Sustainability and Biodiversity of Tropical Ecosystems
Scott Bergen
First a congratulatory note on creating a symposium structure that brought many untraditional forestry techniques
to OSU. Although the conference was punctuated by iatrogenic causes, I think it was very successful. I wish I could
have attended the after conference proceedings at the New World Deli.
One thing I would have done differently was the temporal structure of the conference. First, I would have released
Paul Risser and Logan Norris from their introductory duties. They have no direct affiliation with tropical rain
forests beyond securing institutional funds and they have not been the most cooperative in establishing my grant
studies in the Amazon Basin (see
questions). I would have started with a brief review of competing theories of why tropical rain forests are so
species diverse. From these theories I would have started Peart, DeVries, and
tried to get a primatologist to introduce their studies and address how their analyses are different from what
would be expected from temperate climates. Break. Next would be anthropogenic studies of peoples, diseases, and
a comparison of endemic vs. corporate forestry practices. I would ask these participants simply to address are
there any silvic methods which do not result in a net decrease of biological species diversity and if there are
could they please tell us about them. Break. Next, I'd use Dave Perry, and perhaps others (Bawa, maybe other MOBOT
affiliates) to address how restoration efforts have worked or have not worked. I'd ask them to go in-depth on topics
such as methodologies and financing agencies paying for such studies.
Break. For the finally I'd do a traditional round table discussion where one person asks a question and all members
have the opportunity to address the question and perhaps differ with other table members. Break. Beer and munchy
time.
Lastly, I'd try to address the snow job that the media has placed over our head concerning eco-tourism and sustainable
tropical forestry. La Selva, as example, is well on its way to being an island reserve. Indonesia just lost all
of its second growth forest due to fire. The oriental region of Ecuador (the place Al Gentry died) and Colombian
and Peruvian amazon developments are at best, for the rich. It seems to me that one of the best preventative measures
to sustainability in the tropics is keeping out corporations that are globalized in financial structure. Some of
the best preserved areas left in the tropics are those areas that have economic climate inconducive to western
economics. The Peten region of Guatemala, Chiapas region of Mexico, Nicaragua have extensive tracts of intact forests
relative to La Selva. Rebel forces in Peru have stopped the development of their amazon rain forests, at least
relative to what has occurred in adjacent Ecuador. I'm a tad contemptuous, I know, but I'm just looking at things
for their face value without taking into account any good intentions groups may have. My findings are that introduction
of western economic systems leads to the eventual destruction of endemic societies and endemic biological species
diversity. Exile from western economics does have its costs in terms of people's health, but even so, endemic peoples
have a strong immunity to endemic diseases of the forest and have sustained their society with them. Introduction
of eco-tourism also introduces diseases not endemic to the areas concerned. The frequencies of Malaria, Dengue
Fever, Leishmanaisis, Yellow Fever have all been shown to increase in frequency with western development, in non-endemic
forms which further displace the peoples they are trying to
assist.
Top
Leslie Dyal
In summary, this syposium integrated many different perspectives on issues surrounding the alarming rates of tropical
ecosystem destruction. Bawa, Stockdale, Baer, and Perry elucidated the perspectives of indigeneous cultures such
as the Soligas, Dayaks, Orang Asli, and native Hawaiians. Others speakers, Kauffmann, Baer, Peart, and Devries
linked these perspectives with fire ecology, human genetics, population ecology, and community ecology. Many of
the speakers demonstrated some ingenious solutions to combat deforestation. For example, the knowledge of indigeneous
cultures can enhance conservation efforts. Other solutions involve allowing these cultures more control over their
resources and providing real economic incentives. Other pertinent issues include the role of density dependence
in maintaining diversity and the haphazard methods of estimating biodiversity due to a lack of spatial and temporal
considerations when sampling. The panel discussion dove to the heart of the matter and outlined the main underlying
problems that fuel resource degradation. The main issues involve greed, centralized power, politics, capitalism,
and communism. These societal problems will be the focus of the remaining discussion.
As a behavioral ecologist and evolutionary biologist, I am interested in the ultimate explanation for these behaviors, greed, capitalism, etc. Ultimate explanations are evolutionary explanations that ask "Why" certain behaviors exist and deal with the function of behavior in terms of reproduction and survival. Conversely, proximate explanations are mechanisms that facilitate the function and these explanations involve "How" certain behaviors exist. Proximate explanations involve cultural, developmental, genetic, hormonal, etc. explanations. Ultimate and proximate explanations are not necessarily exclusive and, in many cases, operate simultaneously. However, by definition, there is only one ultimate explanation. I admit that this terminology developed by evolutionary biologists seems to imply that proximate explanations are not as important. In order to understand the complexity of such issues, however, many different levels of explanations are critical.
