Pilot Program to conserve the Brazilian Rain Forests

NC-IUCN/GSISeries6
Pilot Program to conserve
the Brazilian Rain Forests
(PPG-7):
possibilities for cooperation with the
Guiana Shield Initiative
Dave Zwaan
Pilot Program to conserve
the Brazilian Rain Forests
(PPG-7):
Dave Zwaan

Pilot Program to conserve the Brazilian
Rain Forests (PPG-7):
Dave Zwaan
Amsterdam 2004

Zwaan, D. (2004). Pilot Program to conserve the Brazilian Rain Forests (PPG-7):
possibilities for cooperation with the Guiana Shield Initiative
E-mail: dave.zwaan@iucn.nl
© Netherlands Committee for IUCN
copyright of photograph and map as indicated in captions
Produced by Dave Zwaan and Cas Besselink, NC-IUCN
Layout and cover by Edith Cremers
Cover photo: Giant water lilies (Victoria amazonica) near the Amazon River in
the vicinity of Manaus, Brazil. Photo: Dave Zwaan
Published March 2004
by the Netherlands Committee for IUCN
Plantage Middenlaan 2k
Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Websites: www.iucn.nl, www.guianashield.org
Pilot Program to conserve the Brazilian Rain Forests (PPG-7): possibilities for
cooperation with the Guiana Shield Initiative is the sixth in a series of docu-
ments to be published by the Guiana Shield Initiative (GSI) of the Netherlands
Committee for IUCN. The GSI received funding from the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs of the Dutch Government to lay the foundations for a long-term eco-
regional project to finance sustainable development and conservation of the
unique ecosystems of the Guiana Shield. This eco-region encompasses parts of
Colombia, Venezuela, Brazil and the whole of Guyana, Suriname and French
Guiana.
The Netherlands Committee for IUCN (NC-IUCN) functions as a platform of
the Dutch members of IUCN/The World Conservation Union. The NC-IUCN
implements projects and administers small grants programmes for conserva-
tion. The office is based in Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Website: www.iucn.nl

ACKNOWLED GEMENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The author wants to thank the following persons: Marcello Coelho (Operations
Analist, World Bank Rain Forest Unit, PPG-7), Phil Hazelton (Consultant, former
Natural Resources Management Specialist of the World Bank, Advisory Board
member GSI), Joris Jurriëns (First Secretary Dutch Embassy, Brazil), Alberto
Lourenço (Coordinator PPG-7, Secretariat for Coordination of the Amazon),
Mauro Ruffino (Coordinator ProVárzea), Roberto Smeraldi (Director Amigos da
Terra, Chairman International Advisory Group PPG-7, Advisory Board member
GSI), Gregor Wolf (Rain Forest Unit manager, PPG-7).

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Abbreviations 6
1. Introduction 8
2. History of the PPG-7 12
3. Structure of the PPG-7 14
4. Projects of the PPG-7 17
5. Lessons Learnt 25
6. Second Phase of the PPG-7 and possibilities 28
for the Guiana Shield Initiative
7. References 32
Annexes 33

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

AMA Projeto de Apoio ao Monitoramento e Análise, Monitoring and
Analysis Project
BCC Brazilian Coordination Commission (Comissão de Coordenação
Brasileira)
CdE Centros de Excelência, Centres of Excellence
C&T Subprograma de Ciência e Tecnologia, Science & Technology
DCC Donor Coordination Committee (Comissão de Coordenação dos
Doadores)
DfID Department for International Development (United Kingdom)
FUNAI Fundação Nacional do Índio, Brazil’s National Indian
Foundation
GTA Grupo de Trabalho Amazônico, Amazon Working Group
GTZ Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit,
German international cooperation enterprise for sustainable
development
IAG International Advisory Group (Grupo Consultivo Internacional)
IBAMA Instituto Brasileiro do Meio Ambiente e dos Recursos Naturais
Renováveis, Brazilian Institute for the Environment and
Renewable Natural Resources
INPA Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas da Amazônia, National Institute
for Amazonian Research
JSC Joint Steering Committee (Comissão de Coordenação Conjunta)
KFW Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau, German bilateral government
organization providing funding throughout the major regions
of the world.
MCT Ministério da Ciência e Tecnologia, Brazilian Ministry of Science
and Technology
MMA Ministério do Meio Ambiente, Brazilian Ministry of the
Environment
NGO Non-Government Organization
PD Pesquisa Dirigida, Directed Research
PD/A Projetos Demonstrativos A, Demonstration Projects - Type A
PDPI Projetos Demonstrativos dos Povos Indígenas, Demonstration
Projects for Indigenous Peoples
PGAI Projeto de Gestão Ambiental Integrada, Program of Integrated
Environmental Management
PPTAL Projeto Integrado de Proteção às Terras e Populações Indígenas da
Amazônia Legal, Integrated Project for the Protection of
Indigenous Peoples & Land in the Amazon


Prodesque Projeto Integrado de Monitoramento e Controle de Desmatamento
e Queimadas na Floresta Amazônica, Fire and Deforestation
Control Project
PROMANEJO Projeto de Apoio ao Manejo Florestal Sustentável na Amazônia,
Amazon Sustainable Forest Management Program
PROTEGER Amazon Fire Prevention and Mobilization Project
PROVÁRZEA Projeto de Manejo dos Recursos Naturais da Várzea, Floodplain
Management Project
RESEX Projeto Reservas Extrativistas, Extractive Reserves Project
RFU World Bank Rain Forest Unit
RMA Rede de Organizações Não-Governamentais da Mata Atlântica,
Atlantic Rain Forest Network
SBF Secretaria de Biodiversidade e Florestas, Secretariat of
Biodiversity and Forests
SBVP Sustainable Business Ventures Project
SCA Secretaria de Coordenação da Amazônia, Secretariat for
Coordination of the Amazon
SPRN Subprograma de Política de Recursos Naturais, Natural Resources
Policy Project

INTRODUCTION

1
INTRODUCTION
The Guiana Shield Initiative (GSI), an international partnership with its secre-
tariat at the Netherlands Committee for IUCN (NC-IUCN), has the objective: the
sustainable management in the Guiana Shield eco-region, by setting up a pay-
ment or compensation system for environmental goods and services, such as the
regulation of hydrological cycles, the stabilization of climate and the preservation
of biodiversity. By paying “ecosystem managers” in the region for these services,
sustainability can be achieved, as they do not have to look for other (unsustain-
able) ways to gain income. Since ecosystems do not recognize political borders,
managing transboundary issues is one of the elements of the GSI. Examples of
negative transboundary issues are illegal gold mining and the related spread of
infectious diseases such as malaria and HIV/AIDS. Other transboundary issues
are river basins and watersheds, and indigenous territories for example (see chap-
ter 4, indigenous land project).
The Guiana Shield region is an eco-region which covers the whole of Guyana,
Suriname, and French Guiana and parts of Venezuela, Colombia, and Brazil. The
boundaries of the Shield are roughly as follows: South (from East to West): the
Amazon River, and Japurá River (Brazil), and the Caquetá River in Colombia;
West: the Serranía de Chiribiquete park, the Guaviare River (Colombia), and
Orinoco River (including the Orinoco Delta, Venezuela); North and East: Atlantic
Ocean. The region is very important in an ecological sense as it comprises 25% of
the tropical rainforests in the world (80-90% of the Guiana Shield Rainforests is
in pristine condition). Furthermore 10-15% of the world’s freshwater comes from
this region, hence its name: Guiana (land of many waters). Besides rainforest, one
can encounter swamps (e.g. Orinoco Delta), savannahs (e.g. in the Rupununi
region in Guyana), tepuis (table mountains in Venezuela), but also mangrove
forests (e.g. along the coast of Suriname and French Guiana), and flooded forests
(e.g. the várzeas in Brazil). Endemism is very high in the region. Other character-
istics of the region are, amongst others: low human population, many indigenous
peoples, and relatively little infrastructure. Because the standard of living is low in
the region, illegal gold mining and illegal logging occur (small-scale mining is
mainly caused by Brazilian garimpeiros, who also cross the borders of the neigh-
bouring countries of Brazil). Illegal hunting is also not uncommon (this topic is
described in the GSI publication Commercial Non-Timber Forest Products of the
Guiana Shield 1).
1 Andel, van T.R., A.V. MacKinven, and O.S. Bánki. 2003. Commercial Non-Timber Forest Products
of the Guiana Shield. An inventory of commercial NTFP extraction and possibilities for sustainable
harvesting. GSI/NC-IUCN Series 2.

