478 International Forestry Review Vol.19(4), 2017

The hidden layer of indigenous tenure: informal forest and its implications for forest use and conser- vation in Panama’s largest collective territory

D.A. SMITHa, M.B. HOLLANDb, A. MICHONa, A. IBÁÑEZc and F. HERRERAd aDepartment of Geography and Environmental Studies, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada bDepartment of Geography and Environmental Systems, University of Maryland, Baltimore County, Baltimore, Maryland, USA cSmithsonian Tropical Research Institute, Avenida Luis Clement, Balboa Ancon, Panama City, Panama dFacultad de Humanidades, Universidad de Panamá, Avenida Octavio Méndez Pereira, Panama City, Panama

Email: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] and [email protected]

SUMMARY

A growing body of evidence points to the effectiveness of indigenous territories in reducing tropical deforestation, and global development goals call for increased legal recognition of indigenous . Yet indigenous land tenure systems are typically complex and multi-layered, and as such remain poorly understood in terms of the pathways through which embedded layers, rules, and norms influence the use and maintenance of forests. This paper illustrates one example of this multi-layered tenure in the case of indigenous communities in the Comarca Ngäbe-Buglé, a semi-autonomous, shared territory in western Panama. While the comarca holds one formal collective , research across five communities reveals an informal system of forest ownership that influences how forest resources are managed, and that has implications for longer-term forest conservation efforts. The findings show that indigenous households use and manage a wide range of plant species, but that access to for- est resources is uneven, and pressure on existing forests continues to increase, even from within the comarca through population growth. Mature forest surrounding the communities is held in de facto ownership by individuals and families who restrict access to resources, and this informal tenure system appears to be slowing deforestation, at least over the short-term. Many of these forest stewards wish to protect at least part of the forest over the long-term, while several forest parcels are being kept in reserve for the next generation of farmers. This hidden form of forest tenure, embedded within the communally-held lands of the comarca, highlights an important research need for those looking to improve the effectiveness of forest conservation programs in reducing deforestation and improving indigenous livelihoods.

Keywords: land tenure, tropical forests, , forest conservation, Panama, Ngäbe

La couche cachée du régime foncier indigène: possession forestière informelle et ses implica- tions pour l’utilisation et la conservation de la forêt dans le territoire collectif le plus étendu du Panama

D.A. SMITH, M.B. HOLLAND, A. MICHON, A. IBÁÑEZ et F. HERRERA

Des preuves croissantes soulignent l’efficacité des territoires indigènes à réduire la déforestation tropical e, et des buts globaux de développe- ment mettent l’accent sur le besoin d’une reconnaissance légale du régime foncier indigène. Cependant, les systèmes de régime foncier indigènes sont pour la plupart complexes et en plusieurs strates, demeurant par conséquent peu compris en tant que sentiers par lesquels des couches ancrées, des règles et des normes influencent l’utilisation et la gestion de la forêt. Ce papier offre en illustration un exemple de cette possession à plusieurs strates: le cas des communautés indigènes dans le Comarca Ngäbe-Buglé, un territoire partagé semi-autonome dans le Panama de l’ouest. Alors que le comarca détient un titre collectif formel, une recherche auprès de cinq communautés révèle un système informel de régime foncier indigène, qui influence la manière dont les ressources forestières sont gérées, ayant également des implications pour les efforts de conservation à plus long terme. Les résultats indiquent que les foyers indigènes utilisent et gèrent un large éventail d’espèces botaniques, mais que l’accès aux ressources forestières est inégal, alors que la pression sur les forêts existantes continue de s’accroître, au sein même du Comarca, du fait de la croissance démographique. La forêt mature encerclant ces communautés est tenue en possession de fait par individus et familles, lesquels restreignent l’accès à ses ressources. Ce système informel de possession semble ralentir la déforestation, du moins à court terme. Nombre de ces responsables de la forêt désirent protéger à long terme au moins une partie de la forêt, alors que plusieurs parcelles forestières sont gardées en réserve pour la génération à venir de fermiers. Cette forme cachée de possession forestière, ancrée dans les terres gérées en communauté dans les hauteurs de comarca met en lumière un important besoin de recherche pour tout désireux d’améliorer l’efficacité des programmes de conservation forestière dans la réduction de la déforestation et l’amélioration des revenus indigènes locaux. The hidden layer of indigenous land tenure 479

La cara oculta de la tenencia de la tierra indígena: la propiedad informal de los bosques y sus implicaciones para el uso y conservación del bosque en el territorio colectivo más grande de Panamá

D.A. SMITH, M.B. HOLLAND, A. MICHON, A. IBÁÑEZ y F. HERRERA

Cada vez hay más pruebas que apuntan a la efectividad de los territorios indígenas en reducir la deforestación tropical, y por eso los objetivos de desarrollo globales hacen un llamado a un mayor reconocimiento legal de la tenencia de la tierra indígena. Sin embargo, los sistemas indígenas de tenencia de la tierra son típicamente complejos y muestran múltiples facetas, y por ello siguen siendo poco conocidos en términos de las vías a través de las cuales estas facetas, reglas y normas arraigadas influyen en el uso y mantenimiento de los bosques. Este documento ilustra un ejemplo de esta tenencia de múltiples facetas en las comunidades indígenas en la Comarca Ngäbe-Buglé, un territorio semiautónomo compartido del oeste de Panamá. Si bien la comarca posee un título colectivo formal, la investigación en cinco comunidades revela un sistema informal de propiedad de los bosques que influye en la forma de manejo de los recursos forestales, y que tiene implicaciones para los esfuerzos de conservación forestal a más largo plazo. Los resultados muestran que los hogares indígenas usan y manejan una amplia gama de especies de plantas, pero que el acceso a los recursos forestales es desigual y que la presión sobre los bosques existentes continúa aumentando, incluso internamente en la comarca debido al crecimiento de la población. Los bosques maduros que rodean a las comunidades son propiedad de facto de un número de individuos y familias que restringen el acceso a los recursos, y este sistema informal de tenencia parece estar frenando la deforestación, al menos a corto plazo. Muchos de estos administradores del bosque desean proteger al menos una parte del bosque a largo plazo, mientras que guardan varias parcelas forestales en reserva para la próxima generación de agricultores. Esta forma oculta de tenencia forestal, arraigada en las tierras comunales de la Comarca, destaca una necesidad importante de investigación para aquellos que buscan mejorar la efectividad de los programas de conservación forestal para reducir la deforestación y mejorar los medios de vida indígenas.

