Institution-based access implications faced by traditional communities in Amazônia: towards co-managing protected areas and Terms of Compromise for socio-biodiversity
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18472/SustDeb.v15n2.2024.54251Keywords:
Resource and market access, Sociobiodiversity of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities, (in)formal institutions, Formalisation, Protected areas, Rights-based managementAbstract
Given limitations of resource and market access reported by traditional local communities and a limiting institutional environment for socio-biodiversity in Amazônia, the main question is: how do institutions (re)shape natural resource and market access by Quilombolas in the protected area of the Trombetas River Biological Reserve (TRBR) and the Implications of the TRBR Term of Compromise (TC) – a formal institution written by the Chico Mendes Institute for Biodiversity Conservation (ICMBio) – on livelihoodrelevant access to socio-biodiversity products (Brazil nuts) and markets. Methods include semi-structured interviews (n=89) focusing on Non-timber forest products gatherers, as well as observation and focusgroup interviews for data triangulation. An analytical framework is developed, combining access theory, institutions and property rights scholarship. Findings reveal that the TC overwrites institutionalised norms of Quilombola communities, which regulated such livelihood-relevant access long before the TRBR establishment (1979). The TC not only formalises BN use but also unintentionally restricts natural resources and market access, limiting Quilombolas’ bioeconomy-benefits.
Downloads
References
ACEVEDO, R.; CASTRO, E. Negros do Trombetas: guardiões de matas e rios. Belém: Núcleo de Altos Estudos da Amazônia (NAEA), Universidade Federal do Pará (UFPA), 1998.
AGRAWAL, A.; GIBSON, C. C. Enchantment and disenchantment: the role of community in natural resource conservation. World Development, v. 27, n. 4, p. 629-649, 1999.
AGRAWAL, A.; REDFORD, K. Conservation and displacement: an overview. Conservation and Society, v. 7, n. 1, p. 1-10, 2009.
ALMEIDA, A. Traditionally Occupied Lands in Brazil. Manaus: Programa de Pós-graduação em Sociedade Cultura da Amazônia (PGSCA) da Universidade Federal do Amazonas (UFAM), 2011.
ANAYA, F. C.; ESPÍRITO-SANTO, M. M. Protected areas and territorial exclusion of traditional communities: analyzing the social impacts of environmental compensation strategies in Brazil. Ecology and Society, v. 23, n. 1, p. 13, 2018.
BEBBINGTON, A. Capitals and capabilities: a framework for analyzing peasant viability, rural livelihoods and poverty. World Development, v. 27, n. 12, p. 2021-2044, 1999.
BELCHER, B. M.; RUIZ-PÉREZ, M.; ACHDIAWAN, R. Global Patterns and Trends in the Use and Management of Commercial NTFPs: implications for livelihoods and conservation. World Development, v. 33, n. 9, p. 1435-1452, 2005.
BENZEEV, R.; ZHANG, S.; RAUBER, M. A.; VANCE, E. A.; NEWTON, P. Formalizing tenure of indigenous lands improved forest outcomes in the Atlantic Forest of Brazil. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, Nexus. USA. 2, p.1-8, 2022.
BERGER, P. L.; LUCKMANN, T. The social construction of reality. A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. New York: Anchor, 1967.
BOUDON, R. The Unintended Consequences of Social Action. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1982.
BRASIL. Decreto 84.018, de 21 de setembro de 1979, cria a Reserva Biológica do Rio Trombetas. Diário Oficial da União. Seção 1 (13790). Brasília, 1979.
BRASIL. Lei No. 7.347, de 24 de julho de 1985. Presidência da República. Casa Civil. Subchefia para Assuntos Jurídicos. Brasília, 1985.
BRASIL. Constituição da República Federativa do Brasil de 1988. Brasília, 1988.
BRASIL. Lei Federal n. 9.985, de 18 de julho de 2000. Regulamenta o art. 225, §1º, incisos I, II, III e VII da Constituição Federal, institui o Sistema Nacional de Unidades de Conservação da Natureza e dá outras providências. Presidência da República, Casa Civil. Brasília, 2000.
