University of California Santa Cruz What Makes Community Forestry Work? a Comparative Case Study in Michoacan and Oaxaca, Mexi
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SANTA CRUZ WHAT MAKES COMMUNITY FORESTRY WORK? A COMPARATIVE CASE STUDY IN MICHOACAN AND OAXACA, MEXICO A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSPHY in ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES by James Barsimantov June 2009 The Dissertation of James Barsimantov is approved: Professor Alan Richards, Chair Professor Daniel Press Professor Greg Gilbert i ii Table of Contents James Barsimantov – Doctoral Dissertation List of Tables iv List of Figures viii Abstract x Acknowledgements xi Chapter 1: Introduction 1 Chapter 2: Research Design and Methodology 18 Chapter 3: Is Community Forestry Related to Reduced Deforestation? An Analysis of 43 Eight Mexican States Chapter 4: Does Vertical Integration Matter? Social and Ecological Outcomes of 60 Community Forestry Programs Chapter 5: Internal and External Influences: Why do some communities attain higher 106 levels of vertical integration? Chapter 6:Vicious and Virtuous Cycles and the Role of External Non-Government 122 Actors in Community Forestry in Oaxaca and Michoacan, Mexico Chapter 7: Land cover change and land tenure change in Mexico’s avocado region: 140 Can community forestry reduce incentives to deforest for high value crops? Concluding Remarks 155 Appendix 1: Field Tools 160 Appendix 2: A Theoretical Model of Deforestation with Community Forestry 168 Appendix 3: Ecological Measures - Forest Transects 176 Bibliography 194 iii List of Tables James Barsimantov – Doctoral Dissertation Chapter 2 Table 2.1. A Schematic Approach to Case Selection of Mexican Forestry 20 Communities Table 2.2. Number and Percent of Communities by Level of Vertical Integration in 21 Oaxaca and Michoacan Table 2.3. Socioeconomic Characteristics of Study Municipalities and Michoacan’s 24 Geopolitical Regions Table 2.4. Number and Percent of Communities by Level of Wood Processing and 26 Region in Michoacan Table 2.5: Area and Volume of Authorized Timber Harvest and Wood Processing 26 Facilities in Michoacan, Mexico Table 2.6. Demographic and Geographic Characteristics of Oaxaca’s Regions 28 Table 2.7. Number and Percent of Communities by Level of Vertical Integration in 28 Oaxaca’s Regions Table 2.8. Avocado Production in Mexican States: 1978, 1990, and 1997 32 Table 2.9. Avocado Production in Mexico Compared to Other Countries, 2000 32 Table 2.10 Avocado Production in Michoacan as Compared to Other Orchard Crops, 33 2007 Table 2.11. Avocado Production by Municipality, Michoacan Mexico, 2006 34 Table 2.12 Recent Growth of Production in Ario de Rosales 34 Table 2.13. Schematic Diagram of Hypotheses and Case Selection 37 Table 2.14: Household survey sample sizes and response rates 38 Table 2.15. Number of Transects in Case Study Communities and Description of 41 Forest Type Chapter 3 Table 3.1. Independent Variables Used in Multivariate Regression Model 49 Table 3.2. State-Level Means of Deforestation and Common Property Forest Variables 50 Table 3.3. Coefficients for six regressions on drivers of gross deforestation in Mexico 52 Table 3.4. Coefficients for six regressions on drivers of forest recovery in Mexico 53 Table 3.5. Coefficients for six regressions on drivers of net forest cover loss in Mexico 54 Table 3.6. Coefficients for six regressions on drivers of gross deforestation in Mexico, 55 split sample Table 3.7. Magnitude of impact of common property and management variables 58 Chapter 4 iv Table 4.1. Planned and Final Selection of Case Study Communities 64 Table 4.2. Number and percent of community forestry types in case study regions, 64 Types II, III, and IV Table 4.3. Basic Characteristics and Control Variables of Case Study Communities 68 Table 4.4. Age and Employment of Voting Members and All Households in Case 70 Study Communities Table 4.5. Indigenous Language Speakers in Case Study Communities 70 Table 4.6. Land Ownership and Firewood Usage of Voting Members in Case Study 71 Communities Table 4.7. Corn Production and Subsistence Consumption in Case Study Communities 71 Table 4.8. Mean Education Levels by Subsets of Inhabitants of Case Study 72 Communities Table 4.9. Forest Cover Change Results in Michoacan Avocado Region Municipalities 74 – 1990-2006 Table 4.10. Forest Cover Change Results in Michoacan Case Study Communities – 75 1990-2006 Table 4.11. Forest Cover Change Results in Oaxaca Case Study Communities – 1990- 86 2002 Table 4.12. Forest Cover Change Results in Oaxaca Case Study Districts – 1990-2000 86 Table 4.13. Results of One-Way ANOVAs: Deforestation by Forestry Type and by 87 Region Table 4.14. One Way ANOVAs: Post Hoc Tukey Test Pair Comparisons 87 Table 4.15. ANOVA Results on Wealth and On-Farm Employment in Study 90 Communities Table 4.16. Timber-Related Income and Job Creation in Case Study Communities 91 Table 4.17. ANOVA Results on On-Farm Employment in Case Study