INTRODUCTION recognize local resource rights (Blackman et al. 2014, FAO 2011, Offen 2003, van Dam 2011). Across the Mesoamerican Despite decades of conservation efforts, there continues to isthmus, where the conservation challenge is not only to slow be tremendous concern about the loss and degradation of forest loss but to improve habitat connectivity and reduce tropical forests globally, given their importance for both bio- forest fragmentation, indigenous community forests represent diversity and their role in the carbon cycle and climate change critical complements to existing protected area systems mitigation (Luyssaert et al. 2008, van Dam 2011). There is (Vergara-Asenjo and Potvin 2014). also strong evidence and policy conviction that formal Conservation strategies that work for both people and recognition of land tenure through titling is a critical step forests on indigenous lands require a more nuanced under- toward improving livelihood conditions and achieving tenure standing of existing forest resource use, access, and manage- security. This is reflected in such global initiatives as the ment, which are often shaped within layered systems of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), specifically con- tenure. Numerous scholars have pointed out the importance nected to Goal 15, and in calls from the global land commu- of land titling and legal (de jure) recognition of nity for recognition of community land and resource rights rights as a factor that influences landholder decisions about as a means for achieving sustainable development (United forest use and conservation, yet there is mixed evidence as to Nations 2015b). Given their shared interests and evidence how secure tenure affects the viability and success of different that indigenous peoples are in general relatively good stew- conservation strategies (Robinson et al. 2017). In general, it ards of their forested lands (Vergara-Asenjo and Potvin 2014), is thought that securing tenure through formalization provides conservationists and others promote the recognition of indig- an important incentive to protect forests (Larson et al. 2010b) enous and traditional communities’ territorial rights as a way or promote reforestation (Otsuka & Place 2015). There is to stop land invasions and slow deforestation (Alcorn 1993, evidence in Latin America that formalization of community Davis and Wali 1994, Redford and Padoch 1992, Stevens landholdings has strengthened exclusionary rights, in other 1997, Stocks 2003). words enforcing the ability of traditional and indigenous In the last two decades or so, numerous indigenous groups communities to keep external actors from accessing the have gained formal territorial recognition (Herlihy 1997, forests on their territory (Hayes and Murtino 2008). Peres 1994, Roldán Ortega 2004, Schwartzman and The evolving literature on land tenure, however, high- Zimmerman 2005), as part of what some have called “the lights that tenure security does not depend on tenure form single largest transfer of forest to local people” (Larson et al. (Robinson et al. 2014); nor does formal or legal recognition 2010a: 83). In the tropics, those communally-held lands that alone guarantee tenure security (Robinson et al. 2017). In the are now under formal title are estimated to account for one- case of indigenous lands, often the effort to establish formal quarter of total above-ground carbon storage (Pearce 2016). recognition results in a single community land title that Today, close to one-quarter of all forests in Latin America sets the boundaries for how that community’s lands are are found within indigenous-controlled lands, and more viewed by external actors, including the state. Yet this singu- are located within the territories of distinct Afroamerican lar title might represent only the top, or umbrella layer of peoples, community associations, and biosphere reserves that tenure within a multi-layered or nested system across the 480 D.A. Smith et al. territory. In their research on the ejido system in Mexico, slowing deforestation (Hope 2017). Importantly, field-based Alcorn and Toledo (1998) referred to this as a “tenurial shell”, research can play a critical gap-filling role by exploring the and several researchers have pointed to the importance contextual factors that may further be at play beneath this of identifying the underlying or nested informal (de facto) “tenurial shell” (Holland et al. 2017, Blackman et al. 2017, tenure to better characterize the ways in which norms and Robinson et al. 2017b). rules influence forest dynamics (Ankersen and Barnes 2004). Moreover, many of the studies that have added to the This paper examines the interplay between indigenous growing evidence base examine the relationships between forest tenure, forest use, and conservation in western Panama. forest tenure and deforestation primarily relying on quantita- The research, based on fieldwork conducted across five tive methods, remotely-sensed imagery and secondary data, neighbouring Ngäbe communities within a formally- looking for correlations between variables for which data are recognized indigenous territory, aims to provide a better more easily available (e.g., Bonilla-Moheno et al. 2013, understanding of the role of the forest in local livelihoods and Fearnside 1993, Paneque-Gálvez et al. 2013, Pelletier et al. the role of customary forest tenure on natural resource use 2012). While an important contribution, this approach only and the maintenance of forest cover. The research reveals provides a partial view of the processes involved in the a layered system of tenure that includes de facto individual conversion of forests to other uses. As this research shows, the forest ownership and use, which exists within the legally- recognized communal territory. While informal private hold- locally-upheld tenure system most directly influencing forest ing of forest plots appears to have positively influenced forest conditions within community lands is not always consistent conservation and slowed deforestation in the short-term, or fully captured by the legal categories for tenure forms the ability to predict longer-term forest outcomes is limited, typically used in analyses at larger geographic scales using as this informal tenure system remains invisible to broader- remotely-sensed imagery and secondary sources of data. scale forest institutions and conservation groups. More Field research is crucial for understanding indigenous forest broadly, the research illustrates the role that informal owner- use and management practices that occur under the forest ship of forest plots1 may be playing within communally-titled canopy and under the umbrella of community land title – as territories specifically tied to mediating the conversion of these more directly capture the value of forest for local people mature forests. – as well as the factors that shape decisions about whether to maintain or clear forests. Such research is also critical for improving the design and implementation of forest conserva- INDIGENOUS LAND TENURE AND TROPICAL tion initiatives, including payments for ecosystem services FORESTS (PES) programs, which have enjoyed significant expansion at the national and sub-national scale throughout Mesoamerica It has been recognized for many years that land tenure is a during the past decade. More recently, the global initiative key variable that affects the maintenance of forests, but the known as Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and influences of communal ownership “are highly context Degradation (REDD+), formally approved as part of the specific, depending on local and national, ecological, social UNFCCC Paris Climate Agreement, has placed increased and economic context” (Larson et al. 2010a: 79, Ostrom and value on clarification and strengthening of land tenure in Nagendra 2006, Pacheco et al. 2012). Secure tenure provides tropical forests of high priority for carbon sequestration and an incentive to protect forests and the natural resources they storage (Blackman et al. 2014). Clear and uncontested land provide, and in cases where forests are owned or controlled rights have been cited as critically important for participation collectively, customary practices can effectively regulate in both PES schemes and REDD+ (Gregersen et al. 2010, the use of the forest (Burger 2001, Ostrom 1990, Robinson et al. 2014, Wunder 2005, 2013). In Panama, the Pagdee et al. 2006). This, however, is not always the case. There are examples of communities that have failed to man- most recent estimates are that more than half of mature forest age their communal forests effectively, resulting in degrada- cover is held within indigenous territories, including the tion and deforestation, even when the right local governance comarcas – semi-autonomous territories recognized by the conditions seem to be in place (Blackman et al. 2014, Gibson state and legally protected from the invasion of colonists, and and Becker 2000, see also Bowler et al. 2012, Robinson et al. lands referred to as “claimed lands,” which are in the process 2014). Some have argued that that there are certain inherent of petition by indigenous groups for formal state recognition characteristics associated with ‘indigeneity’ that influence (Vergara-Asenjo and Potvin 2014, Herlihy 1989). The same improved ecological conditions in areas under indigenous research by Vergara-Asenjo and Potvin found that formalized community control (Barrera-Bassols 2006, Colchester 2000). indigenous territories (comarcas) in Panama were as effective Yet others caution against oversimplification of the relation- as formal protected areas at reducing deforestation, highlight- ship between indigenous groups and conservation, suggesting ing the opportunity for these forest lands to become a key that the current momentum behind formalization of indige- component of Panama’s national REDD+ strategy moving nous land tenure does not imply specific outcomes for forward (Vergara-Asenjo and Potvin 2014).

1 The terms plot and parcel are used here, but in the region, these areas are often referred to as “reservas.” We are not aware of an equivalent Ngäbere term. The hidden layer of indigenous land tenure 481

FIGURE 1 Map of the Comarca Ngäbe-Buglé, showing the approximate distribution of mature forest cover (2010), protected areas, and the study region with the location of the five study communities

SITUATING THE RESEARCH Ngäbere name), is not connected to the national electricity grid, has no internet connection, and lacks other basic needs This research took place in the Comarca Ngäbe-Buglé, the of an administrative centre. largest of the formally-recognized comarcas (6,814 km2), Progress in terms of increasing capacity for self-governance legally established in 1997 for Ngäbe and Buglé communities is also severely limited by persistent socioeconomic after a long struggle to have their territorial rights recognized challenges associated with high rates of poverty, including (Figure 1). The land ultimately included within the comarca challenges associated with multiple measures of human well- boundaries did not include all of the territory originally being: high rates of infant mortality, illiteracy, and isolation claimed by the Ngäbe and Buglé people, and much of the land from economic opportunities that have over time increased within the comarca has soils and steeply sloping areas that the gap between these indigenous populations and the non- are not suitable to sustained agricultural production (Young indigenous population in Panama (Michon 2010). The popu- 1971, Wickstrom 2003, Michon 2010). The system of indig- lation living within the comarca has more than doubled in enous governance within the territory predates the establish- the past twenty years, to a most recent estimate of 178,000 ment of the comarca, consisting of public gatherings called inhabitants (INEC 2011). Unfortunately, aside from the congresos that occur at district, regional, and “national” ethnographic studies of Philip Young and Burton Gordon in levels. This comarca was declared at the provincial level as a the 1960s and 1970s, very little social science research has semi-autonomous territory, and yet the past twenty years have been done within the comarca, so there is a significant lack yielded little in terms of strengthened capacity and empower- of understanding of indigenous , natural resource ment for self-governance. To highlight a telling example, the management, economic change, and cultural dynamics in ostensible capital of the comarca, Llano Turgí (or Büabitdi, its the region. 482 D.A. Smith et al.

Thus little research has explored the internal comarca For this present study, the first phase of fieldwork began governance and, as the results presented here suggest, forest in the community of Tugwrabitdi (known outside of the and land management decisions are seemingly shaped, region as Ratón), and included ethnographic research focused enforced, and upheld at the local community level. Pressure on the use of wild forest plants (Michon 2010). Workshops from outside the comarca, especially in the form of mining, were held with men and women to identify useful forest has generated situations in the recent decades whereby plants, and guided trips were organized to observe traditional the comarca authorities have needed to organize to resist management practices that occur in the forest. A second intrusions (Wickstrom 2003, Michon 2010). phase of the research began in 2011, when the study area was Legally, within the Comarca Ngäbe-Buglé there is no expanded to include four additional communities. A local – the territory, including the forests, is owned coordinator was recruited to provide logistical support, and a collectively (ACUN 2003). As in other Latin American regional coordinator became instrumental in explaining the countries, the Panamanian state has formally recognized the objectives, methods, and outcomes of the project to comarca property rights of the indigenous residents of the territory, authorities and people in the study area. Four Ngäbe univer- which include rights to harvest resources and to exclude other sity students were hired as research assistants, and one local users, but not alienation – in other words, selling lands is not investigator was selected in each of the five participating permitted (Pacheco et al. 2012). The use and enjoyment of the communities to become part of the research team. land within the comarca is done through what is called a right Detailed data on forest use and informal tenure was col- of possession that belongs to an individual or a family, and lected with a four-page questionnaire that was administered that can be inherited (ACUN 2003). This right of possession with 25 people (22 men and 3 women) who were identified as 2 can extend to both cultivated and non-cultivated lands, includ- owners of forest parcels in the study area . The questionnaires ing forests. The federal government, through its role in pro- documented basic information about these owners (e.g., age, residence) and their parcels. Questions were also asked about tecting endangered species and issuing permits for logging, the types of resource use that occur within parcels, including through the Ministerio de Ambiente (until recently called the questions related to tenure rights such as access, exclusion, Autoridad Nacional del Ambiente, or ANAM), also plays a alienation, and management. During the interviews, a small role in shaping resource rights. In the case of remote Ngäbe sketch map was made of each forest parcel, but unfortunately, communities however, the presence of the agency appears to the information in these sketch maps was not sufficient to be negligible. accurately delimit or measure the size of parcels. Respon- The five communities that participated in the research are dents were also asked about their future plans for their forest found in the central part of the comarca, on either side of the parcels, short-term (5-years) and long-term (25-years), and continental divide and proximate to large areas of contiguous to share their thoughts and suggestions about conservation mature forest that are priority corridor areas for the larger strategies. Efforts were made to administer the forest parcel regional Mesoamerican Biological Corridor, connecting questionnaire with as many of the owners as possible, includ- the Palo Seco Protected Forest and Santa Fe National Park ing all individuals who own larger parcels. It is estimated that (Figure 1). the individuals or families have informal rights to well over half of the mature forest within the study area, within what they consider to be their community boundaries, providing a RESEARCH METHODOLOGY good characterization of forest use and forest tenure for the study area. The field research methodology for this paper was based on a The protocols for each phase of the field research received combination of workshops, interviews and questionnaires approval from the Research Ethics Board through Carleton carried out from 2010 to 2013. The overall research effort University (11/2011, #12-0283). The research team also re- also included participatory mapping and focus groups, with ceived approval from comarca authorities and informed con- discussion of those results detailed in Smith et al. (2017). sent was provided by all research participants in the five par- Importantly, the participatory mapping effort incorporated ticipating communities. the creation of a mature forest cover map for the study area. Mature forest cover was delimited using high resolution Ikonos satellite imagery (true colour image, 1 m resolution, RESEARCH FINDINGS from December 2, 2010), using GPS points with associated field notes on forest cover for reference. In order to situate the Land use and livelihoods among the Ngäbe communities study area forest context within the broader region, the team also explored forest change over time within the comarca, as Subsistence shifting agriculture is the cornerstone of liveli- compared with national statistics, using the global forest hoods in the Ngäbe communities that participated in the change data product, developed by Hansen et al. (2013). study. Families cultivate corn (Zea mays), the most important

