Deforestation and Communities

Jun 15, 2009 Editorial

In the Low Carbon Development Strategy (LCDS) draft paper that has been put forward as the base document for national consultations, the impact of deforestation on local communities has been emphasised.

We have a unique situation in our rainforests, where practically all the indigenous Amerindians have communal title to their lands (13% of our landmass) and they have been given the option to “opt in” or chose not to participate in whatever eventual plan that will emerge. They, however, have been included in the consultation process, not only to make them aware of what may be in the offing, but to offer their invaluable experience gleaned from centuries of coexisting with the forest ecosystem.

In the premises of the LCDS, the argument for deforestation is made by pointing to the economic gains that come from the logging, agriculture, livestock etc. that replace the forests. A study that was just published in the prestigious journal Science, however, is questioning that assumption by taking a more nuanced approach to the notion of “development”. The researchers used the UNDP’s development index, a metric that combines life expectancy, literacy, and standard of living, to assess the welfare of two-hundred and eighty-six villages in the Brazilian Amazon with varying degrees of deforestation.

They found that the relative welfare of the inhabitants increases as deforestation begins, but then declines as the frontier progresses on to other areas, leaving pre and post-deforestation levels of human development statistically equal. In other words, the boom-and-bust cycle generates few lasting benefits for local permanent populations.

Most gains accrue to a population of migrants—loggers, ranchers, speculators, land squatters, miners, and farmers, that move with the frontier as resources are exhausted and land is degraded. This discrepancy between the economic growth that the migrants produce, and is reflected in booming GDP figures and the transitory benefits to the permanent population, brings to the fore the old distinction between “growth” and ‘development that should be a caution to our indigenous peoples.

The study supports the conclusion of the LCDS that the mechanisms to compensate communities for keeping forests standing, may be a better approach to improving human welfare, while simultaneously sustaining biodiversity and ecosystem services, in rainforest areas.

However, while the LCDS focuses on the relative benefits of the various funding mechanisms that have been touted (and will be decided on at the upcoming UNFCCC’s December meeting in Copenhagen) the study suggests that payments for ecosystem services schemes will only be effective where there is the institutional capacity to deliver benefits to local people.

The authors argue, as does the LSDS, that emerging payments for ecosystem services schemes, could become a key mechanism for delivering benefits to local populations as an incentive for preserving forests as viable and productive ecosystems. They point out that a handful of ecosystem services programs are already being implemented in the Brazilian Amazon, including Bolsa Floresta in the state of Amazonas, an initiative that offers payment and access to education and healthcare to families that voluntary agree to reduce deforestation.

Finally, in line with the LCDS proposed parallel “green development” of the intermediate savannahs, the study concludes, “A combined approach might include supporting the better use of areas that have already been deforested, or in our case, savannahs-(e.g., via the intensification of ranching and agriculture) alongside restricting further deforestation [e.g., through protected areas and appropriate land use zoning] and promoting reforestation in degraded landscapes; direct incentives to encourage forest-based livelihoods based on the sustainable harvest of timber and non-timber forest products, within and beyond forest concessions; and targeted policies to improve literacy, health, and land tenure security.”

It would appear that there should be some concentrated attention by the administration and the indigenous peoples, to ensure that sustainable development is the result of all the strum and drang.

Latest News

Deforestation and Communities

Related

Similar Articles

The Glenn Lall Show|| February, 10th, 2025

Follow on Tik Tok @Glennlall

THE BLUNT OF THE DAY

Sports

Ministry of Culture, Youth and Sport endorses Mashramani Street...

Guyanese boxers shine in IBA World Rankings ahead...

Motie returns for Day/Night affair, as fired-up...

Daniel Singh pockets East Bank Pool crown

Khalil, Pollard and Barker reign supreme as BCQS...

Cricket West Indies passes historic governance...

Features/Columnists

Guyana’s silence represents a shocking neglect of its national interest

OAS Secretary General Election and renewed OAS Consensus

Corruption – at epidemic proportion

Publisher’s Note

Weekend Cartoon

Bridge Watch

Demerara Harbour Bridge

> Berbice Bridge […]

Deforestation and Communities

Share this:

Related

Similar Articles

The Glenn Lall Show|| February, 10th, 2025

Follow on Tik Tok @Glennlall

THE BLUNT OF THE DAY

Sports

Features/Columnists

Publisher’s Note

Weekend Cartoon

Bridge Watch

Demerara Harbour Bridge

> Berbice Bridge […]