INTRODUCTION

The Pilot Program to Conserve the Brazilian Rain Forests (PPG-7) has many
overlapping activities with the GSI, as well as overlapping areas (which include
the States of Amapá and Roraima, and parts of the States of Amazonas and Pará,
see illustration). Also several possibilities for future cooperation are described
based on several scenarios. The Pilot Programme is of great importance as its
projects can act as examples of sustainable management of rainforests (accom-
plishments of the projects are described in chapter 4). The Pilot Program focuses
until now only on the Brazilian Amazon and the Atlantic Rainforest. This is a
main difference with the objectives of the GSI, as ecological processes are trans-
boundary, which means that what is ecologically happening in the neighbouring
countries of Brazil could influence Brazil (and vice versa of course). In a possible
second phase of the PPG-7, the Pilot Program might extend to neigbouring coun-
tries, which is of course of importance for the GSI. Even if the second phase of
the PPG-7 would only continue activities in Brazil then: 1. a relevant part of the
Guiana Shield is covered by these activities, and 2. further collaboration with
the rest of the region could follow. This is discussed in the last chapter.
This map of the northern part of South America shows the Guiana Shield region and
the Brazilian Legal Amazon. As can be seen, both regions overlap. AC: Acre, AM:
Amazonas, AP: Amapá, MA: Maranhão, MT: Mato Grosso, PA: Pará, RO: Rondônia, RR:
Roraima, TO: Tocantins. Map: produced by Dave Zwaan

INTRODUCTION

The focal area of the PPG-7 is the Brazilian Amazon Rainforest, which covers nine
Brazilian states (see illustration). The Amazon is the largest tropical rainforest in
the world and plays an important role in carbon sequestration and as a supplier
of non-timber forest products. At the same time, it is the main supplier – often in
an unsustainable manner – of the third largest timber market in the world, the
São Paulo region. It is estimated that 10%-15% of all existing species live in
the Amazon Region. Only 2% of the Brazilian human population inhabits the
Amazon Region, at a density of 3.2 inhabitants per km2 (SIVAM, 2003). Most of
the residents of the Brazilian Amazon now live in big cities like Manaus or Belém.
Although the population figure of the region is low, the number of inhabitants in
the Guiana Shield region is even lower: approximately 0.8 inhabitants per km2.
There are different threats to the rainforest in South America, for example over-
exploitation of logging, gold mining, and fires.
The Brazilian Amazon Rainforest area was originally estimated at 4 million km2
(almost 48% of the territory of Brazil), while the whole Amazon Basin covers
6 million km2 in nine countries. The PPG-7 covers the area called Legal Ama-
zônia, which is more than 5 million km2 (60% of the territory of Brazil). The area
of the Guiana Shield region, which overlaps with the Legal Amazon, is approxi-
mately 2.5 million km2. By 1999 about 14 percent of the original forest area of the
Amazon Region did not exist anymore. In the period of 1999-2000 19,000 km2
was deforested (another 0.5%), mostly in the southern states of the Legal
Amazon. In 2002 surprisingly high levels of deforestation were observed, bring-
ing the total to 15.3%. And still the figures are not encouraging; economic
development lobby and agricultural lobby are doing probably better than
environmental lobby (Joris Jurriëns, pers. comm. 2004). These high levels of
deforestation were a reason for the new Brazilian Government to take action
(with two plans, see chapter 6). This is one of the reasons why the second phase
of the PPG-7 is not a reality yet, as these actions are crucial for the definition of
the major lines of this second phase (see chapter 6).
The first contact of the GSI with the PPG-7 was in May 2001, when the GSI was
present at the VIth Participants Meeting in Cuiabá. Mary Allegretti, then
Secretary for the Amazon and in charge of the PPG-7, agreed at that stage to be
the Brazilian Steering Committee member for the GSI. Mary Allegretti has been
of tremendous help and she has showed great interest in the activities of the GSI,
which she has fully supported2. One year later, in June 2002, the GSI was also
present at the II Encontro Nacional in Rio de Janeiro. This resulted in the first steps
towards more collaboration with the PPG-7. In September 2003 a Memorandum
of Understanding was signed between the PPG-7 and the GSI.
2 For more information about the VIth Participants Meeting, we refer to the Fact Finding Mission
to the PPG7 and the Guiana Shield Country Brazil (Roraima), downloadable on the website
www.guianashield.org.

INTRODUCTION

The goal of the PPG-7 is to develop innovative strategies for the protection and
sustainable use of the Amazon and Atlantic Coastal Rainforests, as well as to
improve living conditions among local populations (http://www.mma.gov.br/
port/sca/ppg7/index.html). In order to reach this goal, several entities work
together in an international context. Involved are, amongst others: the Brazilian
Government (with the Ministério do Meio Ambiente, the Ministry of the
Environment as coordination body, and several institutions such as IBAMA –
Brazil’s Environmental Institute, INPA – National Amazonian Research Institute,
FUNAI – National Indian Foundation), Brazil’s civil society, and the internation-
al community (with donors such as the German GTZ/KFW, and the British
DFID).
For the GSI, the PPG-7 is of great importance, because it can be an example of
how projects can be implemented in the whole Guiana Shield area, and the les-
sons learnt from the experiences of the PPG-7. On the other hand, the Pilot
Program can also learn from projects already going on in the Guiana Shield, and
the GSI will focus on compensation systems for environmental goods and ser-
vices which can give another dimension on PPG-7 projects. Furthermore there
are two scenarios: 1) if the second phase will extend to neighbouring countries,
the GSI can work intensively with the PPG-7 to attain each of their goals in the
region; 2) if it is decided that there will only be sharing information or even less
activity, the GSI can suggest to work together on the field of sharing lessons
learnt, duplicating projects, and setting up transboundary projects across the
Brazilian border in close collaboration with the PPG-7. This is discussed further
in the last chapter.
II Encontro Nacional in Rio de Janeiro, 2002. Photo: Dave Zwaan

