WorldDevelopment, Vol. 25, No. 6, pp. 989-1000,
1997
0 1997 Elsevier Science Ltd
Pergamon
All rights reserved. Printed in Great Britain
0305-750x/97
$17.00+0.00
PII: s0305-750x(97)00002-8
Forest Management Practices in the Bayano Region of
Panama: Cultural Variations
CYNTHIA S. SIMMONS*
Florida State University, Tallahassee,
U.S.A.
Summary. - This paper examines the relationship between cultural variation and forest management
practices in the New World tropics by presenting results from a survey conducted in indigenous and
colonist communities in a settlement frontier of Panama. Statistical analyses, focused specifically on
differences between the economic base, forest use, and management practices of indigenous and colonist
households, are presented. The findings reveal that there are no significant differences between the
indigenous and colonist households in this respect; furthermore, differences that exist among the sample
households appear to be linked to access to market and not to cultural variations. 0 1997 Elsevier
Science Ltd
Key words deforestation
Latin America,
Panama, frontier development,
forest management,
reforestation,
thought to engage in sustainable land use and
resource
management,
and many have drawn
distinctions between the agricultural practices of
indigenous populations and migrants (Vayda, 1979;
Hames and Vickers, 1983; Dove, 1986; Posey and
Balee, 1989; Moran, 1990). Indigenous populations
are evidently
aware of resource
constraints,
1. INTRODUCTION
Many policy makers view the resettlement
of
populations in frontier regions as a way to reduce
rapid urban population growth and as a means for
providing opportunities to the growing number of
landless peasants in Latin America (Lisansky, 1990,
p. 4). One of the most profound cultural and
ecological transformations
taking place in Latin
America today is the conquest of the tropical forests,
partly in response to such population
mobility
(Schumann and Partridge, 1989, p. 3). Associated
land expansion, or land extensification,
has been
recognized
as a key factor in increasing
food
production in Latin America (Bilsborrow,
1992).
On the other hand, these phenomena are linked to the
progressive destruction of tropical forests and are
thereby implicated in resulting environmental problems (Walker, 1993). The mismanagement of forest
resources by rural populations, particularly colonist
populations, is often cited as a major factor in loss of
tropical forest resources. In the model of invasive
forest mobility (see Walker, 1993), small producers
practicing
shifting cultivation follow penetration
roads into primary forest in search of land to
cultivate. As soil fertility declines, the farmers
continue moving to new lands made accessible by
roads, thereby creating a repetitive cycle of forest
destruction.
Whereas colonist populations
are blamed for
forest degradation,
indigenous farmers are often
*This work was supported, in part, by the International
Institute of Tropical Forestry, US Forest Service. I am
particularly
indebted to Robert Walker, who made substantial theoretical contributions to this research. I am also
thankful to Rick Condit and Stanley Heckadon of the
Smithsonian
Tropical
Research
Institute (STRI), who
helped greatly in logistical aspects of the work. Rotilio
Paredes of PEMASKY and Salamon Aguilar of STRI gave
excellent field assistance. Robert Coyne the former director
of College Programs, and the faculty and administration of
the Panama Canal Branch of the Florida State University
provided support. I am especially grateful to Dionesio
Bautista and Ulises Morales of IUCN, Francisco Herrera of
the University of Panama, Mirei Endara of INRENARE,
Atencio Lopez and Marcia1 Arias of Napwana, Cacique
Bonarjes of the Ipeti Embera Community, Cacique Dilmo
Mecha of the Maje Embera Community, Cacique Tomas of
the Comarca Madugandi,
Fr. W.P. Kasuboski and the
Sisters Lauritas, and Sabe Hemandez who proved to be an
invaluable friend in the field. I am also thankful to Peter
Doan and Rebbecca Miles-Doan, Florida State University,
for providing valuable guidance. The views expressed in
this paper are those of the author and not necessarily those
of the supporting agencies or indiviudals. Final revision
accepted: January 2, 1997.
989
990
WORLD
DEVELOPMENT
ecological relationships, and the importance of forest
land to environmental
maintenance (Chirif, 1978;
Clay, 1988; Rude1 and Horowitz, 1993). Moreover,
studies on traditional resource management in Latin
America suggest that indigenous populations do not
simply respond and adapt to the limits of their
environment; many actually manipulate and manage
critical resources in the interest of long-run viability
(Posey and Balee, 1989; Clay, 1988). This paper
addresses the alleged differences in environmental
behavior between indigenous and colonist populations for the case of forest exploitation
in an
agricultural frontier in Panama. Alleged behavioral
differences in this regard have influenced the design
of environmental policy in a number of countries.
Forest policy in Panama, for example, attempts to
control resource exploitation by colonists through
permits, but leaves indigenous communities free to
regulate themselves.’
The paper is organized as follows. Section 2
discusses the theoretical issues involved. To this end,
the notion of the peasant economy is addressed, and
certain anthropological evidence is brought to bear
on the relevant theoretical issues. In addition, this
section states the main behavioral hypotheses flowing from the literature. Section 3 introduces the study
area, elements of research design, and the research
methodology, which is survey based. Section 4 gives
the main empirical
findings which show little
behavioral differences between the cultural groups.