I am not only interested in ultimate, evolutionary explanations because this is my field of study. But understanding this explanation for greed and centralized power will facilitate studies that could elucidate the environmental factors affecting the variation in these behaviors. With such knowledge, we would have a more concrete solution for sustainability than by proximate mechanisms alone. There are a few examples of this type of applied approach in the entomological literature with some suggestions for use as biological control mechanisms. With that, I would like to propose an evolutionary explanation for the prevalence of greed, centralized power, or resource control. Although I try to remain unbiased in my discussion, I am a white, middle-class, radical, Darwinian feminist and escaping this bias would be impossible.
In order to understand the function of resource control (capitalism), it is important to note the prevalence of this type of system (in other taxa, this is referred to as a resource brokering mating system) and the extreme costs, deforestation among many. Since the costs ultimately affect survival, the benefits must be substantial in order for the behaviors to be so wide-spread. A cost-benefits analysis is definitely warranted. Baer indicated the most obvious cost when she suggested a shift of focus to the women and children in indigeneous cultures who are affected by these acts of greed. In turn, the beneficiaries are the resource holding males in developed countries. The logic may seem intuitive and it should be. If a behavior affects reproduction, it is, by definition, under the influence of natural selection. The only criteria are that individuals have differential survival and reproduction and there exists some mechanism of heredity (i.e. genes and learning) which are the only assumptions of natural selection.
Cost-benefits analysis of a behavior from a natural selection perspective is complex involving individuals as well as the interactions between individuals. The fields of science in this area are relatively new. Consequently, the surface of complexity has only been scratched. My explanations are a glossed-over, extremely brief summary of a naturally complex issue. However, the applicative nature of this type of understanding warrants consideration of sustainability and biodiversity issues from an evolutionary perspective.
The symposium speakers addressed several common themes related to the sustainable management of tropical forest ecosystems, but also emphasized the contrasts in approaches between regions that varied in their biota and social structures. Several examples of sustainable use of tripical forests by indigenous peoples were described, along with examples of projects that increased the involvement of local stakeholders in sustainable forest management. However, it is uncertain how these models can be generalized in the face of the strong institutional forces driving forest conversion.
While in general, local decision making was advocated as less harmful to forests than decisions driven by regional or global forces, there are significant differences in the institutional drivers of forest conversion between regions. In India, there is a ban on large-scale forest conversion, but the high human population density drives small-scale conversion of forest to agriculture and forest degradation through fuelwood gathering. In the Amazon, most forest conversion is by burning to create pasture, with little timber extracted. However, non-local or corporate large landowners are significant causes of large-scale conversion, along with expansion of agriculture and plantations of commodity crops such as oil palm.
In contrast to his earlier writings (Conservation Biology 12: 46-55) which documented the many institutional obstacles to sustainable tropical timber production, Dr. Bawa's symposium presentation offered an encouraging example of the potential for "participatory resource management" by local residents through the sustainable harvest of non-timber forest products (NFTP). Technical assistance helped residents reduce the overharvest of NTFP by monitoring of harvest and by increasing income by value-added products derived from the NTFP harvest. Bawa advocated a paradigm shift from control of the forest by forest department experts to control by many stakeholders. However, this paradigm has the potential to be non-sustainable in areas where a strong timber-extraction industry is supported by local residents due to economic dependence. The success of the Indian example is partly due to strong government support for control by indigenous people, unlike the situation in Brazil and Indonesia.
Dr. Stockdale's presentation documented the different impacts on Bornean forests of 'forest pioneers' (non-local stakeholders) versus local indigenous small landholders (the Dyaks). The Dyaks practice an example of sustainable use of NTFP such as rattan and wild honey. However, unlike in the Amazon, the prevalence of masting among Bornean forest tree species makes the harvest of fruit and nut NTFP's more variable and less viable economically. The Dyak land management system is being destroyed by strong institutional drivers promoting forest conversion. Local residents no longer have secure land tenure or a long-term stake in forest sustainability and may encourage forest fires that destroy plantations as well as primary forest.
This example as well as the Amazon example presented by Dr. Kauffman demonstrate that proximal drivers of forest conversion such as land use practices by small landowners, are distinct from more fundamental drivers that are linked to forces such as the global commodities market and World Bank subsidies based on inappropriate development models. Changes in forest practices based on local community involvement and traditional use of non-timber forest products may be difficult to generalize without changes in the fundamental drivers.
The presentations on forest ecology by Drs. Peart and DeVries offered an additional cautionary note as to the difficulties in managing complex tropical forest ecosystems. The management implications of the patterns of tree diversity studied by Dr. Peart are still uncertain, but it is likely that the low population density of many tree species will increase the effects of landscape fragmentation on species diversity. Further research is needed on the spatial scale of seed predators and disturbance (gap) size. Ongoing research by John Terborgh in Venezuelan rainforests suggests that loss of large predators due to forest fragmentation can induce an increase in small seed predators and consequently a strong decrease in reproduction of large-seeded trees. The complex spatial and temporal variation in insect (butterfly) diversity studied by Dr. DeVries suggests similar difficulties in managing or even assessing patterns of invertebrate species distribution. Dr. Kauffman's work on changes in fire frequency due to fragmentation suggest that emergent landscape effects of forest fragmentation on remnant primary forest may be as important as direct forest loss. The ecosystem management paradigm is still problematic in temperate forest ecosystems due to lack of biological knowledge. Prospects in the more complex tropical forests, given the more extreme lack of biological knowledge on tropical ecosystems, are even more uncertain.
