interactions between indigenous and non...

14
INTERACTIONS BETWEEN INDIGENOUS AND NON-INDIGENOUS POPULATIONS AND THEIR USE OF TROPICAL FOREST Running title: Interactions between native and non-native peoples Word count: 2,909 (from abstract to references, inclusive) Victoria Reyes-García a* , Juan Carlos Ledezma b , Jaime Paneque-Gálvez c , Martí Orta c , Maximilien Gueze c , Agustín Lobo c,d , Daniel Guinart e , and Ana Catarina Luz c a ICREA and Institut de Ciència i Tecnologia Ambientals, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, 08193 Bellatera, Barcelona, Spain b Conservation International - Bolivia, Calacoto Calle 13, 8008 La Paz, Bolivia c Institut de Ciència i Tecnologia Ambientals, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, 08193 Bellatera, Barcelona, Spain d Institut de Ciències de la Terra “Jaume Almera”, 08028 Barcelona, Spain e Oficina Técnica de Parcs Naturals, Diputació de Barcelona, 08036 Barcelona, Spain. * Corresponding author: Victoria Reyes-García ICREA Researcher Institut de Ciència i Tecnologia Ambientals Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona 08193 Bellatera, Barcelona, Spain Tel. + 34 (93) 581 4218 Fax: + 34 (93) 581 3331 E-mail: [email protected]

Upload: phungmien

Post on 28-Jun-2018

214 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: INTERACTIONS BETWEEN INDIGENOUS AND NON …icta.uab.cat/Etnoecologia/projects/docs/bolivian_lowlands.pdf · INTERACTIONS BETWEEN INDIGENOUS AND NON-INDIGENOUS POPULATIONS AND THEIR

INTERACTIONS BETWEEN INDIGENOUS AND NON-INDIGENOUS

POPULATIONS AND THEIR USE OF TROPICAL FOREST

Running title: Interactions between native and non-native peoples

Word count: 2,909 (from abstract to references, inclusive)

Victoria Reyes-Garcíaa*

, Juan Carlos Ledezmab, Jaime Paneque-Gálvez

c, Martí Orta

c, Maximilien Gueze

c,

Agustín Loboc,d

, Daniel Guinarte,

and Ana Catarina Luzc

a ICREA and Institut de Ciència i Tecnologia Ambientals, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, 08193

Bellatera, Barcelona, Spain

b Conservation International - Bolivia, Calacoto Calle 13, 8008 La Paz, Bolivia

c Institut de Ciència i Tecnologia Ambientals, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, 08193 Bellatera,

Barcelona, Spain

d Institut de Ciències de la Terra “Jaume Almera”, 08028 Barcelona, Spain

e Oficina Técnica de Parcs Naturals, Diputació de Barcelona, 08036 Barcelona, Spain.

* Corresponding author:

Victoria Reyes-García ICREA Researcher

Institut de Ciència i Tecnologia Ambientals

Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona

08193 Bellatera, Barcelona, Spain

Tel. + 34 (93) 581 4218

Fax: + 34 (93) 581 3331

E-mail: [email protected]

Page 2: INTERACTIONS BETWEEN INDIGENOUS AND NON …icta.uab.cat/Etnoecologia/projects/docs/bolivian_lowlands.pdf · INTERACTIONS BETWEEN INDIGENOUS AND NON-INDIGENOUS POPULATIONS AND THEIR

Abstract

Researchers have highlighted the role of non-indigenous populations in forest clearance, but

have overlooked the synergistic relations between indigenous and non-indigenous peoples in their use of

forests. We analyzed data from a household survey (n=780) conducted in 87 villages of a foraging-

horticulturist society in the Bolivian Amazon, the Tsimane’. We assessed the entrance of traders, loggers,

cattle ranchers, and colonist farmers in Tsimane’ villages settled in parks, forest concessions, indigenous

territories, and private lands. Interactions between Tsimane’ and non-Tsimane’ were frequent, mostly

non-hostile, and had an economic basis. Tsimane’ reported the entrance of non-Tsimane in 87% of the

villages, mostly to trade agricultural and forest products. Tsimane’ only expressed hostility to the

entrance of colonist farmers. We discuss our findings in the context of research on the role of indigenous

peoples on conservation: Indigenous peoples might reject the entrance of non-indigenous who encroach

their lands, thus potentially inhibiting large-scale deforestation; but indigenous people might engage in

economic interactions that draw on the use of forest resources with non-indigenous peoples, potentially

increasing forest disturbances.