Section 5 concludes the paper with policy implications.
2. THE PEASANT ECONOMY
The following discussion addresses the so-called
peasant household. I follow mainly the definition of
Ellis (1993) in which peasant households
are
persistent rural dwellers living in so-called developing areas with sporadic market attachments. In this
usage, the term covers colonists and indigenous
peoples, although in the extreme case indigenous
groups may show no market involvement whatsoever. Beaumont and Walker (1996) have elaborated
a capital-theoretic
distinction between colonist and
indigenous resource management
based on land
property asset values.
Characteristics
of the “peasant household and
economy” have been the topic of extensive academic
debate. Some emphasize a cultural approach to the
peasant household and attribute economic behavior
to “noneconomic” factors such as tradition, kinship,
and mythology, external to political and societal
influences
(Heynig, 1982). The peasant has an
intimate relationship with the land and practices
traditional agriculture for subsistence as opposed to
economic gain. The cultural approach assumes that
traditional and modernized systems are mutually
exclusive, and consequently implies a sharp behavioral distinction between indigenous peoples, qua
peasants, and colonists as profit motivated farmers,
The economic approach distinguishes peasant households on the basis of degree of involvement
in
markets for inputs, outputs, and capital; cultural
factors are largely neglected. In this framework,
peasant market participation may be highly sporadic
and partial, or regular and complete. Once fully
involved in the market system, however, the peasant
household
is transformed
into a family farm
enterprise. The economic view overlooks cultural
categories, so the peasant category comprises both
indigenous and colonist households (see Ellis, 1993;
Singh and Strauss, 1986).
How the peasant economy is defined and interpreted has significant policy implications. In partcular, literature regarding indigenous people and the
environment
often paints an idealized picture of
traditional peoples who are depicted as coexisting
harmoniously with nature. Whereas traditional life is
equated with environmental harmony, modernization
is equated with environmental degradation (Brechin
et al., 1991, p. 5). Accordingly, indigenous populations are thought to conserve their environment by
virtue of low-intensity, subsistence agriculture, while
colonist populations exploit their environment with
capitalist endeavors.
Nevertheless, commercial orientation on the part
of indigenous peoples seems to emerge even with a
minimal degree of contact. Technological adoption
consistent with optimizing economic behavior, and
not intergenerational resource management, has been
observed among indigenous
peoples in Eastern
Bolivia (Stearman,
1990). Similarly, indigenous
groups in Mexico have switched from low intensity
agriculture to exploitation of forest resources (Bray,
Carrion
and Santos,
1993). The adoption
of
consumerism
has been documented on numerous
occasions (White, 1991; Lindstrom,
1991; Pace,
1993). Cornmodification of ethnicity for the purpose
of attracting tourism has been receiving greater
attention (Smith, 1982; Swain, 1990). Certain groups
in the study area have shown such interest in
cornmodification of cultures for the purpose of ecotourism that outsiders have had little success in
developing profit opportunities for themselves (Chapin, 1990).
In the absence of all market attachments and with
low levels of technology
environmental
impact
would be negligible, but most indigenous peoples
have some contact. The question is to what extent do
elements of material culture and economic behavior
remain integrated into lifestyle, agricultural practice,
and ecosystem
maintenance.
The present paper
focuses specifically
on differences
between the
economic base, forest use, and management prac-
FOREST MANAGEMENT
tices of indigenous and colonist peoples in a select
area of the New World tropics. The culture-based
literature suggests, as hypotheses addressed in this
paper, that indigenous people: (a) have significantly
lower levels of income than colonist populations due
to minimal market involvement, (b) do not practice
extractive, market-oriented forest exploitation due to
subsistence-oriented
preferences,
and (c) practice
sustainable forest management. In the sequel, we
will refer to this set of hypotheses as the model of
cultural differentiation.
3. RESEARCH
METHODOLOGY
The research was conducted in the Bayano region
of Panama, which is experiencing severe environmental degradation and deforestation at a rate of
1,346 hectares per week (Jukofsky, 1991). The
991
PRACTICES
Bayano region is located next to the Darien National
Park, and serves as a watershed for one of the
nation’s major hydroelectrical
dams. It is located
directly in the path of the proposed extension of the
Pan American Highway (see map, Figure 1). The
Bayano region contains considerable cultural diversity with both indigenous (Kuna and Embera) and
colonist populations. The Kuna peoples were the first
to settle in the region. In the 1930s reservation
boundaries were declared; however, government
recognition to this day has not been confirmed.
The Embera peoples migrated from Colombia to the
Bayano region in the 1950s; likewise, reserve
boundaries are not legally established. The colonist
communities
are generally
comprised
of small
farmers who began migrating from Western Panama
in the 1960s due to land scarcity. The extension of
the Pan-American highway through the region has
given further impetus to migration. Except for the
Lago Bayano
Costa Rica
&=%
Panama
Panama
1%:
i( Bayano Region
\
Pan American
Highway
Figure 1. Study area-Bayano
region,
Panama
992
WORLD DEVELOPMENT
Table 1. Economic activity ranked by importance of income generated
Income level
Primary
Secondary
Tertiary
Aggregate data
Activity-%
total mcome
CoIonist
Activity-%
total income
Agriculture-30%
Wage labor-26%
Timber-26%
Indigenous
Activity-%
total income
Wage labor-37%
Timber-23%
Agriculture-l
8%
suggested Kuna reserve areas, land within the region
is predominantly government-owned
with very few
households having legal tenure.