BRASIL. Decreto 4.340, de 22 de agosto de 2002. Regulamenta artigos da Lei 9.985, de 18 de julho de 2002, que dispõe sobre o Sistema Nacional de Unidades de Conservação da Natureza – Snuc, e dá outras providências. Diário Oficial da União. Brasília, 2022.
BRASIL. Decreto Federal 5051/2003. Ratificação da Convenção da Organização Internacional do Trabalho 169. Brasília, 2003.
BRASIL. Termo de Compromisso N. 119/2011 – Reserva Biológica do Rio Trombetas. Processo 02070.000643/2011-16. Diário Oficial da União. Brasília, 2012.
BRASIL. Decreto Federal 10088/2019. Consolidação da Convenção da Organização Internacional do Trabalho 169. Brasília, 2019.
BRASIL. Advocacia-Geral da União. Brasília, 2021.
BRASIL. Ministério do Desenvolvimento Agrário, Ministério do Meio Ambiente and Ministério do Desenvolvimento Social. Plano Nacional de Promoção das cadeias de produtos da Sociobiodiversidade. MDA. Brasília, 2009.
BROCKINGTON, D. Fortress conservation: the preservation of the Mkomazi Game Reserve, Tanzania. Indiana University Press, 2002.
CONVENTION ON BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY. Decision of the 15th Session of the Conference of the Parties to the CBD. UN Document CBD/COP/DEC/15/4, 2022.
CRONKLETON, P.; LARSON, A.: Formalization and collective appropriation of space on forest frontiers: comparing communal and individual property systems in the Peruvian and Ecuadoran Amazon. Society and Natural Resources: An International Journal, v. 28, n. 5, p. 496-512, 2015.
CUNHA, M. Social capital and access to (natural) resources and markets along the BN (Bertholletia excelsa) value chain in the Lower Amazon basin, Pará. Boletim do Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi (MPEG). Ciências Naturais, v. 9, n. 2, p. 337-352, 2014.
DIEGUES, A. C. S. Sociobiodiversidade. In: FERRARO JUNIOR, I. A. (Org.). Encontros e Caminhos: Fundação de Educadoras(es) Ambientais e Coletivos Educadores. Brasília: Ministério do Meio Ambiente, p. 305-312, 2005.
DIEKMANN, A. Empirische Sozialforschung: grundlagen, methoden, anwendungen. 18th edition. Reinbek bei Hamburg: Rowohlt Taschenbuch, 2007.
DIETZ, T.; BÖRNER, J.; FÖRSTER, J. J.; VON BRAUN, J. Governance of the bioeconomy: a global comparative study of national bioeconomy strategies. Sustainability, v. 10, n. 3190, 2018.
FEDER, G.; FEENY, D. Land tenure and property rights: theory and implications for development policy. The World Bank Economic Review, v. 5, n. 1, p. 135-153, 1991.
FILOCREÃO, A. S. M. Agroextrativismo e capitalismo na Amazônia: as transformações no agroextrativismo do sul do Amapá. PhD Thesis in Sustainable Development of the Humid Tropics. Belém: Federal University of Pará, 2007.
FONSECA, I. F. D. A.; LINDOSO, D. P.; BURSZTYN, M. (Falta de) controle do desmatamento na Amazônia brasileira: do fortalecimento ao desmantelamento da autoridade governamental (1999-2020). Sustainability in Debate, [s.l.], v. 13, n. 2, p.12–31, 2022.
GLASER, B. G.; STRAUSS, A. L. The Discovery of Grounded Theory. Strategies for Qualitative Research, Mill Valley: the sociology press, 1967.
GREIF, A. Review essay of “The architecture of the markets: an economic sociology of twenty-first-century capitalist societies” by Neil Fligstein. Contemporary Sociology, v. 32, n. 2, p.148-152, 2003.
HODGSON, G. M. What are institutions? Journal of Economic Issues, v. 40, n. 1, p. 1-25, 2006.
