed in acrisis.

Smallholders increased the efficiency of timber management throughthe production of firewood, poles, and other wood products. While duringthe boom period loggers only extracted logs, in the post-boom period small-holders harvest poles for sale as they thin their stands and sell logs, branches,and debris as firewood. Approximately 70% of firewood sold is obtained inthis way. These characteristics of post-boom management and processinghave greatly increased the value of a tree.

Regeneration

A major factor in the instability of boom-phase timber managementis the destruction of regeneration cycles of commercially important tim-bers. A key element in post-boom timber extraction is the sustenance ofregeneration within the concurrent management system. The 12 participanthouseholds manage seedlings, juveniles, and adults of timber species in eachland-use unit, but with different intensities. While many differences werefound in the density of seedlings, juveniles, and adults among the land-useunits, there was much less variation among the 12 properties. Results of thestudy suggest that farmers are promoting regeneration in their managementsystems (Fig. 3). Fields contain the largest number of timber seedlings perhectare. As fields are converted to fallow, timber seedlings are maintainedand protected until they are juveniles. The surprisingly high survivorship(over 50%) of seedlings into the fallow stage as juveniles testifies to thesmallholders’ careful management.

The study found individuals of the six high-grade species that were ex-tracted during the timber boom producing seeds every year. Since seedsof the overexploited species are easily dispersed throughout the properties,their seedlings and juveniles are found growing in low densities in fields,fallows, forests, and house gardens. By maintaining seedlings, juveniles, andadults in each land-use unit the 12 participant households are managingvaluable timber sources that are often said to disappear with logging byAmazonians (Rice et al., 1997) on their properties. Efficiency in the man-agement of seedlings, juveniles, and adult trees in fields, fallows, house gar-dens, and forests allows smallholders to maintain large stocks of commercialtimber on their properties (Table II).

P1: MRM/RKP P2: MRM



Costs and Benefits

Although management of timber in a concurrent system involves a vari-ety of direct and indirect costs, all sampled households calculated their profitsearned from timber extraction discounting only direct timber managementcosts (Table VI). Most of the indirect costs, such as the tasks of making fields,are discounted from agricultural or agroforestry outputs. Smallholders rec-ognize several direct management costs. The most common ones reportedby the 12 sampled households are related to the management of seed pro-ducer trees, seedlings, juveniles, and mature trees (Table VI). Members ofthe 12 sample households included costs of extracting firewood and polesas expenses accrued in the process of managing for timber production. Forinstance, because poles are most often removed during thinning operations,the cost of harvesting poles is included in the cost of thinning operations.Similarly, farmers incorporate the costs of firewood extraction into log ex-traction (Table VI).

It should be noted that the minimum monthly salary in Brazil at thetime of the study was the equivalent of US$90 or $1,080 per annum and

Table VI. Average Annual Direct Management, Extraction, and Tax Costs for Logging on a25 ha Property. Management Costs for Producing Timber in Housegardens are not Included

Since the 12 Families did not Harvest any Timber from Housegardens in 1996 and 1998

Labor Wage Total(in person days) ($8/person-day) (US$)

Management costsProtection and cleaning of seed producers 8 64Selective weeding of seedlings 4 32Planting and transplanting of seedlings 12 96Protection and cleaning of seed producers 4 32Afastamento (thinning) 4 32Cleaning vines and shrubs 10 80Removal of selected emergent trees by girdling 4 32Firewood Harvesting 10 80Marking and cleaning sawtimber 5 40Felling and cutting sawtimber 7 56Stream cleaning 4 32Hauling (forest to port) 20 160Rent chainsaw ($ 15/day) 9 135Total 101 871 871

Property tax on 25 ha land ($12/ha) avg. property 300

Total Costs 1171Gross revenues from sawtimber (46 m3 @ $10) 460Gross revenues from poles (1895 @ $3) 5685Gross revenues from firewood (362 m3 @ $3) 1086Net revenues (December 1998 US$) 6240

P1: MRM/RKP P2: MRM



that most households had two adult workers. Since most management andextraction costs were covered by the labor of family members, the cashincome households realized was greater than the estimated net revenue. Inaddition, because smallholders do not pay yield taxes on timber (the tax ischarged to sawmills), the state of Amapa indirectly provides smallholdersa tax incentive to manage timber on their properties. While more in-deptheconomic analysis should be done, the results of the standard cost-benefitanalysis show that timber management is a substantial source of householdincome for the poor peasant families included in our sample.

DISCUSSION

The situation recounted above shows that much of the recent researchand analysis on the present and future of timber in Amazonia overlooks anintegral part of timber extraction in the region today. Results of studies thatfocus on the boom phase of logging in Amazonia are virtually irrelevantwhen assessing the stability and profitability of smallholder forestry duringthe later phase in which smallholders have adapted the knowledge gainedfrom “boom” period logging into a profitable and apparently sustainablesystem of concurrent agricultural and forestry management.