2 An additional questionnaire was administered in Bababatda, but was not included in the analysis because it was not about specific forest parcels but rather, about the use of the forests as a whole. The hidden layer of indigenous land tenure 483

TABLE 1 Relative frequency of harvesting resources from forest parcels, as a percentage of all parcels surveyed (n = 41)

Medicinal House construction Firewood Edible plants Game plants materials At least once per week 39 23 3 0 0 1 to 3 times per month 6 9 11 5 0 Every 3 to 4 months or so 11 14 18 15 30 Once or twice per year 6 19 26 46 33 Parcel not used for this type of resource harvest 39 35 42 34 37

crop, in addition to beans (Phaseolus vulgaris), dasheen ceremonial purposes4. At least 41 species are used, and many (Colocasia esculenta), bananas and plantains (Musa spp.), have multiple uses (Michon 2010). Mature forest reserve oranges (Citrus sinensis), and other crops. On the southern areas are visited regularly, especially for firewood and wild side of the continental divide, fields are burned toward the end foods (Table 1). Mature forests are also a critically important of the dry season before planting, but on the very humid, source of house construction materials, although these are not northern slope this rarely occurs. Households also maintain harvested as frequently. Hunting occurs, but not often, which dooryard gardens that include a wide variety of fruit trees, is likely due at least in part to the scarcity of game animals in vegetables, and medicinal plants. the areas surrounding the villages. Cattle ranching occurs in all five of the study communi- Not all forest areas, however, are used regularly. More ties. It is practiced at a small scale, but the number of families remote forest reserve parcels, for example, are not typically involved in cattle ranching appears to be increasing. Ngäbe harvested for firewood given that it is more easily collected men began raising cattle in the comarca toward the end of the from nearby areas and from secondary forests. Some parcels 1800s (Young 1971), but it is a relatively recent introduction are lacking in certain types of resources – e.g., particular in the highlands along the central cordillera. In Tugwrabitdi, food plants – which could be due to their small area, habitat where small scale ranching appears to be more prevalent, characteristics, or a history of unsustainable harvesting. 22 percent of households reported having one or more cattle. Wild plant foods harvested from mature forests include Most pastures are located on the outer edges of the village palm heart, fruits, vines and ferns; consumption varies on lands previously used for cultivation, where they can be throughout the year depending on seasonal factors. The heart visited regularly to tend younger individuals. In some cases, of mitdra (Prestoea acuminata) and the fruits of the ñurun cattle graze in nearby forest areas as well. As has been palm (Chamaedorea tepejilote) are of particular importance, reported elsewhere, cattle represent an important asset that and the young leaves and tendrils of three vines – kä (uniden- can be easily converted to cash, in a place where banks and tified), ka teguea (Sechium venosum) and ngrögä (unidenti- other financial services are unavailable (Coomes et al. 2008, fied) – are eaten frequently as greens. The young, tightly Young 1971). curled frond of the ka oguö fern (unidentified), or fiddlehead, is also eaten by the majority of households. Along with The role of the forest in the lives and livelihoods of the edible plants, local people also eat a wild mushroom. the Ngäbe Numerous medicinal plants are also collected.3 The majority of families in the region build their houses Mature forest – called kätogwä in Ngäbere – is a source of primarily out of forest materials, including at least 10 tree resources that complement other aspects of Ngäbe livelihood species. Again, while the harvest of house construction mate- strategies. Forests are valued for the resources they provide, rials is not frequent, they are of critical importance when a as well as for ecosystem services and cultural reasons. As it new roof is needed or when a structure falls into disrepair and was discovered, forest use is shaped by an informal tenure a new structure is needed. Corner posts that withstand both system whereby mature forests have been divided into parcels termites are rot are particularly valuable, and there are two that have recognized owners. The analysis is based primarily main trees that are used: mrä (unidentified, either one species on the use and management of forest by people who have or 2–3 closely related species in the Lauraceae family), and control over forest parcels. ngrie grie (Roupala aff. montana). It appears that these are Among the forest resources that Ngäbe families depend the only forest products that are occasionally bought and sold on, plants are of particular importance – for firewood, food, within the community, which is likely explained by their house construction materials, and medicines. They are also special , limited and declining abundance, and used to make handicrafts, housewares and objects used for critical importance for building shelter in a region where

3 Medicinal plants were not investigated because of the sensitive nature of this topic, and the potential risk of research results being used for . 484 D.A. Smith et al. cash for buying manufactured materials is difficult to obtain. Others discussed the role of forest cover on stabilizing the Beams, walls and floors are also made using forest species, soil and preventing landslides, which are common in this and wild lianas are used for tying the structure together. While mountainous region. corrugated metal roofs have become more common, palm The forest also has cultural significance. Some people thatch – most often juogo (Geonoma undata subsp. edulis) told us that living close to the mature forest and using its continues to be the most commonly used material, and its resources is an integral part of their culture and their identity decreased availability is a significant concern for local as Ngäbe people. Furthermore, many plant and animal prod- people. Decreased abundance of thatch appears to be due to ucts from the forest are used for traditional ornaments and as a combination of deforestation and overharvesting (including, part of their ceremonial dress, as well as in ceremonies for apparently, occasional by people from outside of the spiritual protection. community). Forest plants are also used to make a range of household items (e.g., baskets, bowls, axe handles) and Forest conditions within the comarca and in forest handicrafts, for which natural fibres and dyes are also used. parcels As mentioned, hunting occurs in forested areas, practiced mainly by men, but this is not done frequently. This is most The indigenous comarcas of Panama are critical for the likely due to the scarcity of game animals in areas surround- conservation of biodiversity, containing an estimated 54% ing the villages, which could be explained by habitat condi- of the country’s mature forest cover (Vergara-Asenjo 2016). tions, depletion caused by overharvesting, or a combination Deforestation rates in the Comarca Ngäbe-Buglé have been of the two. According to Ngäbe hunters, the more commonly high over the last 25 years or so, with a reported total loss of hunted game animals include agoutis, pacas, armadillos, 21.8% from 1992 to 2000 (United Nations 2015a, see also white tailed deer, and collared peccaries, although these Vergara-Asenjo and Potvin 2014). Deforestation rates since animals tend to be captured most often in agricultural areas. 2000 are less certain due to the use of different methodologies Many of the game animals captured in agricultural areas and land cover classifications, and it is not possible to calcu- depend on forest habitats, but also forage in farms where an late the loss of mature forests within the study area where abundance of food can be found at different times of the year, finer resolution is needed for accurate assessments of change as is the case in other parts of western Panama (Smith 2005). over time. Visual inspection of a major initiative to provide Birds are hunted using hand-made sling-shots, and larger finer-resolution forest cover mapping for the year 2012 – animals are killed with rifles or bows and arrows. According work that distinguishes between secondary forests and mature to local people, very few large mammals are present in the forest – however, shows continued loss of mature forests in immediate vicinity of the community, and overall, game is the study region (STRI, n.d.). Further analysis is needed to scarce. Species like tapirs, primates, and the great anteater are generate accurate assessments4. It is clear, however, from said by local people to have been in the area previously, but publically-available information, as well as our own field with deforestation and habitat fragmentation they have “fled” observations and the consistent statements of local residents, to more remote forested areas and are rarely if ever seen. that deforestation remains a significant problem in our Others, such as the red deer can still be found in the vicinity study area. of some communities, but are now reportedly very scarce and The available deforestation numbers point to broader in danger of local extirpation. shifts in forest loss across the comarca, while the field In general, forest products are collected for household research findings help to characterize the ongoing pressures consumption or given as gifts, and are not sold. Of the 25 on forests in the study area. Deforestation represents a threat people with forest parcels who were interviewed, only one to the livelihoods of many families living in the highlands of person reported selling forest products. the comarca, especially for the more impoverished house- Forests are also important for the environmental services holds who are more reliant on forest resources to meet basic they provide. Forests help maintain a reliable supply of fresh needs. The clearing of mature forest to establish new farms as water in small streams, and people recognize that deforesta- part of traditional shifting cultivation, typically at the edges of tion can cause them to dry out seasonally, especially on the existing agricultural areas, is the main direct factor driving drier, south side of the continental divide. One respondent deforestation5. According to older informants in the study noted that the primary motivation for maintaining his forest region, most of the mature forest within walking distance reserve, in fact, is to protect his household’s water source. has been cut down in the last two or three decades due to

4 Global forest change data available from Hansen et al. (2013), were used to calculate a 3.1% loss of forest cover in the comarca from 2001 to 2016, compared to a loss of 5.7% for the entire country over the same time period. These figures, while valuable for their longer temporal scale, represent an estimate of total stand loss, where a change from forest, defined as >50% tree canopy cover, shifts to 0% cover in a given year. As such, they include regenerated forests reported elsewhere (CATHALAC 2009), that are of less value for the conservation of more sensitive, vulnerable species. Moveover, much of the change that is happening beneath the canopy through selected harvests and other uses remains uncaptured with these change estimates. 5 While the proximate causes of deforestation (e.g., population growth) are important, the legacies of colonialism, neglect and social inequali- ties at the national scale remain one of the most important underlying drivers. Rates of extreme poverty within the Comarca Ngäbe-Buglé are reported to be 98.0 percent, compared to 14.4 percent for the country as a whole (INEC 2008, World Bank 2011). The hidden layer of indigenous land tenure 485

