Change and Continuity in a Pastoralist Community in the High Peruvian Andes
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Hum Ecol (2008) 36:535–551 DOI 10.1007/s10745-008-9186-1 Change and Continuity in a Pastoralist Community in the High Peruvian Andes Julio C. Postigo & Kenneth R. Young & Kelley A. Crews Published online: 16 July 2008 # Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2008 Abstract Pastoralists of the high Andes Mountains raise linking social science and remote sensing (Bradley and mixed herds of camelids and sheep. This study evaluates the Millington 2006; Fox et al. 2003; Jiang 2003; Liverman et land use of herdsmen who are confronted by both socioeco- al. 1998; Rindfuss et al. 2003; Rindfuss and Stern 1998; nomic and climate changes in Huancavelica, central Peru. Rindfuss et al. 2004). Though there are recent studies Land use/ land cover change (LULCC) was measured through conducted in the Andes that use remote sensing to satellite imagery, and pastoralists’ capacity to adapt to socio- understand vegetation dynamics (Bradley and Millington environmental changes was evaluated through interviews and 2006; Bustamante Becerra 2006; Millington and Jehangir archival research. The most dynamic LULCCs between 1990 2000) and pastoralist societies (Alzérreca et al. 2006; and 2000 were large increases in wetlands and a loss of Molinillo and Monasterio 1997; 2006), there are fewer permanent ice. We conclude that the people’sresponsesto studies examining LULCC of mountain pastoralism. Meth- these changes will depend on availability of institutions to odological problems (Fox et al. 2003) related to the manage pastures, other household resources, and perceptions topography of mountainous landscapes, to the mobility of of these biophysical changes. Socioenvironmental change is the pastoralists (i.e., transhumance or nomadism; BurnSilver not new in the study area, but current shifts will likely force et al. 2003), or to the marginal importance of mountains this community to alter its rules of access to pastures, its within urban-oriented policies (Fox et al. 2003; Sarmiento economic rationales in regards to commodities produced, and 2000) may partially explain the lack of research. the degree of dependence on seasonal wage labor. In this In order to evaluate the consequences of landscape scenario, households with a greater amount of livestock will change for Andean pastoralists it is important to examine fare better in terms of assets and capital that will allow them to (1) extent, nature, and rate of environmental (biophysical) benefit from the increasing presence of a market economy in a change, (2) concomitant socioeconomic and demographic landscape undergoing climate change. changes, and (3) social capital available for adaptation or adjustments. Extensive pastoral land use systems cover Keywords Andes . Climate change . approximately 25% of the world’s land surface, producing Land use/land cover change (LULCC) . pastoralism 10% of meat consumed by humans and supporting 20 million pastoral households (FAO 2001). In Peru, there are 170,000 households of pastoralists (Sociedad Peruana de Introduction Criadores de Alpacas y Llamas—SPAR 2005) living above 4,000 m elevation in communities with little or no Land use/land cover change (LULCC) is an important agriculture. Instead, they utilize communal pasturelands aspect of global change that can be studied with approaches for grazing mixed herds of alpaca (Lama pacos), llama (Lama glama) and sheep (Ovis aries). They also barter animal products for other necessities such as potatoes, salt, * : : J. C. Postigo ( ) K. R. Young K. A. Crews and maize. Their grazing pastures and wetlands are University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712, USA dependent primarily on groundwater flows. The majority e-mail: [email protected] of pastoralist studies have focused on Africa and Asia 536 Hum Ecol (2008) 36:535–551 (Azarya 1999; Bennett 1988; Blench 1999; Fabietti and differences within and among communities in the high Salzman 1996; Gebre 2001; Johnson 1969; 1991; McCabe Andes are harder to explain. By examining both household 1990; McPeak 2005; Mishra et al. 2003), and some have and community-level perspectives in this study, we can considered pastoralism to be an activity carried out better explain the dynamics of a community that participates exclusively in Europe, Asia or Africa (Markakis 2004; in market economic relationships, transforms its land tenure Salzman 2004). In the Andes it was neglected by social system and cultural values, and experiences increased scientists until the early 1960s (Flores Ochoa 1968, 1977b; tension between community and household needs. Since Markakis 2004). Adams (1962), the concept of campesino community has Typically, pastoralist productive systems have been been understood as a