We have stressed how second phase forestry differs from “boom” phaseforestry in its scale of operations, in the range of timber cut and sold, inthe diversification of wood products to include sawlogs, poles, and firewood,and in the management practices employed. Cost-benefit analysis shows thatsmallholders in Amapa profited substantially from logging during the late1990s, principally from the sale of poles and firewood. Post-boom forestry,as practiced by smallholders, also reveals a new and innovative model wherespecies and wood resources previously disregarded while thinning fallowsor harvesting logs become sources of income.

While the monitoring of economic, social, and ecological conditionsin Amapa continues, and more in-depth research in necessary, current cir-cumstances suggest that profits can be continued through regeneration oftimber stocks and expansion of the market for many species. A combinationof adaptations to the “bust” period environment provides a new economic,social, and ecological arena for research on the processes and effects of tim-ber extraction in Amazonia. The Amapa pattern of practicing forestry as animportant source of income and agriculture largely for subsistence may beexpected to expand to other regions.

One key factor of post-boom forestry is the diversification of timbermarkets, which dramatically increased the stock of commercial timber and

P1: MRM/RKP P2: MRM



the speed at which it could be regenerated. Large-scale industrial extractionin the study region had been limited to only six species; during the course ofthis study 36 species were sold to sawmills by smallholders. More importantly,the diversification included fast-growing species, which are more abundantin secondary forests and reach commercial size much faster. Market diversi-fication as well as the growing participation of Amapa lumber producers in avariety of local, regional, and international markets is a crucial step towardsa stable and profitable timber industry for rural families in Amazonia.

By maintaining a diversity of environments and species on their prop-erties and using available resources in multiple ways, rather than convertingtheir landholdings to a single use—as is the case with cattle ranchers and thetimber industry—smallholders not only reduce risks, but also enhance theireconomic options. They incorporate wood product extraction into their com-plex land-use systems resulting in several advantages over large-scale timberindustries. Managers can shift their allocation of labor and resources amongagriculture, wood products, and NTFPs from year to year, depending on mar-ket changes. The concurrent management of land for both swidden-fallowagriculture and wood products exploitation also increases the efficiency ofboth labor and inputs.

Several important conservation applications can be derived from a bet-ter understanding of post-boom timber management as practiced by small-holders in Amazonia and other tropical regions (Franklin, 1993; Lugo, 1995;Bodmer et al., 1997). Many studies on tropical forest management haveexposed important ecological and social factors that limit the productionof timber. The results of this study, however, show that smallholders inAmazonia are overcoming these problems and can profit from doing so.A clear understanding of the existing variation in forestry, including small-holder forestry and its peculiar social, economic, and ecological characteris-tics is necessary to design appropriate future forestry and agricultural policiesfor the region.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This research was supported and funded by the United Nations Uni-versity Project on People, Land Management and Environmental Change,and The Tereza and H. John Heinz III Foundation. We are grateful to themany caboclo families for sharing their knowledge and offering generousand unconditional support in the field. We also would like to thank RobinSears, Charles Peters, Daniel Nepstad, Julie Denslow, and Eric Weiner fortheir valuable suggestions.

P1: MRM/RKP P2: MRM



REFERENCES

Almeida, M. W. B. (1996). Household extractive economies. In Ruiz, P. M., and Arnold, J. E. M.(eds.), Current Issues in Non-Timber Forest Products Research, CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia,pp. 119–141.

Anderson, A. B., and Ioris, E. M. (1992). The logic of extraction: Resource management andincome generation by extractive producers in the Amazon estuary. In Redford, K., andPadoch, C. (eds.), Conservation of Neotropical Forests: Working From Traditional ResourceUse, Columbia University Press, New York, pp. 179–199.

Barbier, E. B. (1995). The economics of forestry and conservation: Economic values and policies.Commonwealth Forestry Review 74: 26–34.

Barham, B., and Coomes, O. T. (1996). Prosperity’s Promise: The Amazon Rubber Boom andDistorted Economic Development, Westview Press, Boulder.

Barros, A. C., and Uhl, C. (1995). Logging along the Amazon River and estuary: Patterns,problems and potential. Forest Ecology and Management 77: 87–105.

Barros, A. C., and Uhl, C. (1999). The economic and social significance of logging operationson the floodplains of the Amazon estuary and prospects for ecological sustainability. InPadoch, C., Ayres, J. M., Pinedo-Vasquez, M., and Henderson, A. (eds.), Varzea, New YorkBotanical Garden Press, New York.

Bodmer, R. E., J. W., Penn, P., Puertas, P., Moya, and Fang, T. G. (1997). Linking conservation andlocal people through sustainable use of natural resources. In Freese, C. (ed.), HarvestingWild Species: Implications for Biodiversity Conservation, The John Hopkins UniversityPress, Baltimore, pp. 315–358.