FIGURE 2 Reported amounts of mature forest holdings within different size classes in the four communities surveyed. Numbers above columns indicate the number of households with forest parcel holdings within each size class. Several smaller parcels were likely missed by the survey, but all of the large parcels were included

population growth and increased demand for agricultural small groups, who are recognized locally as “owners” of these land. An additional driver of deforestation that local people areas. In most cases the parcels have been inherited, indicat- identify as being important, and that is clearly evident in the ing that the system has been in place for many years, and landscape, is cattle ranching, which is relatively new in the likely originally acquired through the mechanism of the right region, having been introduced in some communities only of possession, pre-dating the establishment of the comarca within the last two decades. (ACUN 2003, Michon 2010). This type of informal private According to informants, deforestation is more extensive forest ownership was unexpected, given that mature forests around the largest of the five communities, Tugwrabitdi, in indigenous regions of Panama are usually not under indi- where mature forest is now only found as fringes along the vidual control, but rather available to those needing land for highest elevations, mainly on steeply sloping lands. In con- farming, as opposed to farms and fallows (including second- trast, the community of Mraribatda (Chichica) is in close ary forests), that are held by individuals through proximity to mature forest and this community and Ngwoini- rights (Gordon 1982, Smith 2003). batda (Suiche) have access to relatively large extensions of The owners of forest parcels exercise the rights of use, primary forest. In the case of Bababatda, the extent of mature access, withdrawal, management, and to some degree exclu- forest is limited, but informants explained that an awareness sion, as they are able to prevent others from cutting down the of deforestation as a problem in the 1970s led to conservation forest for agriculture. These rights, as tied to possession of the efforts and restrictions on the cutting of forest, which is now forest parcel, appear to hold as long as the forest parcel is considered to be in a state of forest regeneration and recovery. clearly occupied and used or managed. There is some expec- tation that the forest parcel will be worked in some way, but Layered forest tenure in study communities within the it appears that only a minimal amount of management is suf- Comarca Ngäbe-Buglé ficient. This system of informal forest ownership is respected within the community, and appears to be accepted by comarca As noted earlier, collective title is the only tenure form recog- authorities at higher district and regional levels as well. It nized for the comarca, and is what is visible to the state. does not prevent people from entering the forest, for example, Notwithstanding legal definitions and official policies, forest to track game or to simply walk from one place to another. tenure in the comarca, for all intents and purposes, is prac- Neither does it restrict people from other communities from ticed at the local level. Across the five study communities, making a temporary shelter for an overnight stay during a trip. over time the mature forest within what they consider to be As indicated in the questionnaire responses, parcels have their community boundaries, surrounding the villages, has been owned for more than 40 years on average, and in several been divided into parcels that are controlled by individuals or cases owners indicated that their parcel had been inherited 486 D.A. Smith et al.

TABLE 2 Forest parcels surveyed

Community Number of owners interviewed Number of parcels Reported total area (ha) Tugwrabitdi (Ratón) 4 5 260 Mraribatda (Chichica) 10 23 714 Ngwoinibatda (Suiche) 8 10 4 644 Üribatda (Quebrada Hacha) 3 3 40 Total 25 41 5 658

over more than one generation. In only two instances were more parcels were inherited from both parents (9 percent), there forest parcels that did not have a previous owner. Young one from a father-in-law, and another from a stepfather. (1971) does not mention the practice, and Gordon (1982), As mentioned, only two parcels had no previous owner. who did research in the 1960s in the lowlands in the northern Five parcels, representing an estimated 182 hectares, were part of the comarca, states that usufruct rights to farmland purchased. At the moment, it is not clear whether these cases were the norm, whereby mature forest is not owned by indi- of forest parcels being bought and sold are exceptions to the viduals. How the ownership of forest parcels emerged is rule or part of a trend. unknown, but could stem from growing populations and a In Tugwrabitdi, 27 percent of respondents indicated that more permanent, nucleated settlement patterns that have led they did not own a forest parcel, and another 57 percent to increased competition for forest resources within walking reported having only a small forest parcel surrounded by distance of villages. their agricultural holdings. Access to forest resources then, is highly uneven. While a few households have control over Forest parcels and their owners large areas of mature forest, most have much smaller parcels, The average area of the forest parcels, based on the data col- isolated fragments, or no mature forest plots at all. Highly lected, is estimated at138 hectares, but there is tremendous unequal forest ownership has significant implications for less variation, with individual parcels ranging in size from 1-2,000 affluent households who have limited access to resources that hectares6 (Figure 2). are needed for food, house construction, and other necessities. Not surprisingly, the two communities that are located closer to the larger, uninhabited forest areas along the central Customary forest tenure and the use and conservation of divide and to the west – Mraribatda and Ngwoinibatda – have mature forests larger parcels and more forest area under individual control. So how does informal forest ownership affect the use of the These two communities can be considered more remote than forest and whether or not it will be cleared for agriculture? the others given that they are farther from roads. Firstly, ownership restricts other community members from The majority of the parcel owners interviewed were men, harvesting the resources found within forest parcels. In with only 3 small parcels owned by women. In most cases, general, the resources found within forest parcels are for there is only one owner, but 13 of the parcels are owned by the exclusive use of the individual and immediate family. multiple people, in most cases by two or more brothers. However, relatives from other households, friends, and other Almost all of the owners interviewed have lived their entire residents of the community or a neighbouring community lives in the community, except for a few who were raised in are commonly given permission to harvest medicinal plants, a neighbouring village, and two who were born elsewhere fuel wood, or game. Questionnaires and interviews revealed, in the comarca. The age of parcel owners varies from 25 to however, that some species are less likely to be shared, such 72 years old, with the average age being 48. In most cases as those used for household construction (mrä tree for house owners have only one parcel, but eight participants have more posts and juogo palm for thatch). Several owners in fact refer than one. The majority – 70 percent – of parcels were to their forest parcels as “juogo reserves.” Active management acquired through from the owner’s father. A few practices to promote palm growth and survival help maintain

6 Forest areas were not measured. The estimates reported here are based on reported size. Sketch maps were made of each of the parcels provid- ing an opportunity to assess the accuracy of reported size, but were not detailed enough to allow for precise delimitation. The degree of error associated with reported forest parcel size is unknown, but it should be pointed out that local people are accustomed to using hectares as a unit of measurement for planning and management (e.g., for buying seed or as part of their involvement in coffee production and other agri- cultural extension programs). Sketch maps provide details on the toponyms of rivers, mountains and other geographic features as well as the names of the owners of neighbouring parcels, confirming that the limits of forest parcels are well known. The total area reported for the forest parcels surveyed, which likely includes all of the larger parcels of the four communities, corresponds well with the estimate of the total amount of the four communities’ mature forest area, which is roughly 6.0 km2 (the exact size depends on community boundaries, which were not delimited). The hidden layer of indigenous land tenure 487 palm populations within forest parcels. Weeding is done asked what might happen in 25 years, respondents were less around these palms to promote growth, harvesting is usually sure about the future of their forest parcels and less optimistic limited to once per year at most, and when collecting thatch, that hey would be conserved. Only 16 percent thought that at least one mature leaf and all young leaves are left on their forest parcels would remain intact over the longer term; the plant. another 34 percent said that they were unsure. Many of the More general forest management consists of clearing and respondents are elderly, and the majority noted that it would selective removal of plants from the understory, something be up to their children, who would inherit their forest parcel, that might be termed “forest weeding.” Local people to decide how it should be used in the future. As one person explained to us that a cleared understory is esthetically more said, “When I die, there will probably be negative changes, attractive, makes it easier to walk through the forest, facili- because children sometimes do not have the same idea as their tates the identification and monitoring of useful plants, and parents.” Or as another stated, “everything will depend on makes it easier to spot wild game and venomous snakes. whether the family continues the same practice or whether Clearing the understory can also promote the growth of useful they will receive some kind of incentive from an institution plants, such as food plants that are spared. It is a practice that [to conserve the forest], but as long as I am alive, conservation is done habitually by people who collect forest resources, will continue.” but it is important to keep in mind that many forest areas are It is clear that while some forest areas are being main- used infrequently or not at all, so the effects of this practice tained indefinitely, in particular for the resources they pro- on the floristic composition and structure of forests varies vide, others are being held in reserve for future conversion to considerably. Another related practice is the selective cutting agriculture. In the case of the largest forest parcels, it would of larger trees and palms to provide increased sunlight for likely take many years – possibly even decades – for them to coffee agroforestry that exists in some forest parcels. be converted to agricultural uses by a single family, even in In the highlands of the Comarca Ngäbe-Buglé, where the case of large households with many children. It is unclear, there are very limited opportunities to earn cash, owners have however, whether this would be possible over the long-term a strong interest in conserving their forest reserves to ensure given the tremendous inequality in land ownership and the continued availability of certain resources. However, the demand for farmland among less affluent families. value of these resources should not be assumed over the long- Parcel owners were asked what they considered to be term. For example, corrugated metal roofs are becoming more promising strategies for conserving the forests over the long- common, and have been the focus of governmental assistance, term. While the majority did not have concrete suggestions, a something that could diminish the importance of thatch, and range of answers was provided, including payments to farm- in turn, the economic value of the forest. ers who give up plans to convert forest areas to agriculture, Informal forest owners prevent other community mem- and educational programs that promote a culture of conserva- bers from cutting down stands of mature forest for agricul- tion. When asked if they would support the creation of a pro- ture. There appears to be significant demand for additional tected area within the comarca to protect mature forests, most farmland in the region, fueled in part by demographic growth. respondents were in favor, but the need for continued access While it is somewhat difficult to measure, the research find- to forest resources was emphasized repeatedly. Among others ings suggest that informal forest ownership is having some there was reluctance, stemming from fears that the central influence in slowing deforestation rates, at least over the government would assume control over the area if it were to short-term. It is important to keep in mind though, that there be included in the National Protected Areas System (SINAP). is nothing in the locally-upheld norms associated with this Overall, the findings lead us to be concerned about the fate individual forest tenure that prevents an owner from clearing of mature forests within the comarca. It is important to keep his or her forest parcels whenever they like. Furthermore, in mind, however, that current trajectories can be altered. One while informal ownership is restricted from the ability to sell promising development is the initiative of a group of residents the land to outside actors (i.e. restricted alienation rights), of Bababatda (Cerro Flores) to formally protect their forest there was no report of whether a situation such as this had parcels. The maps that were made as part of the research have been enforced by comarca authorities. It also appears that been used to help formulate a proposal and begin discussions these de facto owners could subdivide their parcels in the with national authorities to establish a legally recognized future, as a way to pass along wealth to more than one protected area. inheritor.