The sample villages included three Embera, two
Kuna, and three colonist communities, selected to
provide locational variation with respect to the
highway (see map, Figure I). I attempted to obtain
a sample representing 30% of the households in each
village, and in order to insure randomness I selected
every fourth house. Three primary variables are used
in the subsequent analysis, namely income per
household, timber harvest volume (per household),
and regeneration efforts (trees planted per household). Total annual income was determined
by
breaking down income by source: agricultural
products, timber, livestock, wage labor, transfer,
and other source. For each source I elicited details
regarding income generating activities (see example
of economic activities breakdown, Appendix A).
Agricultural data included the three main product
types sold, the quantity sold, the value per quantity,
and where and/or to whom sold. The value of
production (agricultural, livestock, timber, and wage
labor) was verified by unstructured interviews with
area wholesalers, employers, and various representatives from the national ministry for the management of natural resources (Instituto National de
Recursos Naturales Renovables-INRENARE)
and
for agricultural development (Ministerio de Desarrollo Agropecuario-MIDA).
With this information
I estimated
total income and determined
the
distribution of income generation by type and the
economic importance of each source.’
The various forest use and management practices
were determined through a series of questions on the
structured surveys and through key informant interviews. The forestry variables analyzed for this
research were indicators of participation in reforestation efforts, the number of trees cut for timber
purposes, and the number of trees planted.3 National
Agriculture-38%
Timber-27%
Wage labor-17%
policy requires that IO trees be replanted for every
one cut. Reforestation success was calculated by first
multiplying the number of trees cut by 10 and then
comparing this figure to the number of trees the
respondents claimed to have actually planted. Field
verifications of a number of reforestation sites were
undertaken to validate questionnaire response (see
note 3).
4. RESEARCH
FINDINGS
Agriculture was reported by respondents as the
primary activity,4 followed by timber production and
other sources, including arts and crafts production,
entrepreneurial enterprises such as restaurants and
stores, and wage labor. Wage labor activities include
off-farm agricultural work, timber production activities. and service-related employment.5 Unlike many
frontier regions, livestock activities in the Bayano
were not important
to households.”
Economic
activities were additionally ranked on actual income
generated as a proportion of total household income.
In the full sample, agriculture is indeed the primary
source of income; wage labor ranks second, and
timber production
ranks third.’ For indigenous
households, agriculture remains the primary source
of income but ranks third for colonist households
(Table 1). For colonists,
wage labor is most
important and third for indigenous
households.
Timber income is second for both indigenous and
colonist households
at approximately
the same
proportion of total income. Table 2 presents average
annual income calculated as a total. Three calculations were performed
to determine
an average
income per worker, and a value based on household
size. Mean annual income and mean income based
on number of workers per family show comparable
values for indigenous and colonist households. The
calculation controlling for household size, however,
Tible 2. Annual income estimates
Sample
Aggregate
Colonist
Indigenous
Mean income per
household (US $)
Mean income per
worker (US $)
Mean income per family
member (US $)
6,937
7,548
6,473
3,405
3,474
3,352
1,131
1,549
815
FOREST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
Table 3. Mean
timber income analysis
Mean timber
income (US $)
% of total
income
3,932
3,199
4,898
25
27
23
All households
Aggregate
Indigenous
Colonist
Households
Aggregate
Indigenous
Colonist
involved in timber extraction
9,224
6,219
16,738
51
49
17
shows colonist households earn nearly twice as much
as indigenous households. The difference in income
is attributable
to the larger size of indigenous
households.’
Forty-four percent of the sample population was
involved in timber extraction; 71% of these are
indigenous households. A regional analysis revealed
that mean timber incomes derived across the groups
do not vary significantly (Table 3).9 Analysis of only
those households
involved in timber production
revealed, however, a notable difference between
the groups; although fewer colonist households are
involved in timber activities, colonist households
earn nearly three times the amount of indigenous
households on a per capita basis.” Timber income
represents 49% of the total income for indigenous
households and 77% of total income for colonist
households.
In the aggregate, the primary use of the forest is
for fuelwood, followed closely by foodstuffs and
building materials. Although fuelwood is the primary
use, nearly 50% of the population, equally proportionate between indigenous and colonist groups,
have gas stoves; these households indicated that
fuelwood is only used occasionally for foods that
require prolonged cooking (e.g., beans) and, consequently, the actual quantity of fuelwood consumed is
not as great as might appear. Other forest products
Table 4.
Comparative
993
include wood for timber and artisan crafts, medicines, and fodder. A comparative analysis revealed
that a greater percentage of indigenous peoples
reported utilizing the forest resources, indicating a
greater dependence on forest resources (Table 4).