HISTORY OF THE PPG-7

2
During the summit meeting of the Group of Seven (G-7) of industrial countries3
in Houston in 1990, it was German Chancellor Helmut Kohl who called for a pilot
program to reduce the high rate of deforestation in Brazil. This Pilot Program was
approved in 1991 by the G-7, the European Union, and the Netherlands. In total
approximately US$ 250 million was pledged for the Pilot Program to conserve the
Brazilian Rain Forests. Approximately US$ 50 million was meant for the Rain
Forest Trust Fund (ANNEX 1 shows the Pilot Program funding table). There were
some extra contributions from Germany, the European Union, and the United
States to specific projects by setting up other trust funds – with the World Bank
or by co-financing (http://www.worldbank.org/rfpp/). Germany, United King-
dom, and the European Union have given the most financial and technical sup-
port to the PPG-7 in phase one. The PPG-7 was launched at the United Nations
Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in Rio de Janeiro in
1992. All government levels, NGOs, and the private sector work together on plan-
ning and implementation of the activities of the Pilot Program. The first projects
were implemented in 1995.
The overall objective of the PPG-7 is, as stated in the 1992 Rain Forest Trust Fund
Resolution:“to maximize the environmental benefits of Brazil’s rainforests consist-
ent with Brazil’s development goals, through the implementation of a sustainable
development approach that will contribute to a continuing reduction of the rate of
deforestation. The attainment of this objective will (i) demonstrate the feasibility
of harmonizing economic and environmental objectives in tropical rainforests; (ii)
help preserve the huge genetic resources of the rainforests; (iii) reduce the
Brazilian rainforests’ contribution to global carbon emissions; and (iv) provide
another example of cooperation between developed and developing countries on
global environmental issues.” (Mid-Term Review of the PPG-7, 2000). As the
World Bank states: the purpose of the PPG-7 is to try out, experiment, and learn
about new ways to protect the forest and to use the forest in a sustainable way.
Overall, these objectives comply with the objective of the GSI: to sustainably
finance the conservation and sustainable use of the unique intact ecosystems of
the Guiana Shield.
3 The G-7 consists of the following industrial countries: United States of America, Canada, United
Kingdom, France, Italy, Japan, and Germany. The G-7 has been called since 1998 G-7/8 or G-8,
because Russia has joined. Russia will host the G8 Summit in 2006, and thus completing its process
of becoming a full member (http://www.g7.utoronto.ca/).


It is believed that after the first five years of activities, the concept of sustainable
development is more accepted and that the civil society is more participatory,
which in reality is true. The Grupo de Trabalho Amazônico (GTA, i.e. the Amazon
Working Group) represents hundreds of NGOs in the Brazilian Amazon Region.
The GTA is involved at all levels of the programme (Phil Hazelton, pers. comm.,
2003).

STRUCTURE OF THE PPG-7

3
Below is an organigram of the PPG-7, as it was in the first phase. In the second
phase the structure could change.
Donor Coordination Committee (DCC)
International Advisory Group (IAG)
World Bank – Rain Forest Unit (RFU)
Joint Steering Committee (JSC)
Meeting of Participants
Brazilian Coordination Commission (BCC)
Executive Secretary of the Pilot Program
(together with the Coordination Secretariat of the Amazon of MMA)
Sustainable Business Ventures Project
Ecological Corridors Project
Monitoring and Analyses Project (AMA)
IBAMA MCTMMA/SCA/
PDA
FUNAI MMA/SCA/
SPRN
Atlantic
Rainforest
MMA/SBF
Civil Society
INTERNATIONAL LEVEL
NATIONAL LEVEL
• RESEX • PDA • PPD • PPTAL • PGAI2 • RMA • Subprogram
• PROMANEJO • PDPI • CdE • Get legal, • GTA Atlantic Rainforest
• ProVárzea • Prodesque1 • C&T Amazon!3 • PROTEGER
The projects are described in chapter 4.
1 Fire and Deforestation Control Project
2 Program of Integrated Environmental Management
3 Designed to improve the prevention and control of illegal forest fires
and deforestation and thus revert deforestation trends
source: based on http://www.worldbank.org/rfpp/orga/organisation_orga.htm
The activities of the Joint Steering Committee (JSC) are, among others, to make
decisions on the strategy and implementation of the Pilot Program, approve of
new projects, make decisions on the use of the resources of the Rain Forest Trust
Fund, and approve new nominations to the International Advisory Group. The
JSC is composed of three parties: the World Bank, the donors, and the Brazilian
Ministry of the Environment. The last two years, the JSC did not meet, due to the
elections, new government, etcetera (Joris Jurriëns, pers. comm. 2004). In April
2004, the JSC will start negotiations on the second phase of the Pilot Program.


The Brazilian Ministry of the Environment (Ministério do Meio Ambiente, MMA)
coordinates the program, through the Secretaria de Coordenação da Amazônia
(Secretariat for Coordination of the Amazon, SCA). They coordinate the work of
the technical teams for each project and monitor implementation and results.
Institutions like IBAMA (Brazilian Institute for the Environment and Renewable
Natural Resources) design and execute the projects.
Donors like DFID (Department for International Development, United
Kingdom) or KFW (German bilateral government organization providing fund-
ing) are truly supervising their projects, while the European Union does e.g. mis-
sions to projects (monitoring).
The World Bank has a fiduciary function. Their Rain Forest Unit administers the
projects and does due diligence. Their role has changed over the years from leader
and coordinator of the Pilot Program towards support to the Brazilian
Government (Mid-Term Review of the PPG-7, 2000).
The International Advisory Group (IAG) can raise concerns (twice a year). This
group is paid out of the Trust Fund. The IAG has the function of providing strate-
gic input and independent monitoring to the Pilot Program, but in the future this
function might shift, as involved parties show that they are rather uncomfortable
with IAG reports (Roberto Smeraldi, pers. comm. 2004).
Once or twice a year there is a Participants Meeting (with donors, Brazilian
Government, NGOs, and the World Bank). These meetings have the purpose to
assess the progress of the Pilot Program, offer guidance, and also make recom-
mendations. The GSI has attended the meeting in 2001. In 2002, at the II National
Meeting, the GSI stressed the importance of involving neighbouring countries in
the second phase. Roberto Smeraldi agreed at this meeting that this is indeed an
important issue.
The project proposal process is quite complicated and the process is demon-
strated in the following scenario:
The MMA proposes that they want a project on a certain topic. The World Bank
will then write a Project Concept Document, which goes to 1-4 donors and they
have to commit. Then the actual project preparation will start: the World Bank
works with the MMA or IBAMA etcetera. The proposal will be appraised (evalu-
ated) by the World Bank, donors, GTA, and the MMA. After this, it has to be
approved within the World Bank and the Brazilian institutions that are involved.
The final document goes to KFW for example, who will rewrite it in their format,
with the World Bank document as an annex. If this has happened, it goes to the
Ministry of Finance to be signed. The World Bank will monitor the project as a


participant (the World Bank contributes 10% of project budget through the Trust
Fund). Problems can arise when there are more participants. If KFW and DFID
for example have appraised to finance a part, it is possible that DFID starts imple-
menting, while KFW is not yet ready, causing delay. Each donor has a separate
agreement with the MMA (Phil Hazelton, pers. comm. 2003).

PROJECTS OF THE PPG-7

4
The projects of the PPG-7 can be divided into five categories (Pilot program to
conserve the Brazilian Rain Forests – CDROM, WB/MMA/AMA/SPRN):
a. Experimentation and demonstration
b. Conservation
c. Institutional strengthening
d. Scientific research
e. Lessons and dissemination
a. Experimentation and demonstration:
DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS (PD/A)
PPG-7 demonstration projects take place in all (states) of the Brazilian Guiana
Shield.
Examples of PD/A:
1. in the município (i.e. Brazilian district) of São Gabriel da Cachoeira (bordering
Colombia/Venezuela): incentive to the recovery and use of traditional medicine of
Upper Negro River indigenous peoples: forest management system in indigenous
area;
2. in the município of Barcelos (bordering Venezuela): Yanomami Agro-forestry
project: agro-forestry system in indigenous area.
Other areas outside the Guiana Shield where demonstration projects are imple-
mented are in the other Amazonian States of Acre, Rondônia, Mato Grosso,
Tocantins, Maranhão, and along the coastline of Brazil.
The demonstration projects (PD/A) started in 1994 and ended in 2003 and had
the aim to promote, test, and disseminate community-based conservation and
development initiatives applied in the Amazon tropical rainforests and the
Atlantic Forest, so they could be replicated elsewhere. Examples of the thematic
areas are: ecology and environmental quality, policies of participation and social-
environmental conflicts resolution, economic productivity, etcetera. Civil society
was involved in all stages of the project (CDROM, WB/MMA/AMA/SPRN).


