Forest Dependency in the Brazilian and Bolivian Amazon Amy Duchelle1,2 and Karen Kainer1, 3 1School of Forest Resources and Conservation, University of Florida, USA 2Universidade Federal do Acre, Brazil 3Center for Latin American Studies, University of Florida, USA World Forestry Congress, PEN Side Event, October 19, 2009

Objectives Compare the role of forest-based income in livelihood systems of extractive communities in Acre, Brazil and Pando, Bolivia Evaluate income contribution of principal non- timber forest products (NTFPs) Explore policy and market-based tools for increasing income from NTFPs

Context – Acre, Brazil and Pando, Bolivia Humid, moist tropical forest (heavily forested ~90%) Dry season (May-Sept); Annual precipitation: ~2100 mm Acre:10,000km2; Pando:15,000km2 Communities (n=12); HH range: Acre: 16 to 28 (avg.= 24) Pando: 14 to 80 (avg.= 31) Households (n=189) Avg. hhd size 5.4 Acre; 6.0 Pando Variability: Access (road vs. river) and distance to markets Protected area status Origin of settlers Where is the PEN study located: country/ies, region, climate and forest zone(s)? How large approximately is the study area (km2)? What # of villages sampled? How many people live in the surveyed villages? Your sample had how many households? Average # of people per household? Are there key sub-dimensions dividing the sample in terms of livelihood strategies: ethnicity, closeness to markets, migrants vs. non-migrants, history of settlement, etc.?

Household income sources Brazil BRAZIL Avg. income Cash Subsistence US$1319 $815 $504 Bolivia How large are household incomes – separating the subsistence and cash components (average, SD?) What sources contribute to household income? Main categories: forest (B, C, J5, J7, J8)[1], other environmental (D1, E) agriculture - crops (H), agriculture - livestock (I) wage (F) business (G) others (D2, J1-4, J6, J9) [2] —bar chart of income shares (%) with SD intervals. [1] In the brackets, we refer to the respective section of the quarterly questionnaire. [2] Particular other income sources may be singled out if important in the specific case, e.g. remittances. BOLIVIA Avg. income Cash Subsistence US$1095 $805 $289

Relative importance of main NTFPs List products or product categories that provide at least 10% of forest and other environmental income, show their % contribution, and the distribution between cash and subsistence income. 2. Comment on which are “forest” vs. “other environmental income” sources…. 3. Explain how the main subsistence forest/environmental goods were priced

Household income sources Brazil High relative forest income in all wealth classes – everyone is out there! Bolivia

Income sources and seasonality Brazil Seasonal collection of forest products. Q3 - Brazil nut harvest; Q4 – rubber harvest Bolivia Four bar charts (one for each Q1-4), each with mean and SD intervals, for: total income forest income other environmental income agriculture other Is there other evidence of environmental income serving as “seasonal gap filler” when agricultural incomes are low (qualitative)? Q3 and Q4 represent Brazil nut harvest

Policy and market-based tools for NTFPs Government subsidies - Brazil 1999: Chico Mendes Law in Acre – rubber price supports (150% price increase by 2002, Kainer et al. 2003) 2006: Rubber factory in Xapuri, Acre for “green” condoms (+90-215% price increase from 2002 price) 2009: Brazilian National Plan for NTFP minimum prices

Policy and market-based tools for NTFPs Certification of Brazil nuts Organic - product quality through “best management practices” 2) Fair Trade - affiliation with cooperatives 3) Forest Management - environmental, economic and social standards

Benefits of Organic + Fair Trade Brazil nut Certification Income Benefits (2007): Certified producers in Pando 2.5 times less likely to have Brazil nut debt (p=0.037) and in Acre 1.2 times less likely (p=0.034) Also, significant associations between harvest and post-harvest practices and certification.

Conclusions Extremely high levels of forest dependency in Acre, Brazil and Pando, Bolivia NTFPs comprise a large portion of forest income, especially Brazil nuts in Pando Government subsidies for NTFPs and certification schemes through affiliation with cooperatives can bolster forest-based income (Brazil vs. Bolivia)

Acknowledgements Field assistance Regional partners Funding sources Gladys Guanacoma (Universidad Amazonica del Pando) Marciane d’Araujo and Juceli da Souza (Escola da Floresta, Acre) Peter Groenendjik (University of Utrecht), and others… Regional partners Embrapa-Acre, Herencia-Pando, ACCA-Madre de Dios, MAP Initiative Funding sources Brazil nut producers in the MAP region Contact: Amy Duchelle duchelle@ufl.edu