Key Words: Tsimane’; Bolivian Amazon; indigenous territories; encroachment; territorial rights.

Page 3: INTERACTIONS BETWEEN INDIGENOUS AND NON …icta.uab.cat/Etnoecologia/projects/docs/bolivian_lowlands.pdf · INTERACTIONS BETWEEN INDIGENOUS AND NON-INDIGENOUS POPULATIONS AND THEIR

1.- Introduction

Tropical forests host most of the biological diversity of the planet and are also home to millions

of indigenous and non-indigenous peoples –including cattle ranchers, loggers, road builders, oil firms,

and colonist farmers (Mittermeier et al., 2003; Sunderlin et al., 2005). The spatial overlap between

tropical forests and human populations raises the question of the impact of humans on forests.

Researchers agree that non-indigenous peoples have been responsible for most forest clearance and forest

disturbances in the Amazon through the opening of new roads and the spread of cash cropping, cattle

ranching, and logging (Hecht and Cockburn, 1989; Painter and Durham, 1995; Wood and Porro, 2002;

Kometter et al., 2004). But researchers debate the past and present role of indigenous peoples in forest

clearance and forest disturbances. Archeological research suggests that the pre-contact (1492) Amazon

forest was transformed by sedentary, large-scale indigenous populations who used sophisticated

technologies to achieve high levels of land productivity without destroying the forest biomass

(Heckenberger et al., 2007). After centuries of contact, lands inhabited by Amazonian indigenous

peoples still have an inhibitory effect on deforestation (Nepstad et al., 2006), although indigenous

territories experience more forest disturbances (e.g., selective logging) than parks (Oliveira et al., 2007).

Despite the past protective role of indigenous peoples for biological conservation, native Amazonians are

increasingly engaging in wage labor, tourism, commercial agriculture, cattle ranching, and the sale of

timber and non-timber forest products (Godoy et al., 2005; Lu, 2007; Rudel et al., 2002; Stronza, 2001),

activities that presumably damage the tropical forests more than traditional subsistence practices do.

Furthermore, the integration of indigenous peoples into the market economy potentially boosts

interactions between indigenous and non-indigenous peoples and the entrance of non-indigenous peoples

in lands inhabited by indigenous peoples, with potential implications for the use of the forest.

In this paper we use data from a large survey conducted among an indigenous Amazonian society, the

Tsimane’, to describe the level to which non-indigenous people enter indigenous villages and the type of

interactions between indigenous and non-indigenous populations. Since indigenous peoples provide the

socio-political conditions that facilitate or constraint any conservation strategy in their lands,

understanding the type and frequency of interactions between indigenous and non-indigenous populations

should help design better conservation strategies in areas inhabited by indigenous peoples.

Page 4: INTERACTIONS BETWEEN INDIGENOUS AND NON …icta.uab.cat/Etnoecologia/projects/docs/bolivian_lowlands.pdf · INTERACTIONS BETWEEN INDIGENOUS AND NON-INDIGENOUS POPULATIONS AND THEIR

2.- The Tsimane’ and their context

The Tsimane’ are the third largest ethnic group in Bolivia’s lowlands with about 8,000 people

living in less than 100 villages. The Tsimane’ inhabit an area that lies mostly in the province of Beni,

extending from the foothills of the Andes to the Moxos savanna. The Tsimane’ remained relatively

isolated until the 1950s when the arrival of highland colonist farmers, the opening of new roads, and the

logging boom put them in continuous contact with other segments of the Bolivian society, a process that

transformed their lands and their land tenure system.

Tsimane’ traditionally lacked a system of individual land tenure and considered land and natural

resources a common property (Godoy et al., 2001). In 1979 Tsimane’ ancestral lands were affected by a

colonization project that gave several hundreds of hectares to highland colonists in private property

(Pacheco, 2002). Soon after, during the 1980’s, the Bolivian government granted long-term commercial

forest concessions to logging companies and established two protected areas (Pilón-Lajas and Beni

Biological Station) in the territory inhabited by the Tsimane’. Only during the 1990’s the Bolivian

government started a land titling process –yet to conclude- that recognizes the Tsimane’ demand over part

of the land they had traditionally occupied (Chicchon, 1992).