188 demonstration projects were implemented. Out of the PD/A another project
was created, the Projetos Demonstrativos dos Povos Indígenas (PDPI), which aims
at indigenous societies and assisting them to safeguard their natural resources.
FOREST RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PROJECT (PROMANEJO)
The (sub)projects of PROMANEJO do not take place in the Guiana Shield region,
but are found in the States of Amazonas and Pará, just south of the Guiana Shield
border, and in the States of Acre, Rondônia, and Mato Grosso.
The Forest Resources Management Project started in 1999 and will end in 2004.
The objective is to support the development and adoption of timber sustainable
production systems in the Amazon forest region through managed timber
exploitation. Examples of activities of PROMANEJO are: the support to partici-
patory management and conservation of Tapajós National Forest (in Pará, south
of the Amazon River), initiatives from community-based groups, NGOs and pri-
vate companies to test new management alternatives, test alternatives for the con-
trol of timber activity and reinforcement of forest policies (CDROM,
WB/MMA/AMA/SPRN).
Website (in Portuguese): http://promanejo.ibama.gov.br
FLOODPLAIN RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PROJECT (ProVárzea)
(Sub)projects of ProVárzea take place in the States of Amazonas and Pará. Two of
them are located in the Guiana Shield region: one in the Silves Region
(Amazonas), which aims to promote floodplain natural resources conservation
by means of eco-tourism and participatory management in this region. The other
(sub)project deals with the strengthening of users organizations linked to flood-
plain natural resource management. This one is located in the Óbidos, Monte
Alegre, and Alenquer municípios. The várzeas stretch out along the Solimões and
Amazon Rivers and cover 5% of the Legal Amazon.
The aim of ProVárzea (which started in 2000 and will end in 2005) is to establish
the technical, scientific and policy foundations for the conservation and the envi-
ronmentally and socially sustainable management of natural resources within the
floodplains of the Central Amazon River Basin, with a special emphasis on fish-
ing resources. Examples of activities are: strategic studies that contribute to the
improvement of policies and regulations for the floodplain; analyzing issues that
affect the conservation and sustainable use of this ecosystem natural resources;
promotion of promising initiatives for sustainable management of the floodplain
natural resources by financing local conservation and development projects car-
ried out by NGOs and grassroot organizations. Among the developed actions
include efforts to encourage involvement of local and fishing communities in


protecting the region upon which their families’ livelihoods depend (CDROM,
WB/MMA/AMA/SPRN).
Website: http://www.ibama.gov.br/provarzea/inicio/home.php
SUSTAINABLE BUSINESS VENTURES PROJECT (SBVP)
This is a cross cutting project4 mainly financed by the Netherlands (76%)
between 2000 and 2001. The projects take place in the whole Amazon Region.
The objectives of the project are: stimulation of the creation of business ventures
and to prepare new entrepreneurs in terms of their business management capa-
bility, design and propose mechanisms and policies to reinforce the feasibility of
sustainable economic activities in the Amazon Region (sectors like handicrafts,
rubber, Brazil nuts, honey, palm heart, fish, etcetera).
The main activities are: advice on all aspects of the entrepreneurship with regard
to sustainable products, increase of technical capabilities, build up of production
networks, and identify subsidies that may assist in the process of drawing up sus-
tainable development policy mechanisms for the region (CDROM, WB/MMA/
AMA/SPRN).
b. Conservation
EXTRACTIVE RESERVES PROJECT (RESEX)
This project started in 1994 and will end in 2005 and takes place in four extrac-
tive reserves. One of them is located in the Guiana Shield region, namely the Rio
Cajari Extractive Reserve (Amapá, near the border of Pará, just above the Amazon
River). The other extractive reserves are: Chico Mendes and Alto Juruá (in Acre)
and Rio Ouro Preto (in Rondônia).
The aim of the project is to develop and test appropriate approaches to the social,
economic, and environmental management of Amazon ecosystems in four
extractive reserves. It is based on the knowledge and traditional practices of the
populations that depend on forest products for their living.
Examples of the activities are: support of the extractive reserves by legalization,
strengthening of community organizations, improve subsistence and commercial
production, etcetera (CDROM, WB/MMA/AMA/SPRN).
4 The other cross-cutting project is the Atlantic Forest Subprogram. As we are discussing the
Amazon Region in this report, this project will not be further elaborated.


In the RESEX project, 2.1 million hectares of extractive reserves were established.
In the possible second phase of the Pilot Program, a RESEX II will consolidate
these extractive reserves, so they can act as model for the Amazonian Region.
INDIGENOUS LAND PROJECT (PPTAL)
Projects take place in all the Amazonian states. PPTAL started in 1996 and will
end in 2005. This project aims to contribute to the improvement of the well-being
of indigenous peoples through regularization of their lands, protection of their
borders and conservation of existing natural resources. Examples of activities are:
strengthening of indigenous peoples’ control over their territories by encouraging
their active participation in land legalization and protection, supporting indige-
nous organizations’ capacity-building, and supporting alternative approaches to
demarcation carried out by indigenous people themselves, with technical assist-
ance from NGOs under supervision of the National Indian Foundation, FUNAI
(CDROM, WB/MMA/AMA/SPRN).
In this project, 59 indigenous territories were demarcated between 1996 and 2002
(in total 30 million hectares). There are 389 indigenous territories in Amazonia
(99 million hectares), of which 157 territories (45 million hectares) are included
in PPTAL.
Many indigenous people cross national boundaries. There are approximately 220
indigenous groups in Brazil (September 2003). The following are transboundary
in Brazil, Colombia, Venezuela, Guyana, Suriname and/or French Guiana:
• the Baniwa live in Amazonas, Colombia, and Venezuela;
• the Bará, Barasana, Desena, Karapanã, Kubeo, Kuripako, Maku, Makuna,
Miranha, Piratapuya, Siriano, Tariana, Tukano, Tuyuka, Wanana live in
Amazonas and Colombia (not necessarily in the Guiana Shield);
• the Baré, Warekena live in Amazonas and Venezuela;
• the Galibi do Oiapoque, Palikur, Wajãpi live in Amapá and French Guiana;
• the Ingarikó live in Roraima, Guyana, and Venezuela;
• the Makuxi, Patomona, Wapixana live in Roraima and Guyana;
• the Taurepang, Yekuana live in Roraima and Venezuela;
• the Tiriyó live in Pará and Suriname;
• the WaiWai live in Amazonas, Roraima, Pará, and Guyana;
• the Wayana live in Amapá, French Guiana, and Suriname;
• the Yanomami live in Roraima, Amazonas, and Venezuela.
(note: spelling of the different tribes varies). Some of the above tribes are related
or speak the same language (http://www.socioambiental.org/website/pib/english/
whwhhow/table.asp). The GSI regards indigenous peoples as ideal ecosystem