group of households where individual defined either as a mode of production providing subsis- households control different resources in diverse ecological tence products (de Vries et al. 2006; Markakis 2004)oras zones and where production occurs through a dynamic set of an adaptive process to natural conditions (Browman 1974; social relationships that vary according to the ultimate Salzman 2004). As such, pastoralism is a land use system destination of the product (Fonseca and Mayer 1988;Golte that either occupies extensive lands to maintain herds year 1980;GolteanddelaCadena1983;Murra1975). round (through a system of free-range grazing) or that Acknowledging that social relationships are dynamic empha- moves periodically within or between specific grazing sizes specific issues within each community and recognizes territories according to economic and ecological needs that relationships may change over time or even elapse in (Browman 1974; Khazanov 1984, 1998, 2001; Orlove order to attend to the changing needs of a group or an 1982). Interestingly, Andean pastoralism encompasses individual household (Adams 1962; Mossbrucker 1990). elements of both definitions; it provides subsistence to Alber (1999) defined “community” as an institution under pastoralists (Flores Ochoa 1968), and in general it appears transformation rather than as a fixed principle of social to be a successful adaptation process to mountain con- organization, thereby avoiding a definition based upon social ditions (Flores Ochoa 1977b). The adaptive process functions that can change. The relevance of this perspective includes domestication of camelids (Baied and Wheeler is in the understanding of community as an open system in 1993; Gade 1977; Wheeler 1988) and plants (especially dynamic adaptation to environmental and demographic potatoes [Solanum tuberosum]andquinua [Chenopodium change (Zimmerer 1994). Since the 1990s the concept of quinoa]; Custred 1977), and the biological adaptations of community often has focused on land tenure and the humans (Baker 1976;Thomas1977;Thomas1997; resources under its control (Laos 2004;Urrutia2004), the Thomas and Winterhalder 1976;Velásquez1976)and legal status of the community (Burneo de la Rocha 2007; vegetation (Wilcox et al. 1987). Though pastoralists’ Castillo Castañeda 2007), and conflicts between (and within) subsistence is achieved through livestock husbandry, barter communities and with different actors (e.g., government or and trade, and seasonal migration, social relationships and private companies, Bebbington 2007) on diverse scales cultural constraints seem to prevent wealth accumulation (Alzadora and Gironda 2004; Burneo and Ilizarbe 2004; (in this case, herd size) that would lead to social Laos 2004). differentiation and overexploitation of limited resources The methodology of our study combines three perspec- (Browman 1974; Orlove 1982). Further, livestock serve as tives to generate an understanding of the responses of a mobile “secure food base” (Browman 1974:189) and a pastoralist societies in the Peruvian highlands to outside producer of exchangeable goods, key aspects of pastoralist drivers of change. The first perspective links social research adaptation to harsh and changing climatic conditions. with GIScience (geographic information science) at house- Andean pastoralism transforms (and is transformed by) its hold, community, and regional levels (Rindfuss et al. 2003; environment in a dynamic interplay that includes species Walsh et al. 2004). The second addresses the local domestication, pasture management, and climate change. adaptations of pastoralists to climatic variations as well as The peasant (or campesino) community is one of the most to social transformations through history (Walker and Peters examined concepts in Andean anthropology (Alberti and 2007). The final perspective involves linking scientific Mayer 1974; Fonseca and Mayer 1988;Fuenzalida1969, knowledge of the social dynamics of land use/land cover 1982;Golte1992;Mayer2002; Mossbrucker 1990;Sendón change (Lambin et al. 2001; Meyer and Turner II 1994)with 2001), particularly as some scholars (i.e., the indigenistas development projects carried out in the area. Specifically, this such as Castro Pozo 1924; 1973, and Mariátegui 1981) evaluation involves analyses of historical archives, remotely incorrectly equated current institutions with those of the sensed data, and field studies of current land use practices in Inca state (Adams 1962;Jacobsen1993). Under this a peasant community of pastoralists in the Peruvian high- conceptualization, household agency and any inter- or lands. Our overall goal is to elucidate how high elevation intra-communal differences vanish because every decision pastoralist systems have responded to disturbances from the appears to occur at a level higher than the household,