The future of forest parcels DISCUSSION The owners of forested areas were asked about their near- and long-term future plans for their parcels. When asked about Community title has been an important step for recognizing what would likely happen with their parcels in five years, the legitimacy of the Comarca Ngäbe-Buglé, and for negotia- more than fifteen respondents, or 55%, indicated their tions with external actors and programs, including those intention would be to maintain all of their mature forest in its administered by the Panamanian state. This has also repre- natural state. The remaining ten owners, however, stated that sented the portal through which more global strategies such they planned to convert some or all of their forest parcel for as REDD+ can set the stage for collaboration in forest conser- cultivating crops or for cattle pasture. When owners were vation. Beneath this umbrella system of communally-held 488 D.A. Smith et al. lands, however, this study uncovers an informal and locally- Customary forest ownership, which is accepted at the local upheld tenure layer of individual forest ownership and man- level as well as by comarca authorities, prevents other fami- agement. Those seeking to secure future forest conservation lies from cutting down areas of mature forest to establish new in the area would benefit from recognizing this layered farms, but there is nothing that prevents owners or their system and finding entry points for engagement with these descendants from cutting down their forest reserves to estab- de facto forest stewards. lish new farms. Deforestation rates are likely to remain sig- At present there remain many questions about how land nificant given the high fertility rates and a lack of economic tenure affects forest use and whether of alternatives in the region. The apparent increase in cattle forested lands reduces deforestation (Skutch et al. 2014, ranching is also a significant concern, given that pastures tend Blackman et al. 2017, Robinson et al. 2017). Part of the to be established on nearby lands previously used for cultiva- uncertainty may be related to the fact that there can be tion, which means that farms must be established elsewhere significant discrepancies between legal (de jure tenure) status to replace them. Also worrisome is the practice of renting and on-the-ground (de facto tenure) realities. Fieldwork with pastures to ranchers from outside of the local area, which has local communities can reveal customary tenure systems that begun to occur in the community of Tugwrabitdi. An addi- provide individual forest rights that do not correspond with tional factor that merits further study is the influence of social what are classified as community forests. Analysis of the assistance payments. For impoverished families they are a relationships between tenure and deforestation based on legal critically important source of income. While important for categorizations that do not correspond to local practice can the many families who need the help, anecdotal evidence lead to misleading results.7 To better understand the drivers suggests that some have invested at least part of this money in of deforestation and how to counter them, research on the buying cattle. The questionnaires and interviews with these hidden relationships between property rights and deforestation that forest owners suggest that their forest stewardship is not relies primarily on remotely sensed data and legal categories necessarily guaranteed in the long-term. Future pressure needs to be complemented with field research. One of the from population growth and migration within the comarca, in more significant contributions of this research is the unveiling addition to factors that are difficult to anticipate, mean that of indigenous forest use and management beneath the canopy these individuals could quickly shift from forest stewardship and the hidden forest parcel owners functioning within the to increased exploitation of forest resources or conversion to umbrella of indigenous community tenure. agriculture. In light of this, those seeking to avoid future The findings show that mature forests continue to provide deforestation will want to consider ways to both incentivize a wide range of products that Ngäbe families rely on, and that the continued stewardship of these forests by working with forests are managed by parcel owners to promote the abun- the existing norms, and consider how comarca governance dance of valuable species. Informal forest ownership provides might be supported in designing ways to both support these an important incentive to manage forests to enhance their informal owners in their existing roles, and restrict rights such value, perhaps more importantly, prevents them from being as alienation through parcel fragmentation to dis-incentivize cleared by others for agriculture. In some cases, these forests future forest loss. Such restrictions to specific rights within are being kept in reserve for the owner’s children to clear in the bundle have proven to be effective for forest conservation the future, but it still provides some breathing room to devel- in other study areas in Latin America, while also potentially op economic alternatives that are more sustainable. However, problematic for individual families seeking a secure liveli- at present comarca governance does not preclude owners hood for future generations (Holland et al. 2017). Should from clearing their forests, and given current trends, it is there be a shift to enforcing additional restrictions on indi- unlikely that informal ownership will prevent the conversion vidual forest ownership, it would be important to at the same of forests to agricultural uses over the long-term. Individual time to provide assistance to enhance the value of forest control over forest parcels also poses challenges for broader parcels, and explore ways for de facto forest owners and scale conservation initiatives. entire communities to generate benefits from sustainable use and management of the forests. Currently however, in Hidden forest owners and prospects for conservation addition to game animals, certain forest plant resources have become depleted within the existing forests, undermining the Deforestation in the Comarca Ngäbe-Buglé is a persistent economic value of some forest areas (Michon 2010). More problem that will likely grow more challenging if there is no can be done to promote the survival and abundance of useful conservation engagement and support for those who steward species, and value of the forest – for example, by combining the forests in these communities. As more than one person put scientific and indigenous knowledges to develop propagation it, the forest is cut down “por necesidad” (out of need). techniques for valuable species that have been depleted.

7 While the scope of informal ownership of forest parcels within collectively owned indigenous territories is not known, it is not unique to western Panama. For example, within collectively owned ejidos and other “social properties” of Mexico, while ownership is shared, in practice, individuals may have recognized rights over “uncertified” land parcels, including forest parcels (Skutch et al. 2014, Smith et al. 2009). The hidden layer of indigenous land tenure 489