managers in the Guiana Shield region. The resguardos in Colombia are a good
example of indigenous sustainable forest management5.
ECOLOGICAL CORRIDORS PROJECT
The Ecological Corridors Project consists of two corridors: one is located in the
Amazon Region and stretches from the east of Manaus to the border of Colombia
(comparable with the size of the United Kingdom), around the Solimões and
Japurá Rivers. Part of this corridor is in the Guiana Shield region. The other
project (with the size of Ireland) is located along the central Brazilian coastline.
This project started in 2002 and will end in 2006, and has the objective to con-
serve biodiversity by establishing ecological corridors in the Amazon Region and
Atlantic Forest. The ecological corridors aggregate many existing protected areas
(varying from state conservation unities to indigenous lands). The activities are
e.g.: incentive to the conversion of private areas into conservation areas, support
to the sound resource management, and formulation of policy recommendations
(CDROM, WB/MMA/AMA/SPRN).
AMAZON FIRE PREVENTION AND MOBILIZATION PROJECT (PROTEGER II)
This project is active in all the Amazonian States, except Amazonas.
The first phase of this project started in 1998, as there were a lot of fires at the time
(especially in the State of Roraima). In 2001 the second phase started (until 2004).
Activities in the first phase were: awareness raising, mobilizing small farmers, and
training them on the prevention of fire. The aim of the second phase of this
project (PROTEGER II) is to minimize the use of fire and promotion of the adop-
tion of sustainable practices in the production system of small farmers. The activ-
ities in this phase were: training of 425 monitors, seminars for training of the
monitors, distribution of 102,000 primers and 81,000 posters, formation of 241
environmental community participatory groups, promotion of 12 annual cara-
vans for interchange visits, including 36 experiences of management and produc-
tion without fire – there will be also seminars on this subject (CDROM,
WB/MMA/ AMA/SPRN).
In this project, 12,000 family-based producers (coming from 322 municipalities)
were trained in techniques for controlled burning and forest fire prevention.
Website (in Portuguese): www.proteger.org.br
5 Hammen, M.C. van der. 2003. The Indigenous Resguardos of Colombia: their contribution to con-
servation and sustainable forest use. GSI/NC-IUCN series 1


c. Institutional strengthening
NATURAL RESOURCES POLICY PROJECT (SPRN)
This project takes place in all Amazonian States. The project, which started in
1996 and ends in 2006, has the following objective: to support sustainable use of
natural resources by defining and implementing the appropriate models of inte-
grated environmental management along the state and municipal governments in
the Amazon Region.
Examples of activities are: ecological/economic zoning, which defines guidelines
for the use of natural resources in specific zones within priority areas; monitor-
ing of key environmental variables in priority areas; enforcing environmental
laws and regulations; strengthening state and local governmental agencies
through staffing, training, improved organization, and equipment purchases;
promoting citizen awareness through educational campaigns (CDROM,
WB/MMA/AMA/SPRN).
One of the accomplishments of the SPRN is the development of innovative
approaches to environmental monitoring, licensing and enforcement (focus on
controlling deforestation and illegal logging). Other accomplishments are the
strengthening of state and municipal government agencies so they can implement
decentralized strategies in environmental management, and the introduction of
new principles of collaboration and participation to the Brazilian administrative
culture – in particular within environmental authorities (Mid-Term Review, 2000).
AMAZON WORKING GROUP INSTITUTIONAL STRENGTHENING PROJECT (GTA)
The Amazon Working Group (Grupo de Trabalho Amazônico, GTA) is an umbrel-
la organization created in 1992. Today it has 19 offices in the States of Roraima,
Amazonas, Pará (not in the Guiana Shield region), Amapá, and the States of Acre,
Rondônia, and Tocantins.
The aim of this project is strengthening of the institutional and operational
capacity of the GTA, so that it can efficiently represent the Amazon civil society
in the Pilot Program. The current project to support the network’s institution
strengthening started in 2002 and will end in 2005. The GTA is a coalition of 500
grassroots Amazonian NGOs (like rubber tappers, fishermen, and Amerindians).
The GTA is participating in several fora on discussions on the Amazon and in the
monitoring of all projects of the Pilot Program.
The activity of the project is capacity building of the GTA on a technical, financial,
communication, political, and institutional level (CDROM, WB/MMA/AMA/
SPRN). The GTA is actively participating in the PPG-7. The building-up of social
capital and participation of NGOs and the Brazilian civil society is considered one
of the key achievements of the Pilot Program (Mid-Term Review, 2000).


Website (in Portuguese): http://www.gta.org.br
Another institutional strenghtening project is the Atlantic Rainforest Network
(RMA), which has also received support under the Demonstration Projects. The
objective of the Rede Mata Atlântica is to promote the conservation of the Atlantic
Rainforest through coordinated political action and NGO mutual support, and
exchange to promote effective public sector conservation programs. The project
started in 2001 and will end in 2004. Website: http://www.rma.org.br/
d. Scientific research
SCIENCE CENTRES AND DIRECTED RESEARCH PROJECT
Scientific research takes place all over the Amazon Region.
This project, started in 1994 and ended in 1999, had two components: directed
research (PD) and science centres (C&T). The PD Project (PPD) had the objec-
tive to give support to research projects in the Amazon Region. The C&T had the
objective of institutional strengthening of the Emílio Goeldi Museum in Belém
and the National Institute for Amazon Research (INPA) in Manaus (Centres of
Excellence). Activities were the institutional strengthening and development,
recovery and improvement of infrastructure and equipment, strengthening of the
human resources basis, and dissemination of scientific information (CDROM,
WB/MMA/AMA/SPRN).
With regard to the PPD, 56 directed research projects were implemented on sus-
tainable development and conservation. With regard to the C&T project, the
infrastructure and management of INPA and the Emílio Goeldi Museum were
strengthened.
e. Lessons and dissemination
MONITORING AND ANALYSIS PROJECT (AMA)
This project started in 1998 and currently has a closing date of December 2004,
with a possibility of extension. It covers every state of the Brazilian Amazon. It has
the objective of contributing to the identification, systematization, and dissemin-
ation of lessons learnt and other strategic knowledge derived from the Pilot
Program. Activities are monitoring and evaluation, studies and analyses, and dis-
semination and interchange (CDROM, WB/MMA/AMA/SPRN). The Mid-Term
Review commented on the fact that in reality there was no dissemination (until
2000), but since 2001, considerable progress has been made in dissemination,
with a number of publications being launched by AMA (Marcello Coelho, pers.
comm. 2004).


GSI Project experience
In the first phase of the Guiana Shield Initiative, mainly studies and workshops
were carried out to show the importance of the region6, and which are a basis for
a GEF proposal the GSI will submit. The GSI has gained lots of experience with
projects via the small grants Tropical Rainforest Programme (TRP) of the NC-
IUCN, which has been operating since 1996. Since 1 January 2004, the small
grants for Wetlands programme of the NC-IUCN has also possibilities to fund
projects in the Guiana Shield region, which means more possibilities for projects
in the region. A difference with the PPG-7 projects is that they are country driven
and the Netherlands Committee for IUCN does not give technical assistance. GSI
projects will, as mentioned before, focus on compensation systems for environ-
mental goods and services and transboundary issues. Although the contributions
are modest compared to the funding of the PPG-7, almost 60 projects7 (or exten-
sion of projects) were funded in the Guiana Shield region. In the table below, one
can find how many (sub)projects were funded via the TRP in the Guiana Shield
region until 2003. They are placed under one of the type of projects the PPG-7 is
carrying out, but some projects are related to several elements (and then only one
was chosen). As the TRP financed a lot of programmes in relation to indigenous
peoples, most projects were placed in the Conservation type.
Type of Experimentation Conservation Institutional Scientific Lessons and Financing
project and strengthening research dissemi- involved
demonstration nation (until
31 Dec. 2003)
Country # of EUR # of EUR # of EUR # of EUR # of EUR
projects proj. proj. proj. proj.
Brazil 4 74,500 € 74,500
Colombia 3 69,500 4 151,000 1 21,500 3 121,500 € 363,500
French 1 47,000 € 47,000
Guiana
Guyana 1 4,000 13 286,000 2 12,000 € 302,000
Suriname 3 90,500 4 162,000 1 61,500 € 314,000
Venezuela 1 66,000 8 180,500 1 17,500 2 46,000 4 90,500 € 400,500
Guiana 2 32,000 1 2,500 € 34,500
Shield
general
TOTAL 8 230,000 36 933,000 4 51,000 6 229,000 5 93,000 € 1,536,000
6 Studies have been done on carbon, commercial NTFPs, resguardos in Colombia, Priorities Setting,
hydrology, sustainable ecotourism, and monitoring (see www.guianashield.org).
7A description of the projects can be found at http://www.nciucn.nl/english/funds /trp/projectlists/
latam_2.rtf and http://www.nciucn.nl/english/funds/trp/project lists/LATIN%20AMERICA.rtf