As a consequence of changes in traditional Tsimane’ land tenure system, nowadays Tsimane’

villages are settled in protected areas, forest concessions, indigenous territories, and private lands which

include (but are not limited to) colonization areas (Fig. 1). Rights to use natural resources by Tsimane’

and non-Tsimane’ vary by land tenure type. Tsimane’ indigenous peoples have the right to hunt, clear

land, and extract timber and non-timber forest products (NTFPs) for consumption in protected areas,

indigenous territories, and forest concessions. Under approved management plans, Tsimane’ can extract

timber from indigenous territories and authorized logging companies can extract timber from forest

concessions (Decreto Supremo Nº 22611, Ley Forestal Nº 1700). Intensive land uses (cattle ranching,

commercial agriculture, non-planned logging) by non-Tsimane’ is legally limited to private lands.

FIGURE 1

Tsimane’ interact with non-Tsimane’ entering their villages in different ways. In villages on indigenous

territories far from towns, Tsimane’ work for illegal loggers and barter surplus crops and NTFPs with

traveling traders. In forest concessions, Tsimane’ work for logging companies and barter with traveling

traders. In villages on indigenous territories or private lands close to towns, Tsimane’ work for colonist

Page 5: INTERACTIONS BETWEEN INDIGENOUS AND NON …icta.uab.cat/Etnoecologia/projects/docs/bolivian_lowlands.pdf · INTERACTIONS BETWEEN INDIGENOUS AND NON-INDIGENOUS POPULATIONS AND THEIR

farmers and cattle ranchers or increase forest clearing to plant cash crops that they sell in local towns

(Vadez et al., 2008).

3.- Methods

A team working in the area since 2001 collected data for this study during 2007.

The Great Tsimane’ Council (Tsimane’ umbrella government) approved the study and

we obtained consent from each respondent.

3.1.- Sample

We visited all Tsimane’ villages with at least ten households, except for three

villages that were excluded for logistic reasons (n=87). We retrieved information on the

legal land tenure status of each village by cross-checking the geographical position of

the village (collected during fieldwork) with the geographical database of the Instituto

Nacional de Reforma Agraria. Our sample includes villages in parks (n=17), logging

concessions (n=11), indigenous territories (n=45), and private lands (n=14). 20% of the

villages had road access throughout the year. The percentage of villages in logging

concessions (36%) and private lands (36%) with year-round road access was higher than

the percentage of villages with year-round road access in indigenous territories (18%)

and parks (5%). The average number of households across villages was 20.6

(SD=18.2).

Upon arrival at each village we randomly selected 10 households out of a list provided by the highest-

ranking authority in the village and interviewed the male household head (or the female if the male was

absent). In villages with less than 10 households we interviewed all the available household heads. Our

final sample (n=780) represents 43% of all Tsimane’ households.

3.2.- Survey

We asked every person in the sample three questions referring to traders, loggers, cattle ranchers, and

colonist farmers. We first asked respondents to report the entrance of traders in the village during the 30

days previous to the interview. If the interviewee reported entrance of traders, we asked about the

Page 6: INTERACTIONS BETWEEN INDIGENOUS AND NON …icta.uab.cat/Etnoecologia/projects/docs/bolivian_lowlands.pdf · INTERACTIONS BETWEEN INDIGENOUS AND NON-INDIGENOUS POPULATIONS AND THEIR

trader’s intention and the respondent’s response to the trader’s entrance. We recorded the textual answers.

We then repeated the questions for loggers, cattle ranchers, and colonist farmers.

3.3.- Variables

We constructed individual-level variables capturing reported a) entrances, b) intentions, and c) responses

to traders, loggers, ranchers, and colonist farmers. For each actor, the variable entrance took the value of

1 if the respondent reported one or more entrances and 0 otherwise. We coded responses to the question

regarding intentions into a) trade of crops and NTFPs, b) logging (e.g., timber extraction and purchase), c)

land encroachment, and d) other (e.g., social visits). We coded answers to the question about Tsimane’

response into a) actively rejected (e.g., told the outsider to leave), b) passively accepted (e.g., did not

interact), c) engaged in economic activities (e.g., buying or selling products), or d) engaged in social

activities (e.g., chatting).