Forest management practices were analyzed based
on indicators of reforestation participation and forest
replacement rates. Analysis of reforestation participation for the entire sample revealed that 75% of the
households
reforest;
and of those, 65% were
indigenous
households
and 35% were colonist
households.”
Data on reforestation from the timber
sample revealed
negligible
difference
between
populations, with approximately 83% of the colonists
that extract timber indicating that they reforest,
compared to 87% of the indigenous households.
Analysis of intensity of reforestation
effort was
conducted on households involved in timber extraction. This analysis was done by determining the
number of trees cut, the number of trees planted
annually, recent reforestation effort per household,
and the legally required reforestation rate (Table 5).”
Evidently, neither indigenous nor colonist populations
are reforesting at the legal requirement; the shortfall is
40% among indigenous households and 73% among
colonist households.
On a per capita basis, the
significance of this shortage may not be apparent;
however, an aggregate analysis of all households
involved in timber reveals a shortage of 59% of the
legal regeneration amount (Table 6). Analysis of
reforestation efforts for the entire sample population
reveals greater regeneration success at 84% of the
legal reforestation
requirement.
The full sample
indicates that the regional replacement shortage is
approximately 1,170 trees; of that, a shortage of 432
trees, or 13%, is attributed to indigenous peoples and
738 trees, or 15%, to colonists.
The proposed hypotheses predict that indigenous
households: (a) do not practice extractive, marketoriented forest exploitation (due to their subsistence
existence), (b) have significantly
lower levels of
income than the colonist populations (due to their
analysis of forest
% of aggregate sample
Colonist
Indigenous
use
Forest use
Aggregate %
Fuelwood
Food
Building
Other:
Timber
Crafts
Medicine
Fodder
83
83
66
58
84
18
49
43
31
21
19
19
53
56
41
39
71
63
44
44
93
98
83
69
16
19
34
24
37
44
59
43
Gas Stoves
48
25
23
59
41
% of respective sample
Colonist
Indigenous
994
WORLD DEVELOPMENT
Table 5. Reforestation
Timber sample
# of trees
extracted - annually
Entire
Indigenous
Colonist
18
11
35
success for households involved in timber
# of trees
planted - annually*
12
12
12
Recent
reforestationt
Reforestation
success$
Shortage
percentage
-106
-44
-255
59
40
73
74
66
95
*Average number of trees that respondents indicated they planted annually.
tAverage number of trees that the respondents indicated that they planted within the last several years. This is one time
occurrences and not annual rates.
$Reforestation success was determined by multiplying the number of trees cut by the legally required replacement rate of 10
trees for each cut. This figure was then subtracted from the number of trees actually planted. This score reflects the
difference in number of trees, either positive or negative.
minimal involvement
in the market), and (c) practice
sustainable
forest management.
Involvement
in forest extracting activities was
assessed by conducting a chi-square test of independence on household type and involvement in timber
production. The hypothesis suggests that indigenous
households are involved in timber extraction activities to a lesser extent than the colonist households.
The chi-square test revealed there exists a statistically significant relationship between household type
and involvement in timber extraction. The crosstabulation results, however, show that the dependence is positive between indigenous households and
timber involvement (Table 7). Of the households
involved in timber, 71% are indigenous, which is
significantly greater than colonist household involvement at 29%.
The second hypothesis is that income levels for
indigenous
households
is less than income for
colonist households. A t-test was conducted on mean
timber income of households involved in timber
production. Colonist households evidently have a
higher mean timber income than indigenous house-
holds, but it is not statistically significant. Similar ttests were conducted on mean timber income per
worker and mean timber income based on family
size (Table 8). The t-test performed on mean timber
income per worker, like overall timber income,
revealed no significant difference between groups.
Mean timber income based on family size, however,
shows a significant difference. As discussed, this
finding was expected due to the larger family size of
indigenous households.
The third part of this analysis focused on forest
management practices. The variables were reforestation participation, annual rate of reforestation, and
total reforestation efforts; the reforestation participation indicator was given by the practice of tree
planting. A chi-square test revealed that reforestation
participation and household type are independent
(Table 9). T-tests were conducted on mean number
of trees planted annually and recent reforestation
efforts (Table 10). Results in both cases failed to
show significant differences between the groups.
Finally, disaggregated analyses based on community location relative to the highway were performed
Table 6. Cumulative analysis of reforestation
Legal reforestation*
# of trees
Timber sample
Aggregate
Indigenous
Colonist
Entire sample-Cumulative
Aggregate
Indigenous
Colonist
Reforestation
effortst
# of trees
SUCCESS
Reforestation
shortagest
# of trees
Shortage
percentage
7,500
3,300
4,200
3,120
1,980
1,140
4,380
1,320
3,060
59
40
73
analysis
8,160
3,240
4,920
6,990
2,808
4,182
1,170
432
738
14
13
15
*Required number of trees was determined by first multiplying the per capita trees cut by the respective population size.
This quantity was next multiplied by 10, which is the legally required reforestation rate.
tActua1 number of trees planted was determined by multiplying the per capita reforestation effort amount by the respective
population size.
IReforestation
shortages were calculated by subtracting the actual number of trees planted from the legally required
reforestation rate.