LESSONS LEARNT

5
LESSONS LEARNT
The Mid-Term Review (2000), carried out by Indufor Oy (Finland) and STCP
(Brazil), gave recommendations for the future of the Pilot Program and reviewed
the accomplishments attained (lessons learnt). It should be mentioned here that
there were comments on the Mid-Term Review from the IAG8. Their main com-
ment was that the Mid-Term Review contained many errors, omissions or mis-
leading biases with regard to the Pilot Program. The biggest failure, according to
the IAG, was that the review did not develop an analysis of the historical develop-
ment of the Pilot Program, as most of the problems mentioned in the Mid-Term
Review have their origin in the structure and framework of the five year long
negotiating phase of the Pilot Program. Because of this omission, it is impossible
for outsiders to understand the reasons for certain arrangements, and strategic
design of several projects. With this in mind, it is still useful to look at some of the
recommendations stated in the Mid-Term Review to learn from the experiences
of the PPG-7. As it is a few years later, some of the issues pointed out in the Mid-
Term Review, might be resolved, such as the lack of dissemination (see AMA
project, chapter 4). Most (updated) accomplishments of the Pilot Program are
integrated in chapter 4.
The World Bank’s administrative costs were until 2000 US$ 14 million (17% of
the total Pilot Program spending). The overall administrative costs were esti-
mated 40% of the spending (however, some of these costs can be seen as institu-
tional strengthening of the partner institutions). The structure of the GSI will cer-
tainly not be simple, as six beneficiary countries will be involved, but the pro-
gramme will not be donor driven, which will reduce complex procedures. It
should be a signal for the GSI to avoid high administrative costs (at least as a per-
centage of the total budget), as it will lead to irritations among the beneficiaries
and could reduce willingness to participate.
The Mid-Term Review states that there was a lack of strategic vision and use of a
programmatic approach. It was recommended that this needs to be developed on
the basis of the Brazilian Government’s vision and strategy for its rainforests. As
mentioned before, the GSI will have a different structure (projects will not be
donor driven), but the GSI will have to deal with six different countries with dif-
ferent visions on their rainforests, which of course cannot be neglected.
8 IAG Comments on the Mid-Term Review Report (January 2001)

LESSONS LEARNT

The coherence and interlinkages between many projects were limited. SPRN,
improved this matter, though. Transboundary projects will be one of the key ele-
ments of the GSI; if the GSI can establish projects on the other side of the border
of Brazil, it would be a good opportunity to create coherence and interlinkages
between projects of the GSI and the PPG-7.
As mentioned before, the Pilot Program was mainly donor driven, as there was
not enough trust in the capability of the Brazilian institutions to efficiently
manage the Pilot Program. It was suggested by the Mid-Term Review to transfer
the management of the Pilot Program in Brazilian hands. Ownership is a very
important issue for the GSI, and transferring it to the region has to be done as
soon as possible. By creating ownership, one creates commitment.
With regard to projects involving indigenous people, the Mid-Term Review men-
tions that the conservation of tropical forests and sustainable development of the
indigenous communities in their traditional lands are mutually compatible objec-
tives. The procedures of the projects were not always compatible with the needs
and capacities of the indigenous organizations involved. The Mid-Term Review
suggests that socio-economic and cultural needs of indigenous people should be
addressed, and they should have full participation. The GSI fully supports these
suggestions. When contracting indigenous communities for ecosystem manage-
ment, the GSI is planning to involve indigenous lawyers to set up these contracts.
The resguardos system in Colombia is an example of indigenous management of
areas. The GSI has published a report about this issue.9
One of the remarks was that there was not enough feedback between research and
other components of the Pilot Program, and that the PD should further identify
knowledge gaps and validate demonstration alternatives. The Priority Setting
Workshop of the GSI – organised in April 2002 in Paramaribo, together with
Conservation International which provided the methodological leadership, and
UNDP – brought together 200 (scientific) participants who reached consensus
about the conservation priorities for the Guiana Shield. This is a good base for
further study and the GSI should stimulate this network of scientists to con-
tribute their knowledge to the region, so all actors can react sufficiently.
Another comment in the Mid-Term Review was that there was only limited
involvement of the private sector. In order to attract the private sector, ecological-
economic zoning can create confidence among the private sector investors for
sustainable development. This activity takes place in the SPRN project. When
developing a solid commercial non-timber forest products sector, for example,
9 Hammen, M.C. van der. 2003. The Indigenous Resguardos of Colombia: their contribution to
conservation and sustainable forest use. GSI/NC-IUCN series 1.

LESSONS LEARNT

one will probably have to engage with the private sector on various levels, as many
commercial non-timber forest products are hard to sell without a good package
and/or distribution channel (importers from abroad, manufacturers, etcetera).
The GSI study on non-timber forest products recognises the marketing problems
for the producers of these products. Future work on NTFPs by the GSI should
first focus on well established products and the regional markets, rather than
international markets.
Other relevant suggestions from the Mid-Term Review were:
• communication as a tool for coherence;
• integration and promotion of awareness raising on sustainability and environ-
mental conservation;
• setting up a program-level monitoring and evaluation system to provide feed-
back to project managers and disseminate critical lessons for other initiatives
involving tropical forests;
• decentralization of environmental administration for greater effectiveness;
• necessity of policy enforcement (as not more than 1% of the environmental
offences have resulted in effective punishment and repair of environmental
damage – until 2000).
With regard to the last comment: the Brazilian Minister of the Environment,
Marina Silva, promised on 15 March 2004, a satellite monitoring system, investi-
gations, and new laws. The Brazilian Government will push for a law that forbids
to occupy and deforest public lands (Nery, 2004).

SECOND PHASE OF THE PPG-7

6
AND POSSIBILITIES FOR THE GSI
As mentioned earlier, the second phase of the PPG-7 is of great importance for
the GSI, as it can entail more collaboration with the Pilot Program. The
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the GSI and the PPG-7 is at the
moment limited to information sharing in relation to several transboundary
issues (such as rivers, indigenous territories, (possible future) parks, infrastruc-
ture development, and gold mining), including the possible development of
transboundary ecological corridors. At the moment, five municípios within the
ecological corridors project, border another Guiana Shield country (Barcelos in
Amazonas – Venezuela, Japurá in Amazonas – Colombia, Santa Isabel do Rio
Negro in Amazonas – Venezuela, São Gabriel da Cachoeira in Amazonas –
Colombia/ Venezuela, and Caroebe in Roraima – Guyana), but the ecological cor-
ridor bordering Colombia may have to deal with the political instability in that
country, which may influence the options for a transboundary project. Sharing
information regarding a monitoring system or methodology is also mentioned in
the MOU. The GSI has done a study about the monitoring possibilities of the
Guiana Shield. In this study, the regional potential of the Brazilian SIVAM, now
focused on the Brazilian Legal Amazon, is highlighted. In addition the MOU
mentions the (joint) organisation of workshops on issues such as cooperation
between managers of transboundary protected areas or indigenous territories,
setting up regional markets for tourism, certified tourist products, etcetera. The
World Bank PPG-7 unit has much to offer for regional initiatives as to sharing
information on policies and best practices and as to technical assistance. The
World Bank PPG-7 unit can also, if the Brazilian Government agrees, support
transboundary activities via the Trust Fund. Additional small contributions may
be provided for networking, cross visits, and training, at the technical and scien-
tific levels (Gregor Wolf, pers. comm. 2004).
A first step would be to look at PPG-7 projects in the fifteen Brazilian municípios
that border the other Guiana Shield countries (see ANNEX 2). These projects
concern the following programme elements: PD/A, Ecological Corridors, PRO-
TEGER II, ProVárzea, SPRN, and PPTAL. Similar projects (with a GSI focus)
could be executed on the other side of the border, if there is a transboundary
aspect (an indigenous area, for example). Other projects could be duplicated, of
course, with information sharing (best practices) or training, technical assistance,
etcetera.