3.4.- Data analysis

We used descriptive statistics to analyze data by land tenure type. We first calculated the number of

entrances reported by all the respondents in villages settled in a given land tenure system. The variable

should be interpreted with caution as there may be overlap between reports from respondents in a village.

We calculated intentions and responses as a percentage of the number of entrances reported.

4.- Results

We found that at least one respondent in 87% of all the villages in the sample

reported the entrance of traders, loggers, cattle ranchers, or colonist farmers during the

30 days before the day of the interview. Traders entered 75% of the villages, loggers

54%, ranchers 18%, and colonist farmers 15% (data not showed). Overall, 63% of

interviewees reported at least one entrance during the 30 days previous to the interview.

Tsimane’ perceived that most entrances in their villages were related to the trade of

crops and NTFP (54%) and to logging (33%). Only 9% of respondents reported land

encroachment.

The percentage of informants reporting entrances was similar across the four

land tenure types, although we found variation in reported intentions (Table 1). Non-

Page 7: INTERACTIONS BETWEEN INDIGENOUS AND NON …icta.uab.cat/Etnoecologia/projects/docs/bolivian_lowlands.pdf · INTERACTIONS BETWEEN INDIGENOUS AND NON-INDIGENOUS POPULATIONS AND THEIR

Tsimane’ reportedly entered indigenous territories, parks, and logging concessions to

barter commercial goods for crops and NTFPs, but they entered Tsimane’ villages

settled on private lands mostly for logging. Land encroachment was very marginal in

indigenous territories and more common in private lands and parks.

TABLE 1

Interviewees mostly accepted the entrance of non-Tsimane’ in their villages,

more often engaging in economic activities (e.g., barter, sale, and wage labor) than

rejecting the entrance of non-Tsimane’ (Table 1). Tsimane’ passively accepted 49% of

the entrances and engaged in economic and social activities in 32% and 5% of the

reported entrances. About 14% of Tsimane’ reporting the entrance of outsiders actively

rejected them. Tsimane’ living in private lands rejected 23% of the entrances, as

opposed to Tsimane’ living in forest concessions who only rejected 6% of the entrances.

Only Tsimane’ living in indigenous lands reported engaging in social activities with

non-Tsimane’ entering their villages.

The analysis of data by actors entering Tsimane’ villages showed that 46% of

the Tsimane’ who reported the entrance of traveling traders bartered with or sold goods

to them, 42% did not have any interaction, 6% engaged in social activities, and another

6% actively rejected the entrance of traders in their villages (data not shown). A low

percentage of interviewees worked for loggers and ranchers (18% and 25%) or rejected

their entrance (21% and 14%), whereas most interviewees reporting entrance passively

accepted the entrance of loggers and ranchers in their village (57% and 58%). Only the

entrance of colonist farmers was mostly rejected: 52% of those who reported the

entrance of colonist farmers actively rejected them. None of the respondents engaged in

economic or social activities with colonist farmers.

Page 8: INTERACTIONS BETWEEN INDIGENOUS AND NON …icta.uab.cat/Etnoecologia/projects/docs/bolivian_lowlands.pdf · INTERACTIONS BETWEEN INDIGENOUS AND NON-INDIGENOUS POPULATIONS AND THEIR

5.- Discussion

Three main findings stem from this research. First, interactions between Tsimane’ and non-

Tsimane’ are frequent and mostly non-hostile. Second, the Tsimane’ do express hostility to the entrance

of colonist farmers in their villages. And third, Tsimane’ interactions with non-Tsimane’ have an

economic basis, mostly through trade of crops, timber, and NTFPs.

First, we found that –independently of land tenure system- interactions between Tsimane’ and

non-Tsimane’ are frequent and mostly non-hostile. Previous descriptive accounts report hostility in the

interactions between Amazonian indigenous and non-indigenous peoples (Alston et al., 2000, Schmink

and Wood, 1992), but we found that about one third of Tsimane’ households engaged in economic

activities with traders and loggers and half of the sample passively accepted their entrance in the village.

Moreover, in a previous study on the region, Godoy and colleagues (1998) found that 69% of the

households reported conflicts with loggers, whereas we found that only 21% actively rejected their

entrance. Assuming comparability between the two studies, the level of Tsimane’ acceptance to non-

Tsimane’ might be growing.