FOREST MANAGEMENT
PRACTICES
995
Table 1. Crosstabulation from chi-square test on household
type and timber involvement
Table 9. Crosstabulation from chi-square test on household
type and reforestation
Timber
involvement
Reforestation
Colonist
household
Indigenous
household
29
12
43.2*
24
30
56.8*
No
Yes
Percentage
*Significant
difference
Percentage
55.8%
44.2%
100
at 0.05 level.
Indigenous
(US $1
Colonist
(US $1
T-value
Per capita
Per worker
Per family
member
6,219
5,434
1,501*
16,737
9,884
5,077*
1.46
1.43
1.87
*Significant
difference
Significance
level
,085
,088
,043
at 0.05 level.
to determine the importance of locational factors on
income variation and timber involvement (see Tables
11-14). This analysis reveals that in general no
differences emerge between indigenous and colonist
groups when controlling for distance, with respect to
income and timber involvement. Differences within
the group emerge over distance, however, with more
distant locations showing lower total income, timber
income, and timber involvement among both indigenous and colonist groups. Full sample tests
aggregating indigenous and colonist groups also
point to the increased economic activity of locations
near to the highway.
5. CONCLUSIONS
The results do not support the model of cultural
differentiation in the Bayano frontier of Panama. The
analysis showed little differentiation across cultural
groups with respect to economic activities, forest use,
and forest management practiced. The main economic activities (wage labor, agriculture, timber) were the
same for both groups except for rankings of
importance.
The data show that both groups,
indigenous as well as colonist, are heavily involved
in the market system; moreover, they are both
practicing timber extraction. In fact, the statistical
testing revealed that three times as many indigenous
households are involved in timber production as
colonist households. Statistical testing on mean total
efforts
Annual rates
Recent reforestation
Colonist
12
66
Percentage
2
10
28.6%
4
26
71.4%
14.3%
85.7%
100%
and mean timber income
revealed
that no
statistically
significant differences
exist between
groups. Interestingly, although not statistically significant, mean timber income for colonist households
is three times the mean timber income for indigenous
households. This may indicate that although fewer
colonist households are involved in timber production, those households are involved more intensively
and derive substantially greater income than indigenous households.‘3 When disaggregated by distance, the analyses suggest that location is a more
important factor than culture in resource use behavior.
Analysis of regional participation in reforestation
indicated that more indigenous households claim to
reforest than colonist households. This may partially
be explained by the communal reforestation projects
performed at the village level in indigenous communities, especially among the Kuna, which requires
all villagers to participate. As a result, within Kuna
communities
an almost overwhelming
positive
response to reforestation
participation
was obtained.14 In contrast, reforestation by those households involved in timber production revealed that a
significant difference between colonist and indigenous peoples participation did not exist.
Analysis of reported reforestation practiced by
households involved in timber revealed that statistically significant differences do not exist between
indigenous and colonist groups. This analysis shows,
however, that colonist and indigenous forest regeneration volume is significantly less than the legally
required volume based on the per capita trees cut and
per capita trees planted. Although the differences in
reforestation efforts are not statistically significant,
indigenous households have greater reforestation
success rates at 60% of the legally required
regeneration amount, compared to colonist households (36%). Whereas reforestation success is low
for those involved in the timber industry, indigenous
and colonist alike, the overall reforestation success
considering the entire sample population is quite
remarkable. The overall reforestation rates indicate
that 84% of the required regeneration amount is
Table 10. Results of t-tests conducted on reforestation
Reforestation
Indigenous
household
income
Table 8. Results of t-tests conducted on mean timber income
Timber
income
No
Yes
Percentage
Colonist
household
Indigenous
12
95
efforts bv households involved in timber
T-value
T-critical
1.001
0.334
1.795
1.153
Significance
0.169
0.371
level
996
WORLD DEVELOPMENT
Table 11. Locational analyses-t-test
Location
Colonist (US$)
Near highway
Total income
Timber income
Far from highway
Total income
Timber income
Indigenous
type
Indigenous
Total income
Timber income
Colonist
Total income
Timber income
Full sample
Total income
Timber income
*Significant
difference
0.07200
0.13985
1,006.50
333.33
2,969.50
1.838.88
1.0128
0.85767
0.1616
0.2009
No
Yes
Percentage
analyses-t-test
on mean income
level
*
Near highway
(USS)
Far from highway
(USS)
T-value
8,302.76*
4,037.60
2,969.50*
1,838.88
1.6957
0.8250
0.04895
0.20720
2,566.00*
500.00
1,006.50*
333.34
2.0803
0.3953
0.02815
0.34930
6,663.69*
3,026.86
2,434.14*
1,428.27
1.8127
0.8218
0.03765
0.20735
Significance
level
at 0.05 level.
recent literature, which narrowly defines and classifies rural peoples. This does not imply, however, that
important differences in tradition, culture and beliefs
do not exist between these groups. Indigenous people
often have a stronger sense of community and ties to
tradition. Culture and tradition are important to
indigenous peoples and great efforts are being made
to maintain their society. It was less apparent,
however, that such culture actually affects their
economic behavior.
An overgeneralized and idealized view regarding
traditional people’s harmony with nature could have
detrimental effects on the environment.