Local residents recognize that there is potential for greater governance systems that regulate the use of forest resources economic benefits from ecotourism if forest cover is main- and prevent deforestation (Colchester 1994, Clarke and tained. At present, tourism is extremely limited, but there is Jupiter 2010, Ganjanapan 1998, Hammi 2010, Niamir 1990, an expectation that it will arrive eventually. Ornithological Ormsby and Bhagwat 2010, Sirait et al. 1994). This is not the tourism (aka, “birding”) may have the most potential given case in the Comarca Ngäbe-Buglé, where there are no com- that Panama already has an international reputation as a bird munity or regional governance systems that prevent parcel watching destination, as well as the fact that there are at least owners from doing what they wish with them, despite the two endemic bird species within this mountainous region negative impacts of deforestation on plant resources, game of the comarca (Angehr 2003). The promise of ecotourism populations, and the water supply for downstream communi- was in fact one of the motivations for the establishment of ties. While informal ownership is likely helping to protect the Bababatda’s protected forest. However, while there are many forest over the short-term, it is far from being a panacea, and factors that are important to consider, successful ecotourism there continues to be an important role that comarca authori- initiatives have tended to be community projects (Coria and ties will need to play in the long-term to protect forests within Calfucura 2012). Informal ownership of forest parcels, how- this shared territory. As Ostrom (2001: 23) notes, “larger ever, could complicate ecotourism initiatives, in terms of how [political] regimes can facilitate local self-organization by to assign responsibilities and share benefits in communities providing accurate information about natural resource sys- where highly unequal access to forest resources may already tems. . . and mechanisms to back up local monitoring and be causing tensions. sanctioning efforts.” Support will be needed to address knowl- Another potential conservation challenge associated with edge gaps and inadequate technical expertise, but political individual control over forest parcels is that it can make it will also be required to negotiate the balance between conser- more difficult to establish conservation or pay- vation goals that provide broad, long-term benefits with the ments for ecosystem services. While the decisive right to more immediate needs of impoverished communities who exclude comes with informal ownership, negotiating and depend on these lands for their well-being. administering numerous individual contracts would likely be Specific conservation initiatives tied to forests, such as the much more cumbersome, and lead to the “high transaction Mesoamerican Biological Corridor, payments for ecosystem costs of dealing with many smallholders,” although grouping services (PES) schemes, and REDD+ typically tie their people into a single, collective agreement could potentially engagement with indigenous and other traditional communi- help overcome this problem (Wunder 2005: 17). Numerous ties through the umbrella layer of tenure and related institu- smaller agreements would be more likely to result in a frag- tions. The comarca’s internal natural resource governance mented patchwork of protected forests, rather than a larger and institutional capacity remains weak. Multiple reasons contiguous area. This is one of the potential challenges facing exist for investing in capacity building and supporting the the UN-REDD+ program, which was initiated in Panama in comarca’s internal approach to resource governance, while 2010 as a pilot program, and formally approved as part of stressing the importance of recognizing these informal forms the UNFCCC Paris Climate Agreement in 2015. It would be that tie together forest management and conservation within challenging both logistically and in terms of program goals individual communities. for REDD+ to be link at the individual community or even individual forest parcel owner scale. This study also reveals Forest conservation partnerships that the individual forest owners are best characterized as forest stewards who have long managed and conserved the Given that so many tropical forests are under some form forest. There is little evidence from the questionnaires that of community ownership, “it is imperative that government, would suggest these forests are under active pressure of con- donors, and other stakeholders devote the resources needed to version and thus any involvement in REDD+ or an associated ensure that co-management is as effective a conservation tool PES scheme would be to reward these communities and de as possible” (Blackman et al. 2014: 36). There is now a large facto forest owners for their stewardship, and incentivize it to body of literature on community-based forest management continue into the future. It might also be practical to work that can be drawn from, that demonstrates that while there with comarca authorities and community representatives to continue to be challenges there are effective ways of achiev- establish payments in return for protecting remote forest areas ing success (Colchester 2004, Lazaró et al. 1993, Porter- that do not currently have owners. This would require further Bolland et al. 2011, Ros-Tonen 2007). Strengthening research and fieldwork to identify these remote forests and co-management through providing infrastructure, technical their characteristics. assistance, and research partnerships are recognized as key recommendations for the conservation of forests, although it Governance of forests within shared indigenous is important to avoid loss of local autonomy and subordina- territories tion of indigenous knowledge along the way (Blackman et al. 2014, Finley-Brook 2007). Potential pitfalls can likely be Much of the literature on forest tenure and conservation points avoided by conducting field research that provides a better to the importance of effective governance institutions (Gibson understanding of traditional forest use and customary forest et al. 2000, Hecht 2014, Pagdee et al. 2006). There are numer- tenure practices. Conversely, poor understanding of local ous examples from around the world of complex customary conditions can lead to conflict, failed conservation policies, 490 D.A. Smith et al. and ultimately, further deforestation. Partnerships need to be mitigation, biodiversity conservation, and habitat connectivi- sensitive to traditional practices and be open to developing ty. However, while local people can manage forests very strategies “in a way that is consistent with their own knowl- effectively, community forestry is “not a panacea for obtain- edge systems and cultural frameworks” (Davis and Wali ing improvements in livelihoods and forest conservation” 1994). As Larson et al. (2010a: 84) point out, new forest man- (Larson et al. 2010a: 79). agement strategies “may recognize some existing resources How do these multi-layered tenure arrangements affect uses embedded in local livelihoods and customary practice the protection of forests over the long-term? This is an impor- but also introduce new rules and standards and restrict certain tant question, and one that calls for more explicit research previous behaviours.” engagement by both the land tenure and conservation com- Any type of conservation or forest co-management strat- munity. In the Comarca Ngäbe-Buglé, an in-between type of egy should take into account the very different worldview of customary forest tenure exists, whereby individuals or small the Ngäbe and Buglé inhabitants of the comarca as well as the groups have exclusive control over who can harvest resources legacies of colonialism that continue to place indigenous within forest parcels, and the right to clear them for agricul- communities in a less powerful position than outsiders. Indig- ture if they choose, despite the fact that the forests within the enous societies often have very different conceptualizations territory are part of the commons. These processes cannot be of land ownership. As Burgher et al. (2001: 4) point out, detected from satellites, and need to be investigated in the the idea of the commons “rests on very simplified liberal- field, which can be arduous given that it usually involves worldview assumptions about individual interest and behav- building rapport, gaining approval, and conducting research ior.” Distinctive belief systems need to be respected, and not in remote locations. As Poteete et al. (2010: 6) note, “the dismissed as anecdotal or less valuable than scientific modes practical challenges of conducting rigorous social science of thought. research on topics for which data are scarce, or difficult to Over the long-term, forest conservation will require access or to interpret, have not received adequate attention.” efforts to promote sustainable development, to provide eco- Where indigenous governance regimes are not adequately nomic alternatives for people who currently have no choice supported and weakly developed, as is the case in western but to cut down more forest for subsistence farming. Initia- Panama, this underlying tenure layer of informal ownership tives could include the development of forest resources with can slow deforestation due to locally-upheld rights of access, commercial value that provide additional incentives to protect use, withdrawal, and management. But informal ownership the forest, which has been shown to be a powerful way of and resulting forest stewardship may only be buying time, and preventing deforestation (Larson et al. 2010, Ruiz-Mallén strategies are needed to provide economic alternatives for 2015). As mentioned above, ecotourism also holds some growing populations that are currently reliant on farming for promise as a sustainable economic activity that is compatible their sustenance. Developing effective strategies will require with the maintenance of mature forests, and could also consideration of customary tenure practices. Individual own- provide opportunities to sell handicrafts made from forest ership of forest parcels will be compatible with some strate- materials. gies, and pose difficulties for others. Importantly, the authors In summary, forest conservation in the comarca will recognize that this study is limited in its ability to extrapolate depend on a combination of strategies that build on and and offer broad policy guidance, given the focus on only respect customary practices, good environmental governance, five communities within the comarca. Moreover, the analysis and partnerships with organizations and agencies from presented here is based on the study team’s perspectives outside of the comarca. as outside researchers; indigenous community leaders and comarca authorities may have different understandings of how the multi-layered land tenure regime may be affecting CONCLUDING REMARKS forest conservation. If promoting and sustaining forest conservation and While still challenging, several favorable conditions exist for community livelihoods is a common goal, then research protecting the remaining forests within the Comarca Ngäbe- of this scale and depth plays a key role in helping to untangle Buglé. Firstly, they provide valued resources and they have and unveil the often complex and layered forms of tenure significant cultural meaning. Secondly, after a long struggle, within community forested lands. In this way, the conserva- there is now secure collective ownership in the form of a tion community can support communities and invest in forest semi-autonomous territory, where pressures on forests and conservation efforts that steer away from universals and other natural resources is mitigated by a strengthened ability false assumptions to work collaboratively with community by the comarca authority to exclude. There is also widespread realities, share knowledge, and build on customary practices. concern in the region about deforestation and an evident conservation ethic tied to Ngäbe cosmology, as well as among comarca authorities who recognize the many benefits ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS that forests provide. These conditions are favourable for effective co-management, and present opportunities for com- We would like to thank the many people who made this munities to leverage support for existing forest stewardship research possible, in particular people in the five communities practices as part of broader global goals for climate change involved in the project, Tugwrabitdi (Ratón), Mraribatda The hidden layer of indigenous land tenure 491

(Chichica), Bababatda (Cerro Flores), Üribatda (Quebrada ANKERSEN, T., and BARNES, G. 2004. Inside the Polygon: Hacha), and Ngwoinibatda (Suiche), who listened to us Emerging Community Tenure Systems and Forest and answered our questions. The local investigators, Rubiel Resource Extraction. In Working Forests in the Neotropics Montezuma, Titi Montezuma, Gustavo Castillo, José Pineda (Daniel J. Zarin, et al., eds., 2004); University of Florida and Hector Reyes, made invaluable contributions, as did our Levin College of Law Research Paper. http://dx.doi.org/ regional project coordinator, Alberto Montezuma, and the 10.2139/ssrn.2714066 local project coordinator, Ramón Pineda. We would also like BLACKMAN, A., EPANCHIN-NIELL, R., SIIKAMAKI, J., the thank the four university students who participated in the and VELEZ-LOPEZ, D. 2014. Biodiversity Conservation project, Noris Flores, Elías Gallardo, Hidalgo Taylor and in Latin America and the Caribbean: Prioritizing Poli- Tonis Ábrego for their hard work in all stages of the project. cies. RFF Press, Routledge, Washington, DC. Alexis Jiménez worked diligently to digitize the mature forest BLACKMAN, A., CORRAL, L., LIMA, E.S., ASNER, G.P. of the region. Finally, we would like to thank the institutions 2017. Titling indigenous communities protects forests involved in the study, for their support of staff and resources: in the Peruvian Amazon. Proceedings of the National Carleton University, the Smithsonian Tropical Research Insti- Academy of Sciences 114: 4123–4128. tute (STRI), and the University of Panama. The Association BONILLA-MOHENO, M., REDO, D.J., AIDE, T.M., Panamanian Center for Social Action (ACEASPA) was CLARK, M.L., and GRAU, H.R. 2013. Vegetation change responsible for the administration of the project and played a and land tenure in Mexico: A country-wide analysis. Land critical role in its success. Many thanks go to Jesús Aleman- Use Policy 30(1): 355–364. cia, Olimpia Díaz and Charlotte Elton at CEASPA, and Blas BOWLER, D.E., BUYUNG-ALI, L.M., HEALEY, J.R., Quintero of Acción Cultural Ngóbe, for their valuable contri- JONES, J., KNIGHT, T.M. and PULLIN, A.S. 2012. Does butions. We also greatly appreciate the valuable comments community forest management provide global environ- and suggestions of four anonymous reviewers. Finally, the mental benefits and improve local welfare? Frontiers in research would not have been possible without the generous Ecology and the Environment 10(1): 29–36. financial and administrative support of the National Secre- BURGER, J., FIELD, C., NORGAARD, R.B., OSTROM, E., tariat of Science, Technology and Innovation of Panama and POLICANSKY, D. 2001. Common-pool resources (SENACYT). and commons institutions. In: BURGER, D., OSTROM, E., NORGAARD, R.B., POLICANSKY, D., and GOLD- STEIN, B.D. (eds.) Protecting the Commons: A Frame- REFERENCES work for Resource Management in the Americas, pp. 1–15. Island Press, Washington. ACUN (Acción Cultural Ngobe). 2003. No Ngobe niinadi CATHALAC (Centro del Agua del Trópico Húmedo para kore; El pueblo Ngobe vivira siempre. Panama, Panama, América Latina y el Caribe) 2009. Proyecto de asistencia 75pp. técnica para la actualización del mapa de vegetación, uso ALCORN, J.B. 2003. Indigenous peoples and conservation. y cobertura boscosa de Panamá. Panama City. Conservation Biology 7(2): 424–426. CHAPIN, M., LAMB, Z., and THRELKELD, B. 2005. Map- ALCORN, J. and TOLEDO, V. 1998. Resilient Resource ping indigenous lands. Annual Review of Anthropology Management in Mexico’s Forest Ecosystems: the Contri- 34: 619–638. bution of Property Rights. F. Berkes and C. Folke, editors. CLAD, J. 1984. Conservation and indigenous peoples: A Linking Social and Ecological Systems. Cambridge study of convergent interests. Cultural Survival Quarterly University Press, Cambridge, England. 8: 68–73. ALLEN, J.C., and BARNES, D.F. 1985. The causes of defor- CLARKE, P., and JUPITER, S.D. 2010. Law, custom and estation in developing countries. Annals of the Association community-based natural resource management in Kubu- of American Geographers 75: 163–184. lau District (). Environmental Conservation 37(1): ALVARADO, E. 2001. Perfil de los pueblos de Panamá. 98–106. Unidad Regional de Asistencia Técnica (RUTA) y Minis- COLCHESTER, M. 1994. Sustaining the forests: The terio de Gobierno y Justicia (MGJ), Panama City, Panama. community based approach in South and South-East Asia. ANAM. 2003. Informe final de resultados de la cobertura Development and Change 25(1): 69–100. boscosa y uso del suelo de la República de Panamá: 1992– COLCHESTER, M. 2004. Conservation policy and indige- 2000. Proyecto fortalecimiento institucional del Sistema nous peoples. Environmental Science and Policy 7(3): de Información Geográfica de la ANAM para la evalu- 145–153. ación y monitoreo de los recursos forestales de Panamá COMISIÓN ECONÓMICA PARA AMÉRICA LATINA Y con miras a su manejo sostenible. Autoridad Nacional EL CARIBE (CEPAL). 2005. Los pueblos indígenas de del Ambiente, Organización Internacional de Maderas Panamá: Diagnóstico sociodemográfico a partir del censo Tropicales (OIMT). Panama City, Panama. del 2000. CEPAL, Naciones Unidas y BID, Santiago de ANGEHR, G.R. 2003. Directorio de áreas importantes para Chile, Chile. aves en panamá - Directory of important bird areas in COOMES, O.T. 1997. Rain forest extraction and conserva- Panama. Sociedad Audubon de Panamá and BirdLife/ tion in Amazonia. The Geographical Journal 163(2): Vogelbescherming Nederland. Panama City, Panama. 180–188. 492 D.A. Smith et al.