Steve DiFazio
A recurring theme of the symposium was that tropical deforestation is largely an anthropogenic phenomenon, so understanding
and conserving biodiversity requires explicit consideration of the human component of tropical ecosystems. This
may sound trite, but billions of dollars have been wasted on projects in developing countries that fail to take
local needs and cultures into account. Another theme was that understanding the nature and evolutionary dynamics
of biodiversity is a key to successful conservation and restoration. The challenge is in integrating deep scientific
concepts with complex social issues to derive a workable strategy for conservation. Of course, this is a tall order
and we did not come close to accomplishing this with our one day symposium, but I believe we made strides in identifying
significant issues, and in sketching out promising strategies for conservation and restoration.
Interestingly, I found it much easier to derive connections among all of the talks by rearranging the order of the speakers in my mind. First, DeVries raised some important issues surrounding the questions of what is biodiversity and how do we measure it? In particular, it is important to derive metrics for biodiversity than can be compared across sites and studies, taking into account biases caused by sampling intensity and spatial and temporal variation. Peart focused more on mechanisms that maintain biodiversity within a system, presenting some ingenious approaches for detecting intraspecific density-dependence in a complex, species-rich system. Both of these presentations represented some of the ground-breaking basic science that is helping to build a base of understanding on which management of tropical ecosystems might be based.
Kauffman provided an excellent introduction and analysis of the major threats to biodiversity, in particular fire. He convincingly demonstrated that carbon emissions from rainforest combustion can be substantial, and converted systems contain much less carbon (with similar, often exaggerated trends for nutrients). The rate and scale of conversion has some obvious local consequences, and potential global consequences as well. Kauffman ended with some possible solutions to the problem, such as sustainable extractive forestry, and agroforestry. He emphasized the importance of working with local people to determine what might work.
Stockdale, Baer, and Perry all focused on indigenous knowledge as a rich source of information on how to properly manage tropical ecosystems. Stockdale and Baer in particular described in some detail the practices of two very different groups of native peoples in southeast Asia, and the benefits to both the ecosystem and the quality of life of the people themselves. They also described how this way of life and the associated ecosystem were threatened by the inevitable incursion of outsiders. Perry took this one step further, focusing on the introduction of exotic pests as well as human incursions as the causes of loss of ecosystem integrity. He went on to sketch an approach to conservation that focused on ecosystem restoration, using the best science available, but performing the projects within the context of the local culture and religion.
I felt that Bawa came the closest to tying everything together, which is ironic, since he made the first presentation. His approach to biodiversity conservation was centered on local people who depended on the forest for their sustenance. As was stressed by several of the speakers, it is critical that local people have a stake in conserving the forest, or they will overharvest to survive (or allow others to do so). Bawa described a program focused on improving the value of products resulting from sustainable harvesting, thereby providing an immediate and direct benefit to participation in a conservation program. His incorporation of scientific data gathering (using local labor) into the functioning of the conservation project was particularly innovative. Establishment and implementation of an effective and scientifically valid monitoring program is crucial to the success of such a program, and this is a challenge which has rarely been met in development programs. It represents a tremendous opportunity for ecologists who want to have a direct impact on biodiversity conservation while conducting valid and important basic research projects.
Not surprisingly, there were some major topics that received relatively little attention in the symposium. First and foremost is population growth. Perry and others acknowledged that conservation is a Quixotic undertaking in the face of exponential population growth, but little was said about strategies to mitigate or reverse this trend.
Somewhat more surprising was the lack of attention or respect paid to intensive plantation forestry. There is a tremendous need throughout the developing world and tropics for high yielding plantations that can provide fuel and fodder. Shortage of cooking and heating fuel is one of the major problems in developing countries, and plantation forestry is poorly developed in many countries. As a result, wood gathering represents a significant impact on native forests in many developing countries (including Central American countries like Costa Rica). Wood, is a renewable, low-tech. energy source, and intensive plantation forestry has the potential to alleviate pressures on native forests while providing employment for local people. Therefore, it was curious to me that the only talk of plantation forestry was in a negative light (e.g., Stockdale and Perry each spoke derisively of pulp plantations). Of course I understood the point about pulp plantations providing little income or benefit to local people, but many of the same principles that apply to short-rotation pulp plantations apply equally well to fuelwood plantations. This struck me in particular because I am concerned about biodiversity conservation and integrity of forest ecosystems in the developing world, but I have chosen to address these issues by working to improve the productivity of intensive plantation forestry. I am curious to know why plantation forestry is held in such low regard in some circles.