The im-
of household type and timber involvement
Colonist household
Indigenous
household
Percentage
6
4
28.57
8
17
71.43
40.0%
60.0%
100
5
1
27.27%
11
5
72.73%
72.73%
27.27%
100%
Table 14. Crosstabulation
Timber involvement
Significance
1.4962
1.0990
Table 13. Crosstabulation
Near highway
No
Yes
Percentage
Far from highway
No
Yes
Percentage
T-value
S302.76
4,037.60
actually being planted; such successful reforestation
rates are similar for both indigenous and colonist
populations. This success can be attributed to a high
number of households, both colonist and indigenous,
that actually plant trees for future economic gain and
environmental improvement. Field visits to reforestation sites revealed a low level of technical support
consistent with the agricultural technology among
these poor households.
The research indicates that there is no significant
difference between indigenous and colonist peoples
regarding economic activities, forest use, or reforestation practices. This is contrary to much of the
Timber involvement
(US$)
2,566.OO
500.00
Table 12. Community type/locational
Community
on mean income
of timber involvement and location
Near highway
Far from highway
Percentage
14
21
61.4%
16
6
38.6%
52.63%
47.37%
100%
FOREST MANAGEMENT
plementation of forest management and regulation in
Panama monitors and limits access to colonist
populations while allowing indigenous societies to
manage their own forest resources. These policies
are based on the belief that indigenous societies
practice subsistence
agriculture
and sustainable
forest management. Although timber extraction is
not a traditional activity, the study nevertheless
suggests that indigenous
reforestation
has been
successful. Furthermore,
indigenous communities
within the region are in the process of developing
forest management institutions. The success of these
institutions will become apparent over time. With
regard to reforestation in the Bayano region, both
PRACTICES
997
populations are making significant efforts. Overall
reforestation
rates within the region are quite
remarkable and warrant further investigation.
In conclusion, this study in no way suggests that
traditional institutions should be replaced by national
institutions. To the contrary, indigenous efforts at
reforestation clearly indicate that traditional institutions should be supported with technical and material
resources. Forest management policies must consider
the reality of the dynamics occurring among both the
colonist and indigenous populations, and formulate
appropriate policies that promote the protection and
sustainable management of the endangered tropical
forests.
NOTES
1.
The legal structure of the forestry law for the
Republic of Panama is established in Law No. 1 1994.
Regulation of small producers and indigenous communities
is found in article 456 of the Agricultural
Codes and
resolution J.D. 021-93. Reforestation
incentives are outlined in Law No. 24. Currently the legal codes do not
regulate indigenous timber production and reforestation
activities. Personal interviews with INRENARE (Instituto
National de Recursos Naturales Renovables) officials in the
summer of 1995 indicated, however, that such regulation is
currently being discussed.
2.
Timber income, for analysis purposes, was adjusted in
order to estimate a more accurate timber income figure. An
estimated income was calculated based on the number of
trees cut, the type of tree cut, the production method (whether
sold by the tree or prepared into boards and sold by the foot),
the average foot per tree, the average value per foot and per
tree, and the cost assessed by INRENARE. This estimated
timber income was then averaged with the reported timber
income from the survey in order to derive a representative
timber income for analysis across household type.
3.
The forestry-related
variables and analysis are based
on self-reported forest activities. Respondents were asked
directly whether they practice reforestation (plant trees yes/
no), how many trees they cut, and how many trees they
plant. In the Summer of 1995 actual reforestation sites were
inspected to verify the accuracy and reliability of the survey
instrument. I was accompanied by two plant ecologists who
work with the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute in
Panama to verify responses for a number of questionnaires
taken from Embera,
and colonist
communities.
The
questionnaire responses were in every case consistent with
field counts of replanted trees.
6.
Many studies conducted in frontier regions indicate
that land is cleared for the purpose of raising cattle. Such
land management practice has been the alleged cause of
deforestation and land degradation. Although this may have
been the case when the Bayano region was first colonized,
currently only 1% indicated cattle ranching as a primary
activity and such income only represents 6% of total
income. There are large ranches within the region, but the
majority of households are not involved in this activity.
Some respondents indicated land scarcity and government
enforcement of regulations are the main deterrents. Of those
households involved in livestock production, cattle was the
most important livestock for income generating purpose.
Chickens were mainly for household consumption or sold
to purchase necessities.
7.
Other activities such as artisan, domestic, and storerestaurant work represented 13% of total income; whereas
livestock production represented 6% and transfer income
only 2%.
8.
This finding was expected due to the difference in
household size; indigenous households have approximately
eight members and colonist households have five members.
An additional factor is the number of families within the
household. The Kuna have a tradition whereby the daughter
and her family move in with her parents. The result is a
large extended family under one roof.
9.
Due to concern for outlier income levels, I conducted
a t-test on total income by number of workers per
household. The test revealed comparable total incomes
with mean total income for indigenous
households at
$3,352 and $3,474 for colonist populations. A few of the
colonist households with high timber income had a greater
number of adult male workers contributing labor.
4.
Many respondents indicated that agricultural production was valued as important mainly for family subsistence.
The three most important agricultural products are rice,
platanos, and corn.
