Inhibition of Amazon Deforestation and Fire by Parks and Indigenous Lands

Abstract

Conservation scientists generally agree that many types of protected areas will be needed to protect tropical forests. But little is known of the comparative performance of inhabited and uninhabited reserves in slowing the most extreme form of forest disturbance: conversion to agriculture. We used satellite-based maps of land cover and fire occurrence in the Brazilian Amazon to compare the performance of large (> 10,000 ha) uninhabited (parks) and inhabited (indigenous lands, extractive reserves, and national forests) reserves. Reserves significantly reduced both deforestation and fire. Deforestation was 1.7 (extractive reserves) to 20 (parks) times higher along the outside versus the inside of the reserve perimeters and fire occurrence was 4 (indigenous lands) to 9 (national forests) times higher. No strong difference in the inhibition of deforestation (p = 0. 11) or fire (p = 0.34) was found between parks and indigenous lands. However, uninhabited reserves tended to be located away from areas of high deforestation and burning rates. In contrast, indigenous lands were often created in response to frontier expansion, and many prevented deforestation completely despite high rates of deforestation along their boundaries. The inhibitory effect of indigenous lands on deforestation was strong after centuries of contact with the national society and was not correlated with indigenous population density. Indigenous lands occupy one-fifth of the Brazilian Amazon-five times the area under protection in parks--and are currently the most important barrier to Amazon deforestation. As the protected-area network expands from 36% to 41% of the Brazilian Amazon over the coming years, the greatest challenge will be successful reserve implementation in high-risk areas of frontier expansion as indigenous lands are strengthened. This success will depend on a broad base of political support.

Rural household demographics, livelihoods and the environment

“…This does not mean, however, that the policy solutions are simple. And there is a risk that focusing on smallholders-indigenous or otherwise-may result in the neglect of other actors -such as illegal loggers, corporate soy farms, or oil prospecting -that have a far more devastating impact on tropical forests (see, e.g., Hecht, 2005;Nepstad et al, 2006). Ultimately, the focus of research into household lifecycles and environment must expand to cover varied social and cultural contexts, which clearly modify the relationships between household lifecycle stage, household composition and environmental impact.…”

“…This implies that present and future indigenous landscapes are likely to be dominated by the imprint of youthful households. A better understanding of these households relate to their environment might contribute to a more systematic understanding of why, despite high and growing population densities, long-settled indigenous households are found to be associated with much lower per capita rates of deforestation than non-indigenous settlers (Nepstad et al, 2006;Stocks et al, 2006). In the past, indigenous peoples' light ecological footprint was explained by their low population densities, relatively low rates of market integration, and simple technologies.…”

Mauritia flexuosa palm swamp communities: natural or human-made? A palynological study of the Gran Sabana region (northern South America) within a neotropical context

“…The GS region is under several protection figures including national parks, natural monuments, biosphere reserves and world heritage sites (Huber, 1995d) but, as it occurs in other neotropical areas (e.g. Nepstad et al, 2006), this has not inhibited fire practices. In addition, there is a special protection figure for the Venezuelan morichales that explicitly prohibits the use of fire (Anonymous, 1991).…”

Designing protected area networks that translate international conservation commitments into national action

“…For this reason, the Government of Guyana is strengthening sustainable land management in general, and this can also be guided by our priority area map, which identified a further 1.2 million ha beyond the land needed to meet the Aichi Target. In addition, community areas may contribute to both protected area expansion and OECMs (Nepstad et al, 2006), and together with reducedimpact logging, could form a spatial conservation network aimed at reconciling development with the maintenance of high conservation values. As a national strategy, these might also help to shift the economy away from mineral mining, which is the principal source of forest loss in Guyana, towards a more environmentally sustainable and low-carbon model.…”