The topic we tackled for this symposium was complex and multi-faceted, so it is unsurprising that we failed to arrive at a grand synthesis. Our information on Heredia Province was really too sketchy for naïve participants (i.e., those such as myself who have never worked there) to derive a comprehensive assessment of the issues there. None the less, I will summarize what I learned, focusing on the area surrounding La Selva. The forests of La Selva itself are probably pretty safe from cutting, due to a relatively stable political situation in Costa Rica, and the large international presence and stake in the vicinity (meaning there would probably some accountability for persons who decide to cut within the reserve. However, the surrounding area is susceptible to cutting, and in fact most forest has been removed from the area east of the reserve and replaced with banana plantations and ranches, a process which is driven by multinational concerns. In contrast, the area west of the park is largely occupied by small agricultural landholdings, which still contain substantial forest cover. Given the large edge effects that can be expected on such a landscape (alluded to by DeVries), a buffer zone around the reserve in which a modicum of forest cover is maintained is certainly desirable. Also, because the park is fairly small, intensified efforts must be undertaken to create a real corridor linking the La Selva to the larger reserves to the south (Braulio Carillo National Park). To accomplish these goals, innovative programs such as agroforestry systems and perhaps forestry plantations can be introduced, working closely with local farmers to determine where interests lie and to identify the systems with greatest prospects for success (simultaneously taking into account the ecological value of the species in buffers or corridors). Such programs will only work with substantial institutional and legislative support, prospects for which are relatively good in Costa Rica, which has a progressive administration and much international development work. However, projects must also be comprehensive and integrative, incorporating ecological, social, and economic realities simultaneously. Herein lies the greatest challenge.
Strong ecological reasons exist to preserve tropical forests and ecologists are accustomed to hearing them.
Immense and incompletely cataloged biodiversity. Evolution and co-evolution. Genetics. Global climactic change.
Carbon sequestration. Two hundred million years of history. Endemism. But even at that it is difficult to not be
impressed by David Pert's estimate that Bornean tropical forest may support 400 tree species per soil type or Boone
Kaufman's estimate that Amazonia supports over two hundred commercially useful tree species, or that the majority
of butterfly species sampled by Phil de Vries over a one year period were unique. What made the seminar most relevant,
however, was that it went beyond quantitative science by emphasizing preservation of tropical forests depends on
ecology, health, culture, and poverty in five reoccuring themes: 1) there is strong linkage between human action
and forest reaction 2) the western model of building exploitive structures designed to harvest resources until
they collapse is still being applied. 3) native people are still under attack. 4) the gravest threat to ecosystems
is fragmentation and changes in disturbance type and interval. 5) preservation of remaining tropical forests is
hindered by a lack of institution support.
One of my questions was was how firm are primary tropical forest loss statistics. Kamaljit Bawa's answer was not
encouraging. Despite best efforts tropical deforestation is accelarating and may exceed estimates by 2x. He also
pointed out that sustainability often founders because existing infrastructres are based on extraction and exploitation.
He and Phil de Vries also pointed out that while non-wood forest products are a great improvement over wood-based
industries because these methods preserve tropical forest trees, even these friendlier methods pose sobering ecological
questions-what is the effect of fruit harvest on tree regeneration? how does non-wood forest product harvest affect
understory vegetation and animal species? Do work parties in the forest increase probability of fire? A second
question was how successfully tropical deforestation competes for attention with social issues and it seems neither
has a strong history of success. Dr. Stockdale's emphasized the rich knowledge about tropical forest possessed
by indigenous people is under utilized and that despite a rational system which eliminates dependence on a single
species and preserves successional stages and forest function, they are viewed as backward and ignorant by the
waves of migrants invading the island. Dr.Baer pointed out that loss of forest leads to crowded villages on degraded
land and loss of medicinal plants, creating feedback which compounds the problem and encourages disease. It was
also clear from these lecture that the civilized route to problem solution has been inadequate and short sighted,
such as repairing leaky urban plumbing by daming another rainforest river. A particulary appaling example was the
pulping of saw quality Bornean rainforest. Dr. Peart's lecture captured my interest because my training lies in
zoology and evolutionary relationships between lineages, so research investigating how high tree species diversity
evoloves and is maintained sympatrically under a relatively uniform environment is near and dear to my heart. This
lecture was memorable because of its strong linkage of theory and data, for pointing out that this question might
be explored by modeling species as co-competitors where random change drives species in different direction, that
density may be driving distribution, and for clarifying my definition of mast fruiting. There were also some encouraging
points, such as the U.S and other countries are being held accountable for their own land use record, pilot sustainability
programs, and the recent joint effort by the World Bank and the World Wildlife Fund.