10. Differences regarding timber income can be attributed to the type and level of timber production performed,
i.e. whether the tree is prepared and sold by the foot or
whether the tree is sold whole. Refer to Appendix B for
details on timber industry by ethnic group.
5.
Service-related
employment
includes construction,
restaurant and store help, and domestic work such as
cooking, cleaning, and laundry services.
11.
Indication
of reforestation
was derived from a
question on the survey that asked directly whether they
reforest (plant trees) yes or no.
998
WORLD DEVELOPMENT
12. According
to INRENARE, legal regeneration
requirement is 10 trees planted for every one tree extracted.
13. The differences regarding timber income generated
may be related to the production method performed. Many
indigenous households sell timber unprepared by the tree;
contrarily, many colonists prepare the trees into boards and
sell by the foot, which generates a substantially
higher
profit (Appendix B). The trend, however, is increasing
intensification of lumber production by indigenous households. Many respondents stated that they are saving money
to purchase chainsaws for timber production. An estimation, not for statistical purposes, indicated that greater than
50% of the respondents, indigenous and colonist alike, own
chainsaws. A study in 1980 in the Bayano region revealed
that lumbering activities, although on the rise, were mainly
performed to provide supplemental
and quick income
(Wali, 1989). The present study has revealed, however,
that the importance of those activities has significantly
increased and currently this income represents nearly 50%
of the total income for households involved in timber.
According to the respondents within the region, the only
trees available for extraction are within indigenous reserves
and, as a result, indigenous people are intensifying timber
production
and forming partnerships
with colonists for
timber extraction purposes.
Reforestation participation and success were based on
14.
self-reported
data. Therefore,
bias is possible due to
respondents giving answers they thought were correct.
From observation and discussions with community leaders
and INRENARE personnel, it was apparent that a great deal
of reforestation activities were occurring within the region.
Reforestation sites were verified in the Summer of 1995.
The investigations revealed that the questionnaires provided
reliable data.
REFERENCES
Beaumont, P. and Walker, R. (1996) Land degradation and
property regimes. Ecological Economics 18, 55-66.
Bilsborrow,
R. E. (1992) Population
growth, internal
migration, and environmental
gradation in rural areas
of developing countries. European Journal of Population 8, 125-148.
Bray, D. B., Carreon, Merino L. and Santos, V. (1993) On
the road to sustainable forestry: The maya of quintana
roo are striving to combine
economic
efficiency,
ecological
sustainability,
and a democratic
society.
Cultural Survival Quarterly 17(l), 3841.
Brechin, S. R., West, P. C., Harmon, D. and Kutay, K.
(1991). Resident peoples and protected areas: A framework for inquiry. In Resident Peoples and National
Parks: Social Dilemmas and Strategies in International
Conservation. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.
Chapin, M. (1990) The silent jungle: Ecotourism among the
Kuna Indians of Panama. Cultural Survival Quarterly
14(I), 42-45.
Chirif, A. (Ed.) (1978) Etnicidad y Ecologia. Centro de
Investigation y Promotion Amazonica.
Clay, J. W. (1988) Indigenous peoples and tropical forests:
Models of land use and management
from Latin
America. Cultural Survival Report, Vol. 27. Cultural
Survival, Inc, Cambridge.
Dove, M. R. (1986) The ideology of agricultural development in Indonesia. In Central Government and Local
Development in Indonesia, ed. C. MacAndrews,
pp.
221-247. Oxford University Press, Singapore.
Ellis, F. (1993) Peasant Economics. Cambridge University
Press, New York.
Hames, R. and Vickers, W. (Eds.) (1983) Adaptive
Responses of Native Amazonians.
Academic
Press,
New York.
Heynig, K. (1982) The principal schools of thought on the
peasant economy. CEPAL Review 16, 113-139.
Jukofsky, D. (1991) The uncertain fate of Panama’s forests:
Disappointments,
yet hopeful signs. Journal of Fores@
pp. 17-19.
Lindstrom, L. (1991) Kava, cash, custom in Vanuatu.
Cultural Survival Quarterly X(2).
Lisansky, J. (1990) Migrant to Amazonia. Westview Press,
Boulder, CO.
Moran, E. F. (1990) The Ecosystem Concept in Anthropology. American Association for the Advancement of
Science, Washington DC.
Pace, R. (1993) First-time
televiewing
in Amazonia:
Television acculturation
in Gurupa, Brazil. Ethnology
32(2), 187-205.
Posey, D. and Balee, W. (1989) Resource management in
Amazonia: Indigenous and folk strategies. Advances in
Economic Botany No. 7.
Rudel, T. and Horowitz, B. (1993) Tropical Deforestation:
Small Farmers and Lund Clearing in the Ecuadorian
Amazon. Columbia University Press, New York.
Schumann, D. A. and Partridge, W. L. (Eds.) (1989) The
Human Ecology of Tropical Land Settlement in Latin
America. Westview Press, Boulder, CO.
Singh, I. and Strauss, J. (1986) A survey of agricultural
household models: Recent findings and policy implications. World Bank Economic Review l( 1).
Smith, M. E. (1982) Tourism and native Americans.
