Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Community forestry in Mexico


Published on

Published in: Environment, Business, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Community forestry in Mexico

  1. 1. Community Forestry in Mexico Ernesto Herrera Reforestamos Mexico April, 2014
  2. 2. Content • Brief Mexican context • Community forestry • Economic benefits • Threats to community forestry • Lessons learned
  3. 3. Brief Mexican context
  4. 4. Mexican forests 630,000 km2 forested area (1/3 of total sourfice)
  5. 5. Forest’s natural diversity
  6. 6. Biodiversity • Mexico is one of the 17 megadiverse countries. • Neartic and Neotropical species. • 60 pine species • 125 oak species • Difficult to manage biodiverse forests
  7. 7. Forest’s cultural diversity
  8. 8. People living in the forests • 12 million people • 50% indigenous • 50% living in poverty conditions
  9. 9. Mexican ethnic diversity
  10. 10. Main forest economic conditions • Forests account to 0.8 % of GDP • Mexican forests provide 1/5th of what it consumes • Construction and furniture sectors main consumers. • Illegal market makes wood cheaper (30-70% of total market) • Market doesn’t value environmental and social attributes.
  11. 11. Community Forestry
  12. 12. Community forestry: definition The process in which communities get organized to manage their forests to produce, and commercialize forest products and services in order to improve their quality of life.
  13. 13. 1917: Constitution Land rights. Mexican Revolution 1980 1940 1920 1910 1880 1970 Land Concentration 1917: Mexican Constitution: Art. 27: land rights: public, private and “social” land. Ejidos and communities. Social land inalienable, imprescriptible and guaranteed against seizure . Land and management rights evolution Less than 1% of land rightholders owned 87% of the land. Forest concessioned to international corporations. Forest concessions were revoked
  14. 14. 1917: Constitution Land rights. Mexican Revolution 1980 1940 1920 1910 1880 1970 Land Concentration Land and management rights evolution Land distribution Community forestry From 1940 till 1980 xxx hectares were distributed to ejidos. Forest law 1926, Forest law 1940 concessions were granted to private and state owned companies who payed logging rights to communities. Forest moratoriums Forest Law 1986 Communities got the right to manage their forests. Concessions revoked. 1987-2003 Development of all sort of environmental legislation and institutions. 2003: General Law on Sustainable Forestry Development: current advocacy: community management.
  15. 15. Community forestry 992 CFE There are 28,662 ejidos y 2,393 communities in Mexico Nearly 3,000 communities own 50 million hectares, 80% of Mexican forests
  16. 16. Difference of communities and ejidos Communities Ejidos Agriculture, cattle, forests Ancient organizations, indigenous Derived from 1910 Mexican Revolution, mestizo Only forests Very similar. Ruled by Land Act. Communities have a long time governance tradition. Origin Common land Organiza- tion Community forestry applies for both of them.
  17. 17. General assambly Ejido and community organization Commissariat/Board of Directors Supervisory/Survilliance Board Committees Energy Forests Etc. Committees organized beyond election terms Forestry work, permits, governmental support CFE. Trusted people elected every 3 years to supervises the board of director work. Water Community members: Right holders They gatter at least every 6 months. Vote. Define internal regulations. Approve what the Board of Directors work. Distribute benefits. Common land: use President, Secretary and Treasurer: elected every 3 years Responsible for: Representing the community Convening the general assambly Accountability President and CFE Manager.
  18. 18. Public institutional framework Normative role. Forest Management Permits. National Forestry Register. Foresters control (it used to be controled by agriculture) Forest management: Conservation and forest management program (PROCYMAF). PES. Inspection, audits, sanctions, revoke permits (environmental police). Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources Federal Ombudsman of Environmental Protection National Forestry Commission
  19. 19. CF Benefits