The assault on tropical forests, and all ecosystem, is not limited to logging, changes in disturbance frequency
and type, and conversion of vegetation type. In India, where logging has been banned by the supreme court, primary
forest is slowly being nibbled away by desperate indigenous people looking for firewood. Land use decisions are
made at remote locations by people who are not impacted by the fate of forest land they control and who have no
interest in these forests except as a commodity. After 25 years of industrialization, indigenous peoples of Amazonia,
Borneo, and India, still hold a minority of land and live in abject poverty. Tropical forests as lush gardens of
indigenous people contrasts sharply with the historical western view of nature as a resource to which we are entitled
and a force that must be subdued. Some governments are riddled with corruption and self interest. And even when
non-wood forest products are extracted sustainably, markest are not well developed may not be cost effective. These
are large scale problems and preservation will require state and federal support, long-term commitment from institutions,
and native people who feel they have a personal stake in their landscape. Since capitalism will likely persist,
ecosystem functions such as slope stability, climate modulation, carbon sequestration, and water purification must
be factored into planning budgets. Second, institutions which are truly grounded in sustainability must be built
and human relationships to natural systems must be revived. When conversion of an exploitive structure to a sustainable
structure is not possible a willingness to replace these structure must exist. Third, land use decisions must be
made locally because preservation is most probable if decisions about ecosystems are made by people affected by
those decisions. Fourth, policies, which open deep interior forest to colonization and lead to continual erosion
and fragmentation from both outside and inside, must change. Fifth, there must be accountability for products advertised
as benefiting tropical forests and indigenous people actually doing so. These are daunting tasks. Whether these
problems can be resolved at all is unclear. Whether they can be resolved in time is even more uncertain. What is
know is that there is an asymmetry between trees and humans because trees don't need humans, and the trees are
losing.
If there was a disappointment it was the limited time for questions. If the all day format is used again fewer
speakers or firmer time limits might be considered. Secondly, the amount of each lecture devoted to La Selva varied
from virtually nothing to a genuine effort. Speakers who addressed La Selva in the most detail also seemed the
most well prepared. Using a common frame of reference potentially ties lectures together, but it also means each
speaker must invest more time and lecturers who fall late in the day might need to work harder to offer something
original.
Kei Fujimura
Dr. Baer categorized tropical rainforests in three general groups, depending if the observer was a politician,
scientist, or in her example Orang Asli. Politicians saw these rainforests commodities, scientists as ecosystems,
and Orang Asli as managed living space, or a trust. In her categorization she did not include that scientists,
including herself, see the rainforests as more of a sociological problem since often times ecological analyses
neglect the human aspect. Nevertheless, however the scientist may look at the rainforest issues, they concluded
that much of the remaining rainforests are no longer sustainable. From the symposium on Sustainability and Biodiversity
of Tropical Ecosystems, various scientists gave their evaluation on the status of their area of interests.
There were two approaches by the scientists in their analyses of the different rainforests; one centering on people who live in the rainforests and the other that focussed on a non-human aspect. Dr. Stockdale gave a definition of social forestry that summed up her and the other speakers' concepts. Social forestry is the interaction between people and forest. Value is seen in seeking active involvement of local people in environmental care, such as the policies recently implemented by the Indian government. Speakers, who spoke on rainforests from more of non-human viewpoint, emphasized how knowing and understanding intact forests will bring more insight into the magnitude of change when the forests are transformed. Some of them also tried to understand what brought about biodiversity.
Many problems were listed as to the deforestation of tropical rainforests. Dr. Stockdale pointed out that though logging may be the initial problem, it brings a plethora of other problems that may be more detrimental than logging itself. She gave the example of how clearing the land not only changed the sustainable land use practices by the Bentian Dayak, but also was brought detrimental effects by the transmigration of people who did not know the land or how to care for it. Dr. Stockdale stated that another problem was that people in cities who are far from the land make decisions on land use. This problem was accentuated by the situation with the Orang Asli. The government tried to solve their 'malaria' problem with practices that ended up killing some of the Orang Asli. Dr. Baer commented that the loss of sustainable land equated with ill health and loss of the Orang Asli. Other problems included introduction of domestic animals in Hawaii, cattle ranching in the Amazon, plantations for oil palm in Indonesia and Malaysia, coffee and tea plantations and hydraulic power in India
The speakers gave several solutions. Dr. Kauffman suggested agro-forestry to deter the transformation of forest to meadows for cattle in the Amazon. However, Dr. Bawa pointed out that this practice did not work in India because the profits would go to a few people and not the whole community. Dr. Bawa emphasized the need for change in government policy and need for new institutions for changing problems. Several speakers stated that rainforests need to go back to the people who have traditionally worked with it. People who work with the land believe in the long-term use of the land and are more likely to protect it for future generations. In India, policies exist to involve the Soligas with economic incentives, have the Soligas control the biological resources, and assist the Soligas with economic incentives. Dr. Bawa stressed that the involvement of the Soligas is essential for success for sustainable forestry. Another important solution that was suggested was the use of non-timber goods. Drs. Stockdale, Kauffman and Bawa accentuated this point.