Cultural Survival Quarterly 6(3).
Stearman, A. M. (1990) The effects of settler incursion on
fish and game resources
of the Yuqui, a native
Amazonian society of Eastern Bolivia. Human Organization 49(4), 3733385.
Swain, M. B. (1990) Commoditizing ethnicity in Southwest
China. Cultural Survival Quarterly 14( 1).
Vayda, A. P. (1979) Human ecology and economic
development
in Kalimantan
and Sumatra.
Borneo
Research Bulletin 11, 23-32.
Wali, A. (1989) Kilowatts and Crisis: Hydroelectric Power
and So&E Dislocation in Eastern Panama. Westview
Press, Boulder.
Walker, R. (1993) Deforestation and economic development. Canadian Journal of Regional Science 16(3),
48 1497.
White, G. M. (199 1) Village videos and custom chiefs: The
politics of tradition. Cultural Survival Quarterly lS(2).
FOREST MANAGEMENT
PRACTICES
999
APPENDIX A:
Table 15. Economic
Agricultural
Products
-
activities breakdown*
activities
3 main crops
Corn
Rice
N/A
Total value: $230
% of total income:
Quantiry sold
Price
Market
Annual value
10 quintalest
15 quintales
0
$8/qtl
$lO/qtl
0
Middlemen
Middlemen
N/A
$80
$150
0
Quantity sold
3 trees (2,500 ft)
Price
Production
3 trees (2,500 ft)
$.4O/fl
$.37/ft
Prepare boards
Prepare boards
$3,000
$2,715
Quantiw sold
2 cows
Price
$35O/cow
Market
Annual value
4 pigs (150 lbs.)
$.50/lh.
Middlemen
Local
$700
$300
Frequency
5 days/month
Salary
Where
Annual value
$5lday
$ lo/tree
(10 trees/day)
Local
Local
$300
$9,600
Price
Market
Annual value
$1 O/mola
$3/week
Local
Local
$240
$156
1.3%
Timber activitiest
Tree species
Cedar pine
Espave
Total value: $5,775.00
INRENARE fees: $170.50
Net value: $5,603.50
% of total income: 32.6%
Livestock
method
Annual value
activities
Animal type
Cattle
Pigs
Total value: $1,000
% of total income: 5.8%
Wage labor activities
Work type
Agriculture
Timber-lumberjack
Total value: $9,900
% of total income: 57.6%
6 days/week
(Jan-Apr.)
Other activities
Activity type
Art-Molas
Washes clothes
Total value: $9,900
% of total income: 57.6%
Frequency
2 molas/month
Irregular
(Jan.-Apr.)
Total annual income: $17,189.50
*This is only an example to illustrate the methodology that was used to determine an approximate annual income. No one
household participated in all of the categorized activities.
tl quintal equals 100 kilograms
$Refer to Appendix B for details regarding timber activities and breakdown of INRENARE fees,
1000
WORLD DEVELOPMENT
APPENDIX
B: TIMBER PRODUCTION
INRENARE - INSTITUTO
NACIONAL DE RIG
CURSOS NATURALES
RENOVABLES,
Ministry of
Natural Resources which is responsible for regulating forest
use.
INRENARE
1.
2.
3.
4.
FEE SCHEDULE
$0.03 PER FOOT
$2.50 INSPECTION FEE PER PERMIT
$2.50 FOR EACH TREE CUT (This equates to the
cost of ten trees for reforestation efforts).
$3.00 MUNICIPAL TAX
PERMIT TYPES:
(a) Community permit:
Issued to the various indigenous
communities.
Each community
is
permitted to cut 100-160 green trees (standing)
per year. The Community is responsible
to
disperse permits to village members and monitor
reforestation
efforts. According to interviews
with the various chiefs, each villager is allowed
to cut approximately 5,000 feet or five to six
trees per year. Reforestation is achieved through
community projects. The community pays the
tax and inspection fee to INRENARE.
(b) Individual Permits: Individual permits are issued
to colonists (indigenous peoples can not obtain
individual
permits).
Colonists
must go to
INRENARE to obtain a permit. INRENARE
inspects the area and assesses tax and fees.
Individual permits allow for two trees per month
or 24 trees per year to be prepared (only dry trees
- those already felled). Recent law prohibits
slash and bum agriculture; if you can’t cut
anymore trees, then where are the dry trees going
to come from in the future?
(cl Concessions: Companies are awarded concessions on an annual basis. The companies must
conduct
an inventory
of trees, an impact
evaluation to the environment, and a financial
plan. The companies must give $5 per hectare, or
$2,000 if less then 4,000 hectares, to INRENARE to hold in escrow thereby insuring
financial capability for reforestation
efforts.
The concessions are for 100 hectares of green
trees per year or 5,000 hectares of dry trees (see
Table 16).
Table 16. INRENARE-reported
Tree species
Espave
Cedro spino
Cedro margo
Roble
Coibo
Average
value per foot
$0.37
0.40
0.40
0.40
0.73
VALUES AND COST
timber values
Average feet per tree
Value sold by tree
2,500
2,500
670
600
2,000
$50
$150
$60
$40
N/A