The problem at this moment is that negotiations for the second phase have not
yet started and that there is no idea how long they will last once started.
Preparatory talks about the second phase have been going on for a couple of years
now, but with limited content and perspectives. Until now there is no plan to
negotiate a programme with neighbouring countries (Roberto Smeraldi, pers.
comm. 2004).
The delay of the second phase of the Pilot Program is a consequence of two major
Brazilian Government initiatives:
1) The GT do Desmatamento (Grupo Permanente de Trabalho Interministerial do
Desmatamento, Permanent Interministrial Working Group on Deforestation),
lead by the Casa Civil da Presidência (Civil House, which provides services of
consulting, analysis, information, and technical support for the President) to
respond to the on-going deforestation with a comprehensive set of
Government actions developed with fourteen Ministries (such as the
Ministries of the Environment, Science and Technology, Defense, Agriculture,
Development, Justice, Mines and Energy, Planning, and Transport). These
actions range from better enforcement of existing regulations and policies to
supporting sustainable alternatives. This plan was announced on 15 March
2004.
2) Another reason for the delay of the second phase is the Plano Amazônia
Sustentável – PAS, which is a commitment of President Lula and seven
Governors of the Legal Amazon (excluding the States of Mato Grosso and
Maranhão) to sponsor a comprehensive sustainable development plan for the
North Region of Brazil. The Secretaria de Coordenação da Amazônia and the
Ministério de Integração Nacional prepared the technical proposal which is
reaching the level of an internal debate with other Ministries (Alberto
Lourenço, pers. comm. 2004).
The GT do Desmatamento and PAS are major new policies, meaning a radical shift
in terms of how the Amazon is seen by the Government (Alberto Lourenço, pers.
comm. 2004). The Action Report of the GT do Desmatamento has been greatly
influenced by the PPG-7. It is a prime example of “mainstreaming” and of how
the Pilot Program has been influencing public policy (Gregor Wolf, pers. comm.
2004). Comments in an editorial by Roberto Smeraldi on the GT do
Desmatamento state that “the principal problem with the GT is that it is born
before the Sustainable Amazonia Plan (PAS), which should be its older brother.
Announced since May 2003, PAS should become the directing instrument for a
policy of regional development” (www.amazonia.org.br). The second phase of
the PPG-7 will start after the Joint Steering Committee meeting in April 2004.


With regard to a programme with neighbouring countries, the signs at the
Participants Meeting in 2001 were encouraging, as the donors agreed to further
examine the potential for application of the example of international cooperation
to other countries and regions. For the GSI, this was of course a good sign for
future cooperation. The Participants therefore suggested systematic exchange of
experiences and lessons learnt be envisaged among the eight Amazon countries
(i.e. the countries that signed the Amazon Cooperation Treaty, which includes the
Guiana Shield countries, except French Guiana). It was decided then, that one of
the characteristics of the second phase would be the strengthening of the program
approach and the integration with other projects and programs in the Amazonian
Rainforest (Resolution of the Participants Meeting, Cuiabá, 1 June 2001). This is
of course a matter of interpretation (it does not mention which rainforest –
national or international –, but as the GSI is operating in the whole Guiana Shield
(including the part shared with the Brazilian Legal Amazon), the GSI would cer-
tainly be one of the programmes that could qualify for integration.
At the World Summit of Sustainable Development in Johannesburg, 2003,
Commissioner Paul Nielson of the European Union stated as an EU-condition to
support a second phase, the PPG-7 should be extending to neighbouring coun-
tries. While acknowledging its desirability, the PPG-7 experts consulted for this
paper emphasise the multitude and complexity of issues still to be addressed
within Brazil, before extension to neighbouring countries can become a priority
issue in the second phase of the Pilot Program. The second phase will be probably
a mainstreaming phase (integration of the environment into all levels of the insti-
tutions: cross-sector approaches, such as urban waste management). Germany
will admit new pilot projects in strategic areas, but also wants to be part of a
mainstream plan, such as PAS. The Brazilian Government is of the same opinion:
although admitting some new pilots, the second phase is of ambitious main-
streaming efforts. (Alberto Lourenço, pers. comm. 2004). Another reason for
abandoning the pilot phase is that the donors feel that multi-donor projects have
high transaction costs in terms of bureaucracy (Mauro Ruffino, pers. comm.
2004). This was also mentioned in the Mid-Term Review.
It remains unclear how much budget will be available for the second phase of the
Pilot Program. Several PPG-7 experts (Roberto Smeraldi, Alberto Lourenço,
Mauro Ruffino, Joris Jurriëns, and Gregor Wolf) have stated that the United
Kingdom and the Netherlands have ended their aid cooperation with Brazil. The
Independent of 12 November 2003 reported that “Britain was to slash its aid pro-
gramme aimed at saving the Amazon Rainforest and preserving the culture of its
people to meet the soaring cost of rebuilding Iraq”. In the case of the ProVárzea
Project, this means that the development of models of co-management and
implementation of public policy will be affected and more funds will be needed
(Mauro Ruffino, pers. comm. 2004). Only Germany has shown strong commit-
ment, by not only remaining in the PPG-7, but also by raising their budget


(Alberto Lourenço, pers. comm. 2004). The Netherlands can still fund small-scale
strategic activities (Joris Jurriëns, pers. comm. 2004). With regard to the funding
of individual pilots in the second phase, the funding will be less external, but
more from Brazil, the Inter-American Development Bank, and the World Bank.
In this respect, the Pilot Program is evolving, as Brazil is developing a strategy for
the region (Gregor Wolf, pers. comm. 2004).
Although there are still many obstacles to be overcome to extend the PPG-7 to the
neighbouring countries, the GSI is much in favour of this option, as the
Amazonian Forest extends beyond political borders. The PPG-7 and the GSI
could have complementary projects, with a GSI-focus on transboundary projects
in the true spirit of an eco-regional concept. When collaborating, synergy effects
can emerge. If the PPG-7 extends to neighbouring countries, these countries can
benefit from the well-developed methodology of the PPG-7 and its experiences.
Definitely at the short-term, there is another option for the GSI to work together
on transboundary issues – linking GSI-projects to PPG-7 projects, or working
together in the Brazilian Guiana Shield region, or by sharing information or pro-
moting duplication of successful projects. While the PPG-7 is willing to connect
with similar initiatives in neighbouring countries, it may not be able to design
PPG7-financed projects reaching across national borders. Nevertheless, the PPG-7
acknowledges that there are many initiatives in neighbouring countries, which
have highest relevance for its own mission objectives and which could serve as
useful examples for the PPG-7 (Gregor Wolf, pers. comm. 2004).
The GSI looks forward to further cooperation with the PPG-7 in the ways men-
tioned above.