Overall this symposium was interesting and informative. However, the speakers generally had similar viewpoints, that deforestation of these forests are bad and evil. Another point of view would have been interesting and informative as well. The discussion afterwards had some devil's advocates, but their comments did not seem welcomed. Another point of the post-symposium discussion that needed to be addressed was the tendency to place all the blame on greed, whether it was the greed of the country's government or wealthy landowners. We are just much as fault as those to whom we were readily reproaching. The US uses more natural resources per person than any other country. It would be interesting to compare how much resources that these 'greedy' people use in comparison to what the average American uses in the name of 'convenience'.
Emilie Grossmann
Several points were exceedingly clear at the end of the day. Examples of sustainable use of tropical forests are
few and far between. There are many reasons for this, most of which have their roots in human societies, not the
forests themselves. We already know enough to point our finger at what sorts of human activities threaten the forests:
shifting agriculture, banana plantations in Costa Rica, logging, conversion to pasture. We even have a good idea
of what sorts of forest uses are more likely to be sustainable in the long term: perhaps limited forestry, non-timber
forest products. We are not yet sure enough of how different tropical ecosystem function to propose a management
scheme which we are sure will be sustainable for generations to come, but we are beginning to move in that direction.
The problems arise when we think of tropical forests, and try to figure out a way to stop, or minimize those practices which we see as harmful, and shift them to more sustainable methods. Although I didn't hear his name mentioned throughout the day, Garret Hardin, and his conceptual framework, describing a root cause of many environmental problems, 'The Tragedy of the Commons', often came to mind. If the forests are truly a 'commons', then we must have some mechanism for motivating people towards conservation for the good of their community, instead of exploitation for their own good. While this is a highly theoretical, and academic suggestion, some very practical ideas, and examples which fit in well with this concept were aired during the day. Kamaljit Bawa brought up the example of the Soligas, living sustainably in the Biligiri Rangan Hills Sanctuary. Their community was fairly small, its members' livelihoods tied tightly in with the stability of the forest reserve which was their home. Dave Perry mentioned the community of native Hawaiians who are looking to restore their lands as a mechanism for their own spiritual and cultural restoration. Boone Kauffman mentioned the rubber-tappers whose livelihood is tied to in tact forests.
In other instances, small tight-knit communities have not been able to fit in so easily with their local environments. Adela Baer studied the Orang Asli, and their problems with malaria. In this case, many of the problems arising within this community stem from a lack of power over their own situation. Governments, ignorant of local conditions, making the rules. As conditions deteriorate for the locals, their conditions become more desperate, and they will in the end be forced to exploit the forests for the survival of the forests. They may not have the option to work within the forests in a sustainable manner.
Of course, there is still much debate about what exactly is sustainable use of forests. As we saw from Phil deVries' talk, we still have an immense amount to learn about how the system works in order to understand how our management actions will impact and influence the functioning and biodiversity of the forests. David Peart's research begins to get at this idea though. Understanding the mechanisms which maintain tree diversity may be vital in determining if forestry and biodiversity maintenance are compatible at all.
There is still a lot of work to be done to couple this sort of science with the knowledge of local people in order to figure out how to create a sustainable management scheme... even more to carry out that management scheme, given our current problems arising from the structure, and core beliefs of modern society. But in the end, preserving, and sustaining tropical forest does not yet seem to be a hopeless case. It can work, as we saw, in some small cases. The coming challenge is how to make it work on a larger scale.
Jennifer Swenson
The presentations of the speakers ranged from focused scientific research in the tropics of biodiversity (Phil
DeVries, David Peart), to studies of land use change or other phenomena (Boone Kaufman, Mary Stockdale), to "natural
world" philosophy (David Perry) to presentations that promoted activism (Adela Baer, Phil DeVries).
I would like to see a future seminar series focused upon examples of programs that provide sustainable economic
alternatives for communities at the local level and perhaps ideas in global economic proportions of how the resources
of poor countries can be better protected.
The presentations seemed to bring up ambiguous feelings among students about the need to do something in order
to better conserve biodiversity in tropical ecosystems. The gravity of the situation was brought to our attention
throughout the day, as well as the our general inability to control the current demise of these ecosystems. It
was not laid out for us clearly what could be done by an individual to help the current situation. Where can we
donate money to save these areas? Can we send out fliers? Sign a petition? An individual effort, a change in one's
life, or a redirection of one's own studies is a good first step, yet still pales in comparison to the enormous
forces driving the destruction of the tropical ecosystems. Eventually the question comes to increasing population,
the suffereing economics of these countries, and our global economy that drives the local destruction rates of
forests. But how to control the global economy? How can we prevent our developed countries' steady economic growth
which appears to indirectly deplete the already poor countries? Which is easier to control, increasing population
or global economics?
On a more local scale, how can we really protect the biodiversity? Once again economics plays a large role. Dr.