What might explain growing acceptance to non-Tsimane’? A possible explanation for Tsimane’

increasing acceptance to non-Tsimane’ who visited their villages lies on the ongoing process of

integration into the market economy. As mentioned, Tsimane’ are increasingly engaging in the market

economy through wage labor and the sale and barter of crops, timber, and NTFPs. As Tsimane’ abandon

their autarkic way of life and engage in economic activities that provide them cash income and access to

market goods, they might become more dependent and more tolerant to non-Tsimane’, with whom they

interact through market-based economic activities.

Second, we found that the Tsimane’ do express hostility to the entrance of colonist farmers in

their villages, a finding that echoes the thesis that indigenous peoples reject economic activities that

undermine the natural environment that constitutes the basis of their subsistence (Martínez-Alier, 2002).

The entrance of colonist farmers in Tsimane’ villages is now rare, probably because the Tsimane’ live far

from the agricultural frontier in Santa Cruz. However, the combination of three ongoing processes makes

one expect increasing encroachment in the area on a near future. First, as mentioned, the land titling

process that recognizes the Tsimane’ demand over the land they had traditionally occupied remains

unfinished. Insecurity of land rights and rules makes it easy for outsiders to gain access to indigenous

peoples’ communal lands (Albó, 2002; Stocks, 2005). Second, the current government is planning a new

Page 9: INTERACTIONS BETWEEN INDIGENOUS AND NON …icta.uab.cat/Etnoecologia/projects/docs/bolivian_lowlands.pdf · INTERACTIONS BETWEEN INDIGENOUS AND NON-INDIGENOUS POPULATIONS AND THEIR

agrarian reform to encourage the migration of highland colonists to the lowlands by granting them access

to public lands. Third, the transport system in the area is improving both at the local and at the

interdepartmental level. Local roads to Tsimane’ villages are being planned and built and the

interdepartmental road that links the town of San Borja with the capital city of La Paz will be partially

paved soon. Land insecurity, the new colonization policy, and a better transport system might increase

the pressure of highland colonist farmers on Tsimane’ lands thus potentially boosting the number of

conflicts over land and natural resources on the area.

One last finding merits discussion. Our data suggest that –across the four types of land tenure

systems- Tsimane’ interactions with non-Tsimane’ have an economic basis. Economic interactions center

on the trade of crops and NTFPs in villages on indigenous lands and parks and on timber extraction in

villages on forest concessions and private lands. Although our data do not allow for a formal test, it poses

the question of the impact on Amazonian forests generated by the synergistic relations between

indigenous and non-indigenous populations. For example, encouraged by the presence of itinerant

traders, Tsimane’ willing to raise their sources of income increase the area of forest cleared to plant cash

crops (Vadez et al., 2008). As it has been the case somewhere else (Arnold and Pérez, 2001), Tsimane’

seem to be over-harvesting NTFPs with commercial value, such as Geonoma deversa, a thatch palm

highly appreciated in the area (Hinojosa, com. pers.) Also, loggers might be more prone to work in areas

inhabited by indigenous peoples because indigenous peoples provide cheap labor and have expertise in

locating fine woods (Watson, 1996). The first type of interaction might increase the total area of forest

cleared for agriculture (Vadez et al., 2008); the second type of interaction might degrade natural resources

(Arnold and Pérez, 2001); and the third could favor the spread of selective logging, a practice that has

been blamed for up to 50% of total forest damage in some Amazonian states (Asner, 2005).

6.- Conclusion

Researchers have found that lands inhabited by indigenous peoples have an inhibitory effect on

deforestation (Nepstad et al., 2006) but suffer more forest disturbances than inhabited parks (Oliveira et

al., 2007). Results presented here provide a testable social interpretation of those findings: indigenous

peoples might reject the entrance of non-indigenous who encroach their communal lands, thus potentially

contributing to inhibit large-scale deforestation; but indigenous peoples living under land tenure systems

that grant them rights to use land and natural resources (e.g., indigenous territories, forest concessions,

Page 10: INTERACTIONS BETWEEN INDIGENOUS AND NON …icta.uab.cat/Etnoecologia/projects/docs/bolivian_lowlands.pdf · INTERACTIONS BETWEEN INDIGENOUS AND NON-INDIGENOUS POPULATIONS AND THEIR

and parks in the present case study) might engage with non-indigenous peoples in economic activities that

draw on the use of forest resources, thus potentially contributing to increase forest disturbances.

