New Perspectives on Mobility, Urbanisation and Resource Management in Riverine Amazônia

Abstract

International audienceIn recent years, the Amazon has experienced simultaneous processes of urbanisation and creation of protected areas. Debates over the changing role of traditional peoples in the management of such areas have largely taken place in the absence of reliable information on these popula-tions' connections to urban areas. We review the literature on Amazônia to explore how rural–urban mobility redefines patterns of resource use. The focus is primarily on riverine areas of the Brazilian Amazon. Connection to urban areas does not necessarily imply deep changes in production techniques, but induces new norms, rules and values around access to and management of resources. Rural–urban mobility challenges the capacity of local groups to maintain collective resource management, but on the other hand involves the reassertion of traditional territories and identities through social and economic networks. Mobility and migration have long been integral to the livelihood patterns and political strategies of rural and indigenous populations in Latin America (Adams et al., 2009; Alexiades, 2009). Recently, however, the magnitude of social dispersion and changes in settlement patterns associated with rapid urbanisation have renewed research interest in the implications of these processes for resource use and management in general (Wright and Muller-Landau, 2006), and within the Amazon basin in particular (McSweeney and Jokisch, 2007; Padoch et al., 2008). Urbanisation in Amazônia has been better studied on agricultural frontiers (Browder and Godfrey, 1997; Barbieri et al., 2009) than along the floodplains and the Amazon's main tributaries. However, these areas are increasingly important for resource conservation in the region (Parry et al., 2010a). Indeed, a

Forced Migration and Changing Livelihoods in the Brazilian Amazon

“…I find that among the households that remained in rural areas, 13 percent earned income from nonagricultural work in urban areas or from urban rental properties, and among households that moved to cities, 33 percent incorporated on‐farm income from rural land they owned. Most of these households invested in both rural and urban properties and derived income from both locations, which supports the concept of multisited households in the Amazon (Eloy et al ; Pinedo‐Vasquez and Padoch ). The ability of households to obtain income from both rural and urban areas is due in part to compensation payments that were sufficient to enable them to purchase property in both areas.…”

“…In Brazil, links between urban and rural areas have become stronger in recent decades (Graziano da Silva and Del Grossi ). Indeed, multisited households—in which households maintain both urban and rural properties or residences and often derive income from both locations—are common in the Amazon (Eloy, Brondizio, and Do Pateo ; Pinedo‐Vasquez and Padoch ). In addition, a study in Chile found that paved roads made commuting between rural and urban areas easier, enabling rural households to sell products in nearby cities and urban households to undertake farm work in rural areas (Berdegué et al ).…”

Locality Attributes and Networks Serving to Reveal Amazonian Urbanization beyond the Cities

“…In several studies, the connection with urban areas has been pointed out as a factor that changes the ways of life of traditional populations in the Amazonian region (Silva and Begossi ; Eloy, Brondizio, and Pateo ; Schor and others ; Van Vliet and others ). This type of connection, captured here most intensely through the locality production and consumption networks, does not necessarily imply profound changes in Amazonian riverine production techniques, but it suggests new norms, rules, and values around access to and management of resources (Eloy, Brondizio, and Pateo ).…”

“…In several studies, the connection with urban areas has been pointed out as a factor that changes the ways of life of traditional populations in the Amazonian region (Silva and Begossi ; Eloy, Brondizio, and Pateo ; Schor and others ; Van Vliet and others ). This type of connection, captured here most intensely through the locality production and consumption networks, does not necessarily imply profound changes in Amazonian riverine production techniques, but it suggests new norms, rules, and values around access to and management of resources (Eloy, Brondizio, and Pateo ). Pinho and Cardoso () observed in the northeastern Pará (municipalities of Mojú and Acará) that the urban way of life intensifies consumption (of industrial and even food products) and weakens socio‐environmental values in the most isolated localities, tending to devalue nature‐dependent practices that make the sustenance of most isolated populations possible.…”

1. Forests, Trees and Landscapes for Food Security and Nutrition

“…Findings from scholarly literature suggest that migration and associated remittances are reducing relative dependence on forests for consumption, income and livelihoods. This is in turn, leading to a decline in land change from forest to agricultural land (Eloy et al, 2014 for Brazilian Amazon; Hecht and Saatchi, 2007 for El Salvador;and Schmook and Radel, 2008 for Southern Yucatan, Mexico) as remittances are being used to buy food rather than to produce and source food from forests.…”