Browder, J. O. (1987). Brazil’s export promotion policy (1980–1984): Impacts on the Amazon’sindustrial wood sector. The Journal of Developing Areas 21: 285–304.

Dickinson, M. B., J. C., Dickinson, and Putz, F. E. (1996). Natural forest management as a conser-vation tool in the tropics: Divergent views on possibilities and alternatives. CommonwealthForestry Review 75: 309–315.

Franklin, J. F. (1993). Preserving biodiversity: Species, ecosystems or landscapes? EcologicalApplications 3: 202–205.

Gullison, R. E., and Hardner, J. J. (1993). The effects of road design and harvesting intensity onforest damage caused by selective logging: Empirical results and a simulation model fromBosque Chimanes, Bolivia. Forest Ecology and Management 59: 1–14.

Hall, A. (2000). Environment and development in Brazilian Amazonia: From protectionism toproductive conservation. In Hall, A. (ed.), Amazonia at the Crossroads: The Challenge ofSustainable Development, University of London, London, pp. 99–114.

Hecht, S., and Cockburn, A. (1989). The Fate of the Forest: Developers, Destroyers and Defendersof the Amazon, Verso, London.

Hiraoka, M. (1992). Caboclo and ribereno resource management in Amazonia: A review. InRedford, K. H. and Padoch, C. (eds.), Conservation of Neotropical Forests: Working FromTraditional Resource Use, Columbia University Press, New York, pp. 134–157.

INCRA (1994). Relatorio anual da distribucao e propiedade da terra por parcerias no estado deAmapa, Macapa, Brasil.

Lugo, A. E. (1995). Management of tropical biodiversity. Ecological Applications 5: 956–961.

Mahar, D. J. (1988). Government Policies and Deforestation in Brazil’s Amazon Region, WorldBank, Washington, DC.

O’Connell, M. A. (1996). Managing biodiversity on private lands. In Szaro, R. C., and Johnson,W. D. (eds.), Biodiversity in Managed Landscapes: Theory and Practice, Oxford UniversityPress, Oxford, pp. 665–678.

Padoch, C., and Pinedo-Vasquez, M. (1996). Smallholder forest management: Looking beyondnon-timber forest products. In Ruiz Perez, M., and Arnold, J. E. M. (eds.), Current Issuesin Non-Timber Forest Products Research, CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia, pp. 103–117.

Padoch, C., and Pinedo-Vasquez, M. (n.d.). Concurrent activities and invisible technologies:An example of timber management in Amazonia. In Posey, D. A. (ed.) Human Impacts

P1: MRM/RKP P2: MRM



on Amazonia: The Role of Traditional Ecological Knowledge in Conservation and Devel-opment, Columbia University Press.

Padoch, C., and Jong, W. de (1989). Production and profit in agroforestry: An example from thePeruvian Amazon. In Browder, J. (ed.), Fragile Lands of Latin America, Westview Press,Boulder, Colorado, pp. 102–113.

Pinedo-Vasquez, M. (1995). Human Impact on Floodplain Ecosystems in the Napo-Amazon,Peru, Doctoral Dissertation, Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, NewHaven.

Pinedo-Vasquez, M., and Padoch, C. (1996). Managing forest remnants and forest gardens inPeru and Indonesia. In Schelhas, J., and Greenberg, R. (eds.), Forest Patches in TropicalLandscapes, Island Press, Washington, DC, pp. 327–342.

Pinedo-Vasquez, M., and Rabelo, F. (1999). Sustainable management of an Amazonian forestfor timber production: A myth or reality? PLEC News and Views 12: 20–28.

Pinedo-Vasquez, M., Zarin, D., and Jipp, P. (1992). Economic returns from forest conversion inthe Peruvian Amazon. Ecological Economics 6: 163–173.

Plumptre, R. A. (1996). Links between utilization, product marketing and forest managementin tropical moist forest. Commonwealth Forestry Review 75: 316–322.

Putz, F. E., and Viana, V. (1996). Biological challenges for certification of tropical timber.Biotropica 28: 323–330.

Rice, R. E., R. E., Gullison, and Reid, J. R. (1997). Can sustainable management save tropicalforests? Scientific America April: 44–49.

Roberts, M. R., and Gilliam, F. S. (1995). Patterns and mechanisms of plant diversity in forestedecosystems: Implications for forest management. Ecological Applications 5: 969–977.

Schmink, M., and Wood, C. (1992). Contested Frontiers in Amazonia, Columbia UniversityPress, New York.

Uhl, C., P., Barreto, A., Verissimo, E., Vidal, P., Amaral, A. C., Barros, C., Souza, J., Johns, andGerwing, J. (1997). Natural resource management in the Brazilian Amazon: An integratedresearch approach. Bioscience 47: 160–168.

post-boom logging in amazonia

Documents