The success of biodiversity conservation on areas inhabited by indigenous peoples might depend

on successfully finding protective measures that address the nature of the new economic interactions

between indigenous and non-indigenous peoples and the synergetic impact of those actors on tropical

forests.

Acknowledgments

Research was funded by a grant from the BBVA Foundation (IV Convocatoria de

Ayudas a la Investigación en Ecología y Biología de la Conservación). We thank the

Gran Consejo Tsimane’ for their support, the Tsimane’ Amazonian Panel Study

Bolivian research team for help collecting the information, R. Godoy and K. Demps for

comments to a previous version of the article, and ICRISAT-Patancheru for providing

V. R.-G. with office facilities.

Page 11: INTERACTIONS BETWEEN INDIGENOUS AND NON …icta.uab.cat/Etnoecologia/projects/docs/bolivian_lowlands.pdf · INTERACTIONS BETWEEN INDIGENOUS AND NON-INDIGENOUS POPULATIONS AND THEIR

LITERATURE CITED

Albo X. 2002. Bolivia: from Indian and Campesino leaders to councillors and deputies. In:Sieder R,

editor. Multiculturalism In Latin America: Indigenous Rights, Diversity and Democracy.

Hampshire, UK: Palgrave Macmillan; p 74-102.

Alston, L., G. Libecap, and B. Mueller. 2000. Land reform policies, the sources of violent conflict, and

implications for deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon. Journal of Environmental Economic

Management 39;162-188.

Arnold, J.E.M., and M.R. Perez. 2001. Can non-timber forest products match tropical forest conservation

and development objectives? Ecological Economics 39; 437-47.

Asner, G. 2005. Selective logging 'doubles Amazon forest loss'. Science 310; 480.

Chicchon, A. 1992. Chimane Resource Use and Market Involvement in the Beni Biosphere Reserve,

Bolivia [dissertation]. University of Florida.

Godoy, R., M. Jacobson, J. DeCastro, V. Aliaga, J. Romero, and A. Davis. 1998. The role of tenure

security and private time preference in neotropical deforestation. Land Economics 74; 162-170.

Godoy, R., K.N. Kirby, and D. Wilkie. 2001. Tenure security, private time preference, and use of natural

resources among lowland Bolivian Amerindians. Ecological Economics 38; 105-118.

Godoy, R., V. Reyes-García, E. Byron, W. Leonard, and V. Vadez. 2005. The Effect of Market

Economies on the Well-Being of Indigenous Peoples and on Their Use of Renewable Natural

Resources. Annual Review of Anthropology 34; 121-138.

Hecht, S., and A. Cockburn. 1989. The Fate of the Forest: Developers, Destroyers, and Defenders of the

Amazon. Harper Perennia, New York.

Heckenberger, M.J., J.C. Russell, J.R. Toney, and M.J. Schmidt. 2007. The legacy of cultural landscapes

in the Brazilian Amazon: implications for biodiversity. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal

Society B-Biological Sciences 362; 197-208.

Kometter, R., M. Martinez, A. Blundell, E. Gullison, M.K. Steininger, and R.E. Rice. 2004. Impacts of

unsustainable mahogany logging in Bolivia and Peru. Ecology and Society 9; 12.

Lu, F. 2007. Integration into the Market among Indigenous Peoples: A Cross-Cultural Perspective from

the Ecuadorian Amazon. Current Anthropology 48; 593-602.

Martínez-Alier, J. 2002. The Environmentalism of the Poor. A Study of Ecological Conflicts and

Valuation. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.

Page 12: INTERACTIONS BETWEEN INDIGENOUS AND NON …icta.uab.cat/Etnoecologia/projects/docs/bolivian_lowlands.pdf · INTERACTIONS BETWEEN INDIGENOUS AND NON-INDIGENOUS POPULATIONS AND THEIR

Mittermeier, R., C. Mittermeier, T. Brooks, J. Pilgrim, W. Konstant, G. da Fonseca, and C. Kormos.