IKDAHL, I.; HELLUM, A.; KARHUS, R. Human Rights, Formalisation and Women’s Land Rights in Southern and Eastern Africa. Studies in Women’s Law 57. Oslo: Institute of Women’s Law, University of Oslo, 2005.
INACIO DA CUNHA, M. Access to resources and markets for sustainable and inclusive value chains: towards locally adapted institutions for strengthening the chain position of bn gatherers in the Brazilian Amazon. Ph.D. Thesis. Bonn: ForestryBooks. Institute of Earth Sciences of the Free University of Berlin, 2018. 390 pages.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL SCIENCE-POLICY PLATFORM ON BIODIVERSITY AND ECOSYSTEM SERVICES. Global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services. IPBES secretariat, Bonn, Germany, 2019. 1148 pages.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL SCIENCE-POLICY PLATFORM ON BIODIVERSITY AND ECOSYSTEM SERVICES. Thematic assessment of the sustainable use of wild species. IPBES secretariat, Bonn, Germany, 2022b. 958 pages.
INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANIZATION. Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention 169. Electronic document, 1989.
KNIGHT, J. Institutions and Social Conflict. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1992.
LEACH, N. Belonging: towards a theory of identification with place. Perspecta, v. 33, p.126-133, 2002.
LEWINS, R. Acknowledging the informal institutional setting of natural resource management: consequences for policy makers & practitioners. Progress in Development Studies, v. 7, p. 201–215, 2007.
LONG, N. The multiple optic of interface analysis. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (Unesco) Background Paper on Interface Analysis. Unesco: Paris, 1999.
LUKAWIECKI, J.; WALL, J.; YOUNG, R.; GONET, J.; AZHDARI, G.; MOOLA, F. Operationalizing the biocultural perspective in conservation practice: a systematic review of the literature. Environmental Science and Policy, v. 136, p. 369–376, 2022.
LUND, C. Coding regimes of dispossession. An essay on land, property, and law. Globalizations, p. 1–16, 2024.
MAFFI, L. On Biocultural Diversity: linking language, knowledge, and the environment. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington D.C., 2001.
MAROCCOLO, J. F.; WADT, L. H. O.; DINIZ, J. D. A. S.; SILVA, K. E. O protagonismo de organizações indígenas na estruturação da cadeia produtiva da castanha-da-amazônia no estado de Roraima. Amazônia Brasileira Interações, n. 22, p. 19–35, 2021.
MCDERMOTT, M. H. Locating benefits: decision-spaces, resource access and equity in US community-based forestry. Geoforum, v. 40, n. 2, p. 249-259, 2009.
MINISTÉRIO PÚBLICO FEDERAL. Procuradoria-Geral da Região. Parecer nº 958/2019-FM-PRR 1ª Região. AI nº 1008763-41.2019.4.01.0000/PA. MPF. Santarém, 2019.
MITCHELL, R. Formalization of Rights to Land. In: PROSTERMAN, R. L.; MITCHELL, R.; HANSTAD, T. (Ed.). Law, Governance and Development Research. Leiden: Leiden University Press: 333-376, 2009.
NORTH, D. Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge University Press, 1990.
OLSON, M. The Logic of Collective Action. Public Goods and the Theory of Groups. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1965.
OSTROM, E. Governing the commons: the evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge University Press, 1990.
OSTROM, E. A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social-ecological systems. Science, v. 325, n. 5939, p. 419-422, 2009.
PELUSO, L. N.; RIBOT, J. C. Postscript: a theory of access revisited. Society and Natural Resources, v. 33, n. 2, p. 300–306, 2020.
PERES, C. et al. Demographic threats to the sustainability of BN exploitation. Science, v. 302, n. 5653, p. 2112-2114, 2003.
PUTZEL, L.; KELLY, A. B.; CERUTTI, P. O.; ARTATI, Y. Formalization as development in land and natural resource policy. Society and Natural Resources, v. 28, n. 5, p. 453-472, 2015.
RIBOT, J. C. Authority over Forests: empowerment and subordination in Senegal’s Democratic Decentralization. Development and Change, v. 40, n. 1, p. 105–129, 2009.