Bawa's sustainable program of economic self-sufficency in north eastern India appears to be providing a 'sustainable'
economic alternative to this community. Yet this program appears very extensive, including a GIS analysis, and
due to the apparent costs, could not be instituted in many communities. "Only indigenous people can save
themselves" stated Adela Baer, and indicates that not only is economics a factor but the self motivation of
the people and the realization that after centuries of their lifestyle, things are changing rapidly.
Top
Jean-Remy Makana
For millennia forest and human communities have lived in harmony in the tropics. But the last few decades have
seen a significant increase of human pressure on tropical ecosystems; the rate of deforestation in on the increase
in almost all the regions in the tropics. The Forest Science 1999 Spring Symposium aimed to highlight the causes
and effects of deforestation, and to suggest possible solutions for the problem.
Seven speakers contributed to the symposium. They were: Drs. Kamaljit Bawa (University of Massachusetts), Adela
Baer (Oregon State University), Boone Kaufman (Oregon State University), Mary Stockdale (Mulawaran University),
David Peart (Dartmouth College), Phil DeVries (University of Oregon) and Dr. David Perry (Oregon State University).
Major causes of deforestation included forest clearing for agricultural purposes, excessive logging, tree cutting
for fuel wood and the lack of adequate management policies. These causes are exasperated by a fast growing human
population, greedy business people and politicians, and by poverty.
The reduction of forest cover, soil degradation and erosion, the reduction of plant and animal species diversity
and a contribution to the greenhouse effect were cited as some of the negative effects of deforestation. It was
also shown that local communities were adversely affected by the destruction of forests in tropical regions. Even
partial disturbances caused by logging appeared to have profound consequences on species diversity.
Several solutions were suggested to deal with the destruction of tropical ecosystems. They included change in government
priorities and policies, security about tenure and access to land, support for initiatives from local people, support
from rich nations and certification of forests products, and community involvement in forest management.
Overall, the Symposium was a success. The diversity of topics was very effective in maintaining the audience interest
alive throughout the day. However, it would be more interesting and helpful to invite a speaker from forest management
and conservation agencies such as IUCN in order to get a broader view on the issue of deforestation and biodiversity
loss in the tropics.
Although I am not a tropical forest researcher, I have spent time in tropical forests in Zaire and Ecuador and
am interested in seeing the forests I've visited remain intact. Tropical forests still hold within them the wonder
of discovery. A multitude of flora and fauna are being destroyed before they are ever discovered by non- indigenous
and even by indigenous peoples. In our North American forests, with the loss of Native American cultures, no true
"forest people" remain. There are no cultures remaining, to my
knowledge, who live within the forest, respect the forest, and depend on it to clothe, feed, and shelter them.
The situation in tropical rainforest regions, especially South America, is quite different. But these rainforests
and the people within them are vulnerable to outside forces. Population increases, the instability of governments
in tropical regions, the greed of multi-national corporations, the demands of the highly consumptive, industrial
world on developing countries are all major factors in this loss.
It is interesting to hear about the different situations in each of the countries highlighted during the seminar.
The most desperate situations appear to be in Indonesia. With little rainforest left, a burgeoning population,
and government policies that have lead to resource mismanagement, one wonders how much can be saved. For the Orang
Asli, not only is their home in the rainforest being destroyed, they have no rights as a people in the eyes of
the government. More promising stories were told about Soligas
people of India, whose strong sense of preservation for a way of life holds the community together. But still,
much work needs to be done, and more people need to be empowered at the local level.
What are some solutions to the loss of tropical forests worldwide? K.S. Bawa gave some hope, in outlining a paradigm
shift in the way rainforests are perceived. He stated that this shift was occurring in a number of different areas,
from: 1) timber to non-timber goods and services; 2) single-species to ecosystems; 3) inexhaustible resources to
conservation; 4) management by forestry departments to management by many shareholders; and 5) benefits to one
entity to benefits to many groups. However, the rate at which rainforests are being destroyed leads me to believe
that this paradigm shift isn't catching on fast enough with those forces that have the greatest negative impact.
For example, Boone Kauffman made brief mention of social and economic forces that have corrupted the society in
Mexico. These forces appear to be so pervasive and insidious, it makes it difficult, if not impossible for real
change to occur.
Governments throughout the world promote shortsighted projects. Their motivation, it seems, is either greed or
desperation to raise large amounts of capitol quickly to appease lender nations and often at the expense of long-term
sustainable solutions. But resources must be managed better to achieve long-term economic stability. But where
is this sustainability promoted anywhere in the world on a large scale? In my opinion, with all of our knowledge
and resources, the United States, on the whole, provides a poor example as to how resources should be managed for
developing countries. WE need to change this. The concept of "More and Bigger is Better," must be replaced
with "Live Simply" and "Less is More".