2003. Wilderness and Biodiversity Conservation. Proceedings of the National Academy of

Sciences of the United States of America 100; 10309-10313.

Nepstad, D.C, et al. 2006. Inhibition of Amazon deforestation and fire by parks and indigenous lands.

Conservation Biology 20; 65-73.

Oliveira, P.J.C., G.P. Asner, D.E. Knapp, A. Almeyda, R. Galvan-Gildemeister, S, Keene, R.F. Raybin,

R.C. Smith. 2007. Land-use allocation protects the Peruvian Amazon. Science 317; 1233-6.

Pacheco, P. 2002. Deforestation and forest degradation in lowland Bolivia. Pages 66-84 in C. Wood and

R. Porro, editors. Deforestation and Land Use in the Amazon. University Press of Florida,

Gainesville.

Painter, M., and W. Durham. 1995. The Social Causes of Environmental Destruction in Latin America.

University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Rudel T, Bates D, Machinguashi R. 2002. A Tropical Forest Transition? Agricultural Change, Out-

migration, and Secondary Forests in the Ecuadorian Amazon. ANNALS OF THE

ASSOCIATION OF AMERICAN GEOGRAPHERS 92(1); 87-102.

Schmink M, Wood C. 1992. Contested Frontiers in Amazonia. New York: Columbia University Press.

Stocks A. 2005. Too much for too few: Problems of indigenous land rights in Latin America. Annu Rev

Anthropol 34; 85-104

Stronza A. 2001. The Anthropology of Tourism: Forging new Ground for Ecotourism and Other

Alternatives. Annu Rev Anthropol 30; 261-83

Sunderlin, W.D., A. Angelsen, B. Belcher, P. Burgers, R. Nasi, L. Santoso, and S. Wunder. 2005.

Livelihoods, Forests, and Conservation in Developing Countries: An Overview. World

Development 33; 1383-1402.

Vadez, V., V. Reyes-García, R. Godoy, W. Leonard, T. Huanca, and E. Byron. 2008. Income

diversification of rural households: What role for agriculture? Household evidence from the

Tsimane' Amerindians of the Bolivian Amazon. Human Organization. 67, 384-396.

Watson, F. 1996. A view from the forest floor: The impact of logging on indigenous peoples in Brazil. Is

there a future for mahogany? Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society 122, 75-82.

Wood, C., and R. Porro. 2002. Deforestation and Land Use in the Amazon. University of Florida Press,

Gainesville.

Page 13: INTERACTIONS BETWEEN INDIGENOUS AND NON …icta.uab.cat/Etnoecologia/projects/docs/bolivian_lowlands.pdf · INTERACTIONS BETWEEN INDIGENOUS AND NON-INDIGENOUS POPULATIONS AND THEIR

Table 1. Entrance, intention, and Tsimane’ response to traders, loggers, cattle ranchers, and colonist

farmers

Tsimane’ villages settled in:

Parks

Logging

concessions Indigenous

territories

Private

lands

Total

N villages

(N respondents)

17

(148)

11

(78)

45

(429)

14 (125) 87

(780)

% Villages reporting

entrances

76.5 72.7 93.3 92.8 87.3

% respondents reporting

entrances

60.8 66.7 65.7 52.0 62.7

N entrances 120 100 393 83 696

Intentiona

Trade (crops and NTFP

b) 48.3 48.0 64.6 20.5 54.2

Logging 30.0 35.0 30.3 49.4 33.2

Land encroachment 18.3 13.0 3.3 20.5 9.3

Other 3.3 4.0 1.8 9.6 3.3

Tsimane’ responsea

Actively rejected 16.7 6.0 13.7 22.9 14.2

Passively accepted 42.5 68.0 44.8 53.0 48.7

Engaged in economic activities 40.8 26.0 33.1 24.1 32.3

Engaged in social activities 0.0 0.0 8.4 0.0 4.7 a: Figures are percentages referred to the total number of entrances reported

b: Non-timber forest products

Page 14: INTERACTIONS BETWEEN INDIGENOUS AND NON …icta.uab.cat/Etnoecologia/projects/docs/bolivian_lowlands.pdf · INTERACTIONS BETWEEN INDIGENOUS AND NON-INDIGENOUS POPULATIONS AND THEIR