Communities 92 Table 4.18 ANOVA Results on Migration in Case Study Communities 93 Table 4.19 ANOVA Results on Land Sales in Case Study Communities 94 Table 4.20. Qualitative Assessment of Case Study Communities’ Domestic Water 96 System Table 4.21. ANOVA results for Michoacan and Oaxaca Case Study Communities: Is 97 the community doing enough to provide drinking water to households? Table 4.22. ANOVA Results on Governance Functioning Composite Variables in 101 Case Study Communities Table 4.23. ANOVA Results on Change in Governance Strength Composite Variables 102 in Case Study Communities Chapter 5 Table 5.1. P Values of Variables Used in Two Stepwise Analyses, Using Regions and 110 Forestry Types as Grouping Variables, Respectively Table 5.2. Coefficients and P Values for Discriminant Function Analysis with Forestry 111 Types as Grouping Variable Table 5.3. Test Classification of Samples: Percent of Samples Classified into Forestry 111 Types v Table 5.4. Means of Variables Uses in Discriminant Function by Forestry Type 111 (standard deviations in parentheses) Table 5.5. Coefficients and P Values for Discriminant Function Analysis with Regions 112 as Grouping Variable Table 5.6. Test Classification of Samples: Percent of Samples Classified into Regions 113 Table 5.7. Means of Variables Uses in Discriminant Function by Region (standard 113 deviations in parentheses) Chapter 6 Table 6.1: Number and Percent of Communities by Level of Vertical Integration in 125 Oaxaca and Michoacan Study Regions 129 Table 6.2: Characteristics of Case Study Communities Table 6.3: Local Governance Functioning: Results of Factorial ANOVA by Forestry 130 Type and State Table 6.4. Relationship with Forester: Results of Factorial ANOVA by Forestry Type 131 and State Table 6.5. Regression Results: Are individual characteristics related to perceptions of 132 governance and trust in foresters? Chapter 7 144 Table 7.1: Characteristics of Case Study Communities 148 Table 7.2: Land Cover Change in Avocado Region and Municipality of Ario 148 Table 7.3: Land Cover Change in Case Study Communities 152 Table 7.4. Results of Stepwise Analysis to Determine Potential Household Characteristics for Inclusion in Discriminant Function Analysis Table 7.5. Test Classification of Samples: Percent of Samples Classified into Forestry 152 Types Table 7.6. Means, Standard Errors, Coefficients and P Values for Household 153 Characteristics Used in Discriminant Function Analysis, by Existence of Forestry Program Appendix 3 Table A3.1. Rarefied Tree Species Diversity, Average DBH (cm), and Basal Area 177 (m 2/ha) in Case Study Forests (standard deviations in parentheses) Table A3.2. Rarefied Tree Species Diversity, Average DBH (cm) and Basal Area 177 (m 2/ha) in Transects of Type I Communities (standard deviations in vi parentheses) Table A3.3.Tree Species List from 200m x 2m Forest Transects by Community in 178 Michoacan, Forestry Type in Parentheses below Community Name Table A3.4. Correlations Between Species Richness and Basal Area, by Community 179 Table A3.5. Means and Standard Deviations of Forest Condition Variables Used in 181 NMS Ordination on Forest Condition vii List of Figures James Barsimantov – Doctoral Dissertation Chapter 2 Figure 2.1. Michoacan Topography 23 Figure 2.2. Michoacan Geopolitical Zones, and Study Municipalities 23 Figure 2.3. Oaxaca Topography 27 Figure 2.4. Oaxaca Geopolitical Zones, and Study Region 27 Figure 2.5. Avocado Production Zone of Michoacan 30 Figure 2.6. Location of Case Study Communities and Avocado Production Zone 31 Chapter 4 Figure 4.1. Measures of Success in Community Forestry 62 Figure 4.2. Location of Case Study Communities in Michoacan 63 Figure 4.3. Location of Case Study Communities in Oaxaca 63 Figure 4.4. El Chupadero, Type I, Avocado Region: Forest Cover Change 1990-2006 76 Figure 4.5. El Encanto, Type I, Avocado Region: Forest Cover Change 1990-2006 77 Figure 4.6. Tepamal, Type II, Avocado Region: Forest Cover Change 1990-2006 78 Figure 4.7. Pablo Cuin, Type II, Avocado Region: Forest Cover Change 1990-2006 79 Figure 4.8. San Gregorio, Type I, Non Avocado Region, Michoacan: Forest Cover 80 Change 1990-2006 Figure 4.9. Turiran, Type II, Non Avocado Region, Michoacan: Forest Cover Change 81 1990-2006 Figure 4.10. Felipe Tzintzun, Type III, Non Avocado Region, Michoacan: Forest 82 Cover Change 1990-2006 Figure 4.11. Juquila Vijanos (Type I) & Yalina (Type II), Sierra Juarez, Oaxaca: 83 Forest Cover Change 1990-2000 Figure 4.12. La Trinidad (Type IV) & Yatuni (Type III), Sierra Juarez, Oaxaca: Forest 84 Cover Change 1990-2000 Chapter 5 Figure 5.1. Forest Values in Michoacan Case Study Communities 107 Figure 5.2. Forest Values in Oaxaca Case Study Communities 107 Chapter 6 Figure 6.1: The Spectrum of External Non-Government Actors 127 Figure 6.2: Location of Study States, Study Regions, and Case Study Communities 128 Chapter 7 Figure 7.1: Location of Study Region and Case Study Communities 144 viii Appendix 3 Figure A3.1.