RIBOT, J. C.; PELUSO, N. L. A Theory of Access. Rural Sociology, v. 68, n. 2, p. 153-181. 2003.
ROCHA, B. C.; MARTINEZ, D. A.; AFFONSO, H. G.; ARAGON, S.; de OLIVEIRA, V. H.; SCOLES, R. Plunder and resistence in tradicionally occupied territories of the Tapajós and Trombetas basins, Pará state, brazilian Amazonia. Ambiente & Sociedade, v. 24, p.1–22, 2021.
SCHURE, J.; INGRAM, V.; ARTS, B.; LEVANG, P.; MVULA-MAMPASI, E. Institutions and access to woodfuel commerce in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Forest Policy and Economics, v. 50, n. 1, p. 53-61, 2015.
SCOLES, R.; GRIBEL, R. The regeneration of BN trees in relation to nut harvest intensity in the Trombetas River valley of Northern Amazonia, Brazil. Forest Ecology and Management, v. 265, p. 71-81. 2012.
SCOTT, W. R. Institutions and organizations: ideas, interests, and identities. Sage publications, 2013.
SHACKLETON, C. M.; PANDEY, A. K. Positioning Non-timber Forest Products on the development agenda. Forest Policy and Economics, v. 38, p. 1-7, 2013.
SIKOR, T.; NGUYEN, T. Q. Why may forest devolution not benefit the rural poor? Forest entitlements in Vietnam’s central highlands. World Development, v. 35, n. 11, p. 210-225, 2007.
SIKOR, T.; HE, J.; LESTRELIN, G. Property Rights Regimes and Natural Resources: a conceptual analysis revisited. World Development, v. 93, p. 337-349, 2017.
SMITH-HALL, C.; CHAMBERLAIN, J. The bioeconomy and non-timber forest products. In Routledge eBooks, p. 1-19, 2022.
STREECK, W.; CAMPBELL, J.; CROUCH, C.; KRISTENSEN, P. H.; MORGAN, G.; PEDERSEN, O. K.; WHITLEY, R. Institutions in History: bringing capitalism back in, handbook of comparative institutional analysis. Oxford University Press, p. 659-686, 2010.
TAULI-CORPUZ, V.; ALCORN, J.; MOLNAR, A.; HEALY, C.; BARROW, E. Cornered by PAs: adopting rights-based approaches to enable cost-effective conservation and climate action. World Development, v. 130, 104923, 2020.
WEBER, M. Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft. Grundriss der verstehenden Soziologie. Tübingen: Mohr, p. 21-23, [1921] 19.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Sustainability in Debate
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
SUSTAINABILITY IN DEBATE – Copyright Statement
The submission of original scientific work(s) by the authors, as the copyright holders of the text(s) sent to the journal, under the terms of Law 9.610/98, implies in the concession of copyrights of printed and/or digital publication to the Sustainability in Debate Journal of the article(s) approved for publication purposes, in a single issue of the journal. Furthermore, approved scientific work(s) will be released without any charge, or any kind of copyright reimbursement, through the journal’s website, for reading, printing and/or downloading of the text file, from the date of acceptance for publication purposes. Therefore, the authors, when submitting the article (s) to the journal, and gratuitous assignment of copyrights related to the submitted scientific work, are fully aware that they will not be remunerated for the publication of the article(s) in the journal.
The Sustainability in Debate Journal is licensed under Creative Commons License – Non-Commercial-No-Derivation Attribution (Derivative Work Ban) 3.0 Brazil, aiming at dissemination of scientific knowledge, as indicated on the journal's website, which allows the text to be shared, and be recognized in regards to its authorship and original publication in this journal.
Authors are allowed to sign additional contracts separately, for non-exclusive distribution of the works published in the Sustainability in Debate Journal (for example, in a book chapter), provided that it is expressed the texts were originally published in this journal. Authors are allowed and encouraged to publish and distribute their text online, following publication in Sustainability in Debate (e.g. in institutional repositories or their personal pages). The authors expressly agree to the terms of this Copyright Statement, which will be applied following the submission and publishing by this journal.