During the seminar, I learned about many issues surrounding the loss to indigenous cultures, individual species,
and unique rainforest ecosystems. And this awareness of rainforest issues, if enough people are educated about
them, will go a long way toward saving them. I was happy to see so much participation and so many with genuine
concerns for the future of the rainforest. And in the lively discussion following the seminar, it became apparent
that we all want to see the situation move in the direction of positive change. This in itself leads me to believe
there is hope.
Catherine Palmer
It is well understood that the short term benefits derived from deforestation (anywhere in the world) go hand in
hand with long term sacrifices in biodiversity and can lead to eventual economic collapse as this valuable resource
is depleted. In tropical forests it is estimated that the average rate of deforestation within the past 30 years
has been approximately 13 million hectares per year. The loss of tropical forests is one of the most serious problems
facing the world today, for these forests house an abundance of the world's species and play an important role
in global recycling of oxygen and carbon dioxide. The purpose of this symposium was to bring together scientists
from diverse fields to address issues concerning sustainable management of tropical forests (at the local and global
levels), the effects current trends have had on indigenous people and to address methods of quantifying 'biodiversity'
in order to better understand exactly what it is we are trying to preserve and how this can best be accomplished.
There are two biodiversity 'hotspots' in India, the Western Ghats and Arunachal Pradesh. Although clear-cutting has been banned in India, the Western Ghats has already suffered a 40% loss to deforestation and huge tracts of forest in Arunachal Pradesh have been cleared for crop cultivation. In both areas, forest is continuously nibbled away, despite the ban on clear-cutting. Similarly, large forested regions in eastern Costa Rica have been replaced with banana plantations and private land owners are substituting rain forest with crops and cattle in the west. Conversion to cattle pasture is very common in Brazil, where large regions of primary forest are cleared and burned. Studies suggest that burning of biomass in slashed primary forests lead to high levels of nutrient loss and results in increased air pollution (including greenhouse gases). Indonesia contains 10% of the world's remaining forest and houses the 4th largest human population in the world. Logging arrived in Borneo in the late 1970s via the government's desire to become one of the top 10 producers of paper and pulp. Although plantations were prepared to supply the pulp mills, these plantations failed and today the demand for timber is being met through extraction of primary rain forest. Transmigration and oil-palm plantations have also contributed to the degradation of forested areas in Borneo. The government allocated small pieces of land to migrants for cultivation but the crops failed and most of the migrants eventually became employees of the pulp mills. Economic strife in Indonesia inspired the expansion of high profit oil-palm plantations throughout the region and estimates now suggest that one million hectares of Indonesian forest will be converted to oil palm.
Indigenous peoples have inhabited these ecosystems for many years without overexploiting the resources. However, with the global demand for forest products and a shift in economic control of resources the lifestyles of many of these native tribes have been disrupted. For example, the Soligas have inhabited Southern India for many years, depending on hunting and shifting agriculture for their survival. When these practices were banned in 1974 the Soligas were confined to the Biligiri Ranganswarmy Temple Wildlife Sanctuary where parcels of land were allocated for settled agriculture and harvesting of non-timber forest products (NTFP) for global trade was encouraged. Not only do the Soligas receive inadequate returns on these products, but they have little control over the harvests (until recently). Furthermore, the Soligas depend heavily on the income that they do obtain from the NTFPs and studies suggest that some of the harvest species are declining. In Malaysia, there is a direct relationship between loss of forest and degradation of human health. The native people of Malaysia (the OrangAsli) have no land rights and changes in their life-style have been imposed upon them. Many of the OrangAsli now live in crowded villages where malnutrition, anemia, disease (such as malaria) and infant mortality plague them. In Borneo, the native people (Dyaks) are in conflict with the people who are converting the land. The Dyaks have developed a close relationship with their environment. They are traditional shifting cultivators who use all successional stages of the forest. They benefit economically from their rattan gardens, contributing both rattan and rattan products to the global market without overexploiting this resource.
Tropical forests are among the most species rich regions of the world, yet the majority of the species that
they contain are unknown or only partially studied. Recent attempts have been made to quickly inventory species
in localized areas and/or estimate diversity through extrapolation from small data sets in order to determine where
conservation efforts should be concentrated. The importance of accurate surveys cannot be overstated, thus it is
imperative that we invest more time, money and effort in research that well help us understand the biological/ecological
mechanisms that maintain species diversity and adopt a more robust method of sampling and analyzing species richness.
Furthermore, conservation for sustainable use must include protection of whole ecosystems rather than a single
species, demand must be shifted from timber to a whole range of products, local communities must be involved in
conservation efforts and benefits must start extending to many groups of people rather than individuals.
I would like to thank all of the speakers who were generous enough to participate in this symposium and endure
our questions, as well as the graduate students who did such an excellent job putting it together. I am extremely
interested in conservation and forest management but, because I am pursuing research in other arenas, I rarely
have the opportunity to talk to experts in these fields. I benefited tremendously from this symposium.