COOMES, O.T., GRIMARD, F., POTVIN, C., and SIMA, P. GODOY, R., REYES-GARCIA, V., BYRON, E., LEON- 2008. The fate of the tropical forest: Carbon or cattle? ARD, W.R., and VADEZ, V. 2005. The effect of market Ecological Economics 65(2): 207–212. economies on the well-being of indigenous peoples and CORIA, J., and CALFUCURA, E. 2012. Ecotourism and the on their use of renewable natural resources. Annual development of indigenous communities: The good, the Review of Anthropology 34: 121–138. bad, and the ugly. Ecological Economics 73(1): 47–55. GORDON, B.L. 1982. A Panama forest and shore: Natural DALLE, S.P., LÓPEZ, H., DÍAZ, D., LEGENDRE, P., and history and Amerindian culture in Bocas del Toro. The POTVIN, C. 2001. Spatial distribution and habitats of Boxwood Press, Pacific Grove, California. useful plants: An initial assessment for conservation on an GREGERSEN, H., EL LAKANY, H., KARSENTY, A., and indigenous territory, Panama. Biodiversity and Conserva- WHITE, A. 2010. Does the opportunity cost approach tion 11: 637–667. indicate the real cost of REDD+? Rights and Resources DAVIS, S., and WALI, A. 1994. Indigenous land tenure and Initiative, Washington, DC. HAMMI, S. 2010. Can traditional forest management buffer tropical forest management in Latin America. Ambio forest depletion? Dynamics of Moroccan high atlas moun- 23(8): 485–490. tain forests using remote sensing and vegetation analysis. ECONOMIC COMMISSION FOR LATIN AMERICA AND Forest Ecology and Management 260(10): 1861–1872. THE CARIBBEAN (ECLAC). 2011. Statistical yearbook HANSEN, M.C., POTAPOV, P.V., MOORE, R., HANCHER, for Latin America and the Caribbean . Retrieved from: M., TURUBANOVA, S.A., TYUKAVINA, A., THAU, D., http://estadisticas.cepal.org/cepalstat/WEB_CEPALSTAT/ STEHMAN, S.V., GOETZ, S.J., LOVELAND, T.R., estadisticasIndicadores.asp?idioma=i. KOMMAREDDY, A., EGOROV, A., CHINI, L., FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION (FAO). JUSTICE, C.O., and TOWNSHEND, J.R.G. 2013. High- 2011. State of the world’s forests. FAO, Rome. resolution global maps of 21st-century forest cover FEARNSIDE, P.M. 1993. Deforestation in Brazilian Amazo- change. Science 342(15 November): 850–853. Available nia: The effect of population and land tenure. Ambio rom: http://earthenginepartners.appspot.com/science-2013- 22(8): 537–545. global-forest. FINLEY-BROOK, M. 2007. Impacts of multi-scale partner- HERLIHY, P.H. 1989. Panama’s quiet revolution: Comarca ships on Miskitu forest governance in Nicaragua. In: homelands and Indian rights. Cultural Survival Quarterly Ros-Tonen, M. (ed.) Partnerships in sustainable forest 13(3): 17–24. resource management: Learning from Latin America. HERLIHY, P.H. 1997. Central American Indian peoples and CEDLA Latin America Studies, Volume 94, pp. 207–227. lands today. In: Coates A.G. (ed.) Central America: A Brill, Leiden. natural and cultural history, pp. 215–240. Yale University GANJANAPAN, A. 1998. The politics of conservation and Press, New Haven. the complexity of local control of forests in the Northern HOLLAND, M.B., JONES, K.W., FREIRE, J.L., MORALES, Thai highlands. Mountain Research and Development M., NAUGHTON-TREVES, L., and SUÁREZ, L. 2017. 18(1): 71–82. Titling land to conserve forests: the case of Cuyabeno GEIST, H.J., and LAMBIN, E.F. 2002. Proximate causes Reserve in Ecuador. Global Environmental Change 44: and underlying driving forces of tropical deforestation. 27–38. Bioscience 52(2): 143–150. HOPE, J. 2017. The constraints of an ‘ironic scholar’: Nego- GIBSON, C.C. 2001. Forest resources: Institutions for local tiating critical engagement with indigeneity and nature governance in Guatemala. In: BURGER, D., OSTROM, conservation. Geoforum 78: 74–81. INEC. 2008. Encuesta de niveles de vida, principales resulta- E., NORGAARD, R.B., POLICANSKY, D., and GOLD- dos. Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Censo, Panama STEIN, B.D. (eds.) Protecting the Commons: A Frame- City. Retrieved September 19, 2014, from http://www. work for Resource Management in the Americas, contraloria.gob.pa/inec/aplicaciones/Aplicaciones.aspx?ID_ pp. 71–89. Island Press, Washington. CATEGORIA_APLICACIONES=1&ID_IDIOMA=1. GIBSON, C., and BECKER, C.D. 2000. A lack of institu- INEC. 2011. Algunas características de la división política- tional demand: Why a strong local community in Western administrativa en la República de Panamá, según provin- Ecuador fails to protect its forest. In: GIBSON, C., MCK- cia, comarca indígena y distrito, Año 2011. Instituto Na- EAN, M.A., and OSTROM, E. (eds.) People and forests: cional de Estadística y Censo, Panama City. Retrieved Communities, institutions, and governance, pp. 135–161. May 30, 2013, from http://www.contraloria.gob.pa/inec/ MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. Publicaciones/Publicaciones.aspx?ID_SUBCATEGORIA= GIBSON, C., MCKEAN, M.A., and OSTROM, E. (eds.). 45&ID_PUBLICACION=473&ID_IDIOMA=1&ID_ 2000. People and forests: Communities, institutions, and CATEGORIA=17. governance. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. INEC. n.d. Diagnóstico de la población Indígena de Panamá GODOY, R., KIRBY, K., OVERMAN, H., CUBAS, A., con base en los censos de población y vivienda de 2010. CUBAS, G., DEMMER, J., MCSWEENEY, K., and Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Censo, Panama City. BROKAW, N. 2000. Valuation of consumption and sale Retrieved November 5, 2015 from http://www.contraloria. of forest goods from a Central American rain forest. gob.pa/INEC/Aplicaciones/Aplicaciones.aspx?ID_ Nature 406(6): 62–63. CATEGORIA_APLICACIONES=1&ID_IDIOMA=1. The hidden layer of indigenous land tenure 493