  20. 20. Benefits • 80% of legal timber originates in community forestry. • 2,000 community logging permits. • More than 200 communities own sawmill: Local employment. • 40 communities: 800 thousand FSC certified forests.
  21. 21. WB/Profor • Competitiveness and sustainability study • Costs, income, net present value (30 year forecast) • 30 forest communities in Mexico
  22. 22. Site preparation Reforestation Forest vigilance Road manteinance Fire control Forester support Logging rights to community 5%3% 9% 16% 10% 14% Costs distribution (2011) 2011 costs per hectare (USD) Average 57.87 Minimum 2.04 Maximum 516.64 Median 24.51 43%
  23. 23. Income (USD per hectare in 2011) Timber Non-timber forest products Payment for ecosystem services 2011 income per hectare Average 211.50 15.58 8.17 235.25 Minimum 1.36 0.00 0.00 1.36 Maximum 1,292.21 251.97 144.02 1,688.20 Median 90.62 0.08 0.00 90.70 90% 7% 3% 16 of 30 CFE: resin, latex, firewood, medicine, recreation 8 of 30 CFE: water, biodiversity, erosion control Pine, oak… very little tropical species.
  24. 24. 30 CFE, 30 year forecast Production area (hectare) Wood harvested (m3) Yield (m3/hectar e/year) Costs (USD) Income (USD) Net present value (USD/hectare) Average 7,717 11,393 2.52 24 68 2,052.20 MIn 133 389 0.09 2 31 -0.85 Max 26,032 46,095 28.79 263 249 12,379.07 Median 4,182 6,265 1.03 13 56 897.14
  25. 25. Profor study conclusions • Large Mexican market: sales • CF costs are higher in Mexico than other countries. • Important to reduce forester costs with local capacity. • Financial education required for CFE. Book keeping. • CFE should seek profitability, not only employment provider. • Important to find market for other non commercial species. • More analysis required for NTFP and PES. • CFE are reasonable profitable, sustainable and attractive to investment. • Government should put attention in this sector: subsidies, incentives, etc.
  26. 26. Threats of community forestry
  27. 27. Global threats • Globalized markets: forest plantations: low wood prices (pine) • Climate change: community and forest adaptation.
  28. 28. National threats • Political will focused on urban issues • Subsidies to cattle farming and agriculture: deforestation • Mining: 30% of the land concessioned for mining. • Complex legal framework for CF • Informality and Illegality: low wood prices • PROFEPA’s law enforcement duties: too strict with CF, not too strict in the market place. • Drug cartels’s “taxation”, security, corruption. • Lack of forest sector competitiveness over other land uses.
  29. 29. Internal threats • Ageing community decision makers. • Lack of opportunities for young people and women. • Migration of men (USA, cities, tourist zones). • Corrupt caciques, lack of transparency. • Too much politics not good for production and market access. • Good community presidents cannot be reelected immediately, no learning process. • Lack of business language and entreprenurial mindset.
  30. 30. Lessons learned
  31. 31. Governmental support • Too much control derives in informality-ilegality: Legality shouldn’t be costly. • Certification: too much effort for communities and subsidies from CONAFOR but the market doesn’t value. • Payment for ecosystem services: not for conservation only, sustainable management is now recognized. • PROCYMAF: Not only teaching how to fish, it is very important to teach how to sell the fish. • Technology and machinery alone doesn’t bring competitiveness. • Too much support not good: paternalism. Mexico and Guatemala example.
  32. 32. Local capacity • Good foresters, bad foresters: they need to be certified. • Developing community foresters is possible and help communities to reduce costs and engage young people. • CFE can be managed by outsourcers and separate politics from production. • Reforestamos is seeking to transform the extension service model from technical advice to entreprenurial mentoring/coaching. We’ll keep you posted.
  33. 33. Alliances • Lobbing: very important to raise public awareness for normative and institutional innovation. • NGO’s role: different complementing roles: social, environmental, economic, political, etc. • Private sector can complement their business model with CSR in order to support community forestry.
  34. 34. @ReforestamosMex Ernesto Herrera Contacto Thank you! ReforestamosMexico