REFERENCES

REFERENCES
International Advisory Group. 2001, IAG Comments on the Mid-Term Review Report.
Downloadable from http://www.worldbank.org/rfpp/iag/IAG_on_MTR.htm
Indufor Oy and STCP. 2000, Mid-Term Review of the Pilot Program to Conserve
the Brazilian Rain Forests. Downloadable from http://www.worldbank.org/rfpp/docs/
mtrexsum.htm (summary)
NC-IUCN/MMA. 2003, Memorandum of Understanding between the Guiana Shield
Initiative/Netherlands Committee for IUCN and the PPG-7/Ministério do Meio
Ambiente, unpublished document dated 21 August 2003
Nery, N. 2004, Brazil Struggles to Slow Amazon Destruction, Reuters,
dated 15 March 2004
Resolution of the Participants Meeting Cuiabá. 2001, Pilot Program to Conserve the
Brazilian Rain Forests, dated 1 June 2001
Smeraldi, R. 2004, Realistic in its diagnostic, efficient in its implementation?
www.amazonia.org.br, dated 15 March 2004
Woolf, M. 2003, UK cuts rainforest funding to meet Iraq costs, The Independent,
dated 12 November 2003
World Bank. 2002, Pilot program to conserve the Brazilian Rain Forests, an innovative
experience in international cooperation for sustainable development. World Bank,
PPG-7, Secretary for Coordination of Amazonia, Ministry of the Environment.
Worldbank. 2004, Printout of Active and Closed Funds in the Rain Forest Trust Fund.
E-mail from Marcello Coelho (World Bank) to Dave Zwaan on 12 March 2004.
World Bank/Ministério do Meio Ambiente/AMA/SPRN (CDROM, WB/MMA/AMA/
SPRN). Pilot program to conserve the Brazilian Rain Forests. CDROM published by
World Bank, Brasilia, Brazil.
http://www.amazonia.org.br
http://www.g7.utoronto.ca/
http://www.mma.gov.br/port/sca/ppg7/index.html
http://www.nciucn.nl/english/funds /trp/projectlists/latam_2.rtf
http://www.nciucn.nl/english/funds/trp/project lists/LATIN%20AMERICA.rtf
http://www.proteger.org.br
http://www.socioambiental.org/website/pib/english/whwhhow/table.asp
http://www.worldbank.org/rfpp/

ANNEX 1

Funding of the first phase of the PPG-7
Source for Rain Forest For Projects Total
Trust Fund US$ x million
US$ x million (rounded)
Contracted Committed
US$ x million US$ x million
Germany 19.35 87.60 64.31 171.27
European Union 14.05 43.52 6.77 64.34
United Kingdom 2.32 20.27 0.73 23.32
United States 6.25 3.95 9.15 19.35
Netherlands 4.88 0.48 4.26 9.63
Japan 6.80 0.45 7.25
Italy 3.85 3.85
France 1.41 1.41
Canada 0.74 0.74
Brazil - Government 28.75 10.86 39.61
Brazil - Communities 5.00 5.00
Total 58.25 191.44 96.08 345.77
• Germany mainly participates in PD/A, PDPI, Promanejo, Provárzea, SPRN, AMA, and
Ecological Corridors, and associated bilateral programs are financed.
• The European Union mainly provided funding for Resex, C&T, PD/A, SPRN, and
Ecological Corridors.
• United Kingdom has funded projects like C&T, Promanejo, Provárzea, SPRN, and
PDPI.
• The United States funded projects like C&T and PROTEGER.
• The Netherlands has funded mainly SBVP and Strengthening of the Program
Coordination.
• Japan has funded PDPI.
• Italy contributed mainly to the Rain Forest Trust Fund.
• Canada contributed mainly to the Rain Forest Trust Fund.
• France contributed in PD/A.
• Spain participates via scientific cooperation in two bilateral associated projects.
Other multilateral actors are: United Nations Development Programme, Inter-American
Development Bank, and Global Environment Facility.
The Natural Resource Policy Project (SPRN) has received the biggest part of the budget
of the total Pilot Program financing (23%), followed by PD/A (15%).
Source: www.worldbank.org/rfpp/fundtabl.htm

ANNEX 2

Location of projects in the Brazilian Guiana Shield
(derived from CDROM, WB/MMA/AMA/SPRN)
In every Brazilian Guiana Shield município: SBVP, PPD, and AMA projects are carried out.
In brackets: neighbouring state (AP, AM, PA, RR) or neighbouring Guiana Shield country
(COL,VEN, GUY, SUR, FRG). Projects with the potential for transboundary development
are in bold.
Amapá
Laranjal do Jari (PA):
PD/A, RESEX, SPRN
Macapá: PD/A, Proteger II,
SPRN, GTA
Mazagão: Proteger II,
RESEX, SPRN
Porto Grande: PD/A,
Proteger II
Vitória do Jari (PA–
SUR/FRG): RESEX, SPRN
Amazonas
Barcelos (RR–VEN):
PD/A, Ecological
Corridors
Caapiranga: Ecological
Corridors
Coari: Ecological Corridors
Codajás: Ecological
Corridors
Faro: Ecological Corridors
Iranduba: Ecological
Corridors
Itacoatiara: Ecological
Corridors, SPRN
Itapiranga: Ecological
Corridors
Japurá (COL): Ecological
Corridors
Manacapuru: Ecological
Corridors
Manaus: C&T, GTA,
Ecological Corridors,
SPRN
Maraã: ProVárzea,
Ecological Corridors
Nhamundá: Ecological
Corridors
Novo Airão (RR): PD/A,
Ecological Corridors,
SPRN
Presidente Figueiredo
(RR): PD/A, SPRN,
Rio Preto da Eva: PD/A,
São Gabriel da
Cachoeira (AM -
COL/VEN): PD/A,
São Sebastião do
Uatumã: Ecological
Corridors
Santa Isabel do Rio
Negro (AM – VEN):
Silves: PD/A, ProVárzea
Urucará: Ecological
Corridors
Pará
Alenquer: Proteger II,
ProVárzea
Almeirim (AP–SUR):
Proteger II
Monte Alegre: ProVárzea,
Proteger II
Óbidos (SUR): PD/A,
ProVárzea
Oriximiná
(RR–GUY/SUR): PD/A,
Proteger II
Prainha: Proteger II
Terra Santa: Proteger II
Roraima
Amajari (VEN):
Proteger II
Alto Alegre (AM):
Proteger II, SPRN,
PPTAL
Boa Vista: GTA, PPTAL,
Proteger II, SPRN
Bonfim (GUY): PPTAL,
Proteger II, SPRN
Cantá: Proteger II, SPRN,
PPTAL
Caracaraí (AM–GUY):
Proteger II, SPRN,
PPTAL
Caroebe (GUY):
Proteger II, SPRN,
PPTAL, Ecological
Corridors
Iracema (AM): SPRN,
Proteger II
Mucajaí: Proteger II,
SPRN, PD/A
Normandia (GUY):
Proteger II, SPRN
Pacaraima (VEN):
Proteger II, SPRN
Rorainópolis (AM):
Proteger II, SPRN
São João da Baliza (AM):
Proteger II, PD/A,
PPTAL, Ecological
Corridors
São Luiz: Proteger II,
PD/A, PPTAL
Uiramutã (GUY/VEN):
Proteger II

Pilot Program to conserve the Brazilian Rain Forests

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (16)

Similar to Pilot Program to conserve the Brazilian Rain Forests

Similar to Pilot Program to conserve the Brazilian Rain Forests (20)

Pilot Program to conserve the Brazilian Rain Forests