IUCN. 1986. Managing protected areas in the tropics. Inter- PANEQUE-GÁLVEZ, J., MAS, J.F., GUÈZE, M., LUZ, national Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural A.K., MACÍA, M.J., ORTA-MARTÍNEZ, M., PINO, J., Resources, Gland, Switzerland. and REYES-GARCÍA, V.2012. Land tenure and forest LARSON, A.M., BARRY, D., and DAHAL, G.R. 2010. cover change. The case of southwestern Beni, Bolivian New rights for forest-based communities? Understanding Amazon, 1986–2009. Applied Geography 43: 113–126. processes of forest tenure reform. International Forestry PELLETIER, J., CODJIA, C., and POTVIN, C. 2012. Tradi- Review 12(1): 78–96. tional shifting agriculture: Tracking forest carbon stock LARSON, A.M., BARRY, D., DAHAL, G.R. and COLFER, and biodiversity through time in western Panama. Global C.J.P. (eds.). 2010. Forests for people: Community rights Change Biology 18(2): 3581–3595. and forest tenure reform. Earthscan / Center for Interna- PERES, C.A. 1994. Indigenous reserves and nature conserva- tional Forest Research, London. tion in Amazonian forests. Conservation Biology 8(2): LAZARÓ, M., PARIONA, M. and SIMEONE, R. 1993. A 586–588. natural harvest: The Yanesha forestry in Peru PLACE, S. (ed.) 1993. Tropical rainforests: Latin American combines western science and Indigenous knowledge. nature and society in transition. Scholarly Resources Cultural Survival Quarterly 17: 48–51. Books, Wilmington, Delaware. LUYSSAERT, S., SCHULZE, E.D., BORNER, A., KNOHL, POOLE, P. 1995. Indigenous peoples, mapping, and biodi- A., HESSENMOLLER, D., LAW, B.E., et al. 2008. Old- versity conservation: An analysis of current activities growth forests as global carbon sinks. Nature 455(7210): and opportunities for applying geomatics technologies. 213–215. Biodiversity Support Program, Landover, Maryland. MCSWEENEY, K. 2002. Who is “forest-dependent”? PORTER-BOLLAND, LUCIANA, ELLIS, EDWARD A., Capturing local variation in forest-product sale, eastern GUARIGUATA, MANUEL R., RUIZ-MALLÉN, I., Honduras. Professional Geographer 54(2): 158–174. NEGRETE-YANKELEVICH, S., and REYES-GARCÍA MCSWEENEY, K., and ARPS, S. 2005. A “demographic V. 2011. Community managed forests and forest protected turnaround”: The rapid growth of the indigenous popula- areas: An assessment of their conservation effectiveness tions in lowland Latin America. Latin American Research across the tropics. Forest Ecology and Management 268: Review 40(1): 3–29. 6–17. NIAMIR, M. 1990. Traditional woodland management tech- POTEETE, A.R., JANSSEN, M.A., and OSTROM, E. 2010. niques of African pastoralists. Unasylva 41(160): 49–58. Working together: Collective action, the commons, and OFFEN, K.H. 2003. The territorial turn: Making black multiple methods in practice. Princeton University Press, territories in pacific Colombia. Journal of Latin American Princeton, N.J. Geography 2(1): 43–73. REDFORD, K.H., and PADOCH, C. (eds.). 1992. Conserva- ORMSBY, A.A., and BHAGWAT, S.A. 2010. Sacred forests tion of neotropical forests: Working from traditional of India: A strong tradition of community-based natural resource management. Environmental Conservation resource use. Columbia University Press, New York. 37(3): 320–326. REDO, D.J., GRAU, H.R., AIDE, T.M., and CLARK, M. OSTROM, E. 1990. Governing the commons. Cambridge 2012. Asymmetric forest transition driven by the interac- University Press, New York. tion of socioeconomic development and environmental OSTROM, E. 2001. Reformulating the commons. In: BURG- heterogeneity in Central America. Proceedings of the ER, D., OSTROM, E., NORGAARD, R.B., POLICAN- National Academy of Sciences 109(23): 8839–8844. SKY, D., and GOLDSTEIN, B.D. (eds.) Protecting the RIVAL, L. 2007. Alliances for sustainable forest manage- commons: A framework for resource management in the ment: Lessons from the Ecuadoran Chocó rain forest. In: Americas, pp. 17–41. Island Press, Washington. Mirjam ROS-TONEN, M. (ed.) Partnerships in sustain- OSTROM, E., and NAGENDRA, H. 2006. Insights on link- able forest resource management: Learning from Latin ing forests, trees, and people from the air, on the ground, America. CEDLA Latin America Studies, Volume 94, and in the laboratory. Proceedings of the National pp. 37–62. Brill, Leiden. Academy of Sciences 103(51): 19224–19231. ROBINSON, B.E., HOLLAND, M.B., and NAUGHTON- OTSUKA, K. and PLACE, F. 2015. Land tenure and agricul- TREVES, L. 2014. Does secure land tenure save forests? tural intensification in Sub-Saharan Africa. Pp.1–20 in A meta-analysis of the relationship between land tenure C. Monga & J.Y. Lin, editors. The Oxford Handbook of and tropical deforestation. Global Environmental Change Africa and Economics: Volume 2: Policies and Practices, 29: 281–293. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK. ROBINSON, B.E., MASUDA, Y.J., KELLY, A., HOLLAND, PACHECO, P., BARRY, D., CRONKLETON, P., and LAR- M.B., BEDFORD, C., CHILDRESS, M., FLETSCHNER, SON, A. 2012. The recognition of forest rights in Latin D., GAME, E.T., GINSBURG, C., HILHORST, T., LAW- America: Progress and shortcomings of forest tenure RY, S., MITEVA, D.A., MUSENGEZI, J., NAUGHTON- reforms, Society & Natural Resources 25(6): 556–571. TREVES, L., NOLTE, C., SUNDERLIN, W.D., VEIT, P. PAGDEE, A., KIM, Y., and DAUGHERTY, P.J. 2006. What 2017. Incorporating land tenure security into conserva- makes community forest management successful: A tion. Conservation Letters. DOI: 10.1111/conl.12383 metastudy from community forests throughout the world. ROBINSON, B.E., HOLLAND, M.B., and NAUGHTON- Society and Natural Resources 19(1): 33–52. TREVES, L. 2017. Community land titles alone will not 494 D.A. Smith et al.

protect forests. Proceedings of the National Academy of Human Ecology. Tucson, Arizona: University of Arizona Sciences (PNAS). DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1707787114. Press. ROLDÁN ORTEGA, R. 2004. Models for recognizing indig- STEINBERG, M.K. 2005. Mahogany (Swietenia macrophyl- enous land rights in Latin America. The World Bank, la) in the Maya lowlands: Implications for past Land Washington, D.C. use and environmental change. Journal of Latin American ROS-TONEN, M., (ed.). 2007. Partnerships in sustainable Geography 4(1): 127–134. forest resource management: Learning from Latin STEVENS, S. (ed.). 1997. Conservation through cultural America. CEDLA Latin America Studies, Volume 94. survival: Indigenous peoples and protected areas. Island Brill, Leiden. Press, Washington, DC. RUIZ-MALLÉN, I., SCHUNKO, C., CORBERA, E., RÖS, STOCKS, A. 2003. Mapping dreams in Nicaragua’s Bosawas M., and REYES-GARCÍA, V. 2015. Meanings, drivers, reserve. Human Organization 62: 344–356. and motivations for community-based conservation in UNITED NATIONS. 2015a. La superficie boscosa y la tasa Latin America. Ecology and Society 20(3): 33–46. de deforestación en Panamá: Insumos para establecer SCHWARTZMAN, S., and ZIMMERMAN, B. 2005. datos oficiales a ser utilizados en las estadísticas nacio- Conservation alliances with indigenous peoples of the nales, y para informar a convenciones y procesos interna- Amazon. Conservation Biology 19(3): 721–727. cionales. Programa conjunto de las Naciones Unidas para SIRAIT, M., PRASODJO, S., PODGER, N., FLAVELLE, A., la reducción de emisiones provenientes de deforestación y and FOX, J. 1994. Mapping customary land in East de degradación de los bosques en Panamá. Panama City: Kalimantan, Indonesia: A tool for forest management. ONU-REDD. Ambio 23 (7): 411–417. UNITED NATIONS. 2015b. Sustainable Development Goals. SKUTCH, M., MAS, J.F., BOCCO, G., BEE, B., CUEVAS, [online] http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/ G., and GAO, Y. 2014. Deforestation and land tenure in sustainable-development-goals/. Retrieved November 2, Mexico: A response to Bonilla-Moheno et al. Land Use 2017. Policy 39: 390–396. VAN DAM, C. 2011. Indigenous Territories and REDD in SMITH, D.A. 2003. Hunting, habitat, and indigenous settle- Latin America: Opportunity or Threat? Forests 2: 394– ment patterns: A geographic analysis of Buglé wildlife 414 [online] doi:10.3390/f2010394. Retrieved November use in Western Panama. PhD dissertation, University of 20, 2014. Kansas, Lawrence. Gendered geographies and participatory SMITH, D.A. 2005. Garden game: Shifting cultivation, indig- WILSON, E. 2006. enous hunting, and wildlife ecology in Western Panama. processes: Mapping natural resource use with Wapichan Human Ecology 33: 505–537. women in southern Guyana. MA thesis. Department of SMITH, D.A. HERLIHY, P.H., KELLY, J.H., and RAMOS Geography and Environmental Studies, Carleton Univer- VIERA, A. 2009. The certification and of sity, Ottawa, Canada. indigenous lands in Mexico. Journal of Latin American WORLD BANK. 2011. Panama poverty assessment: Trans- Geography 82(2): 395–415. lating growth into opportunities and poverty reduction. SMITH, D., IBÁÑEZ, A. and HERRERA, F. 2017. The im- Report No. 62955. World Bank. Washington DC. Avail- portance of context: Assessing the benefits and limitations able at: http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2011/ of participatory mapping for empowering indigenous 06/16465530/panama-poverty-assessment-translating- communities in the Comarca Ngäbe-Buglé, Panama. growth-opportunities-poverty-reduction. Cartographica 52(1): 49–62. WUNDER, S. 2005. Payments for environmental services: SMITHSONIAN TROPICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE Some nuts and bolts. CIFOR Occasional Paper No. 42. (STRI). n.d. Forest cover comparison: 1992, 2000, 2012. Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor, On-line GIS tool available at: http://strimaps.si.edu/ Indonesia. webmaps/forestcover2012/. WUNDER, S. 2013. When payments for environmental STEARMAN, A.M. 1995. Neotropical foraging adaptations services will work for conservation. Conservation Letters and the effects of acculturation on sustainable resource 6(4): 230–237. use. In: L.E. SPONSEL, (ed.), Indigenous peoples and YOUNG, P.D. 1971. Ngawbe: Tradition and change among the future of Amazonia: An ecological anthropology of the Western Guaymí of Panama. University of Illinois an endangered world, pp. 207–224. Arizona Studies in Press, Urbana, Illinois.