<%BANNER%>

Forest Products for Subsistence and Markets

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0044919/00001

Material Information

Title: Forest Products for Subsistence and Markets Livelihood Systems and Value Chains of Buriti (Mauritia Flexuosa) in Brazil
Physical Description: 1 online resource (175 p.)
Language: english
Creator: Virapongse, Arika
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2013

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: barreirinhas -- brazil -- buriti -- chain -- forest -- livelihoods -- maranhao -- ntfp -- product -- value
Interdisciplinary Ecology -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Interdisciplinary Ecology thesis, Ph.D.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: The effect of forest-based markets on local forest users is a central issue in conservation and development initiatives. Using an anthropological complex system approach, forest-based market participants are considered as a web of actors set within a dynamic socio-economic and political environment and multi-level spatial and temporal scale. Social heterogeneity can add complexity to a system, since different groups can face unique sets of risks, opportunities and available resources. This study examined the impact of a new buriti (Mauritia flexuosa L.f.) handicraft market on the livelihood strategies of different user groups of buriti leaf users and sustainable harvesting in Maranhão, Brazil. It was hypothesized that peoples? participation in the market was impacted by their livelihood assets and constraints, access to resources, and value chain dynamics.  Data was collected by conducting interviews with 149 selected individuals who were landowners, extractors, artisans, vendors of buriti handicrafts, non-users of burití leaves, and non-participators in the burití market. Interviews with ten individuals from governmental and non-governmental institutions were used to provide a broader context for the study. Results included an assessment of the livelihood system, typology of livelihood strategies, identification of significant socio-economic variables, and buriti value chains.  Conclusions showed that it is necessary to consider heterogeneity within forest user populations in order to understand factors that impact participation in forest-based markets. Different groups are faced with varying constraints and resource access that determine their livelihood strategy and decision-making process. This study contributes towards understanding the extent to which theories on human-environmental interactions, livelihood strategies, and knowledge generation can be applied to forest-based markets and stratified user groups. Conclusions from this study can contribute towards developing more effective policies that reduce poverty among forest-based people while maintaining forest resources. Among the study community, results can lead to increased empowerment and more informed decision-making among individuals regarding their forest-based livelihood strategies.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by Arika Virapongse.
Thesis: Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Florida, 2013.
Local: Adviser: Schmink, Marianne C.

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2013
System ID: UFE0044919:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0044919/00001

Material Information

Title: Forest Products for Subsistence and Markets Livelihood Systems and Value Chains of Buriti (Mauritia Flexuosa) in Brazil
Physical Description: 1 online resource (175 p.)
Language: english
Creator: Virapongse, Arika
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2013

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: barreirinhas -- brazil -- buriti -- chain -- forest -- livelihoods -- maranhao -- ntfp -- product -- value
Interdisciplinary Ecology -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Interdisciplinary Ecology thesis, Ph.D.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: The effect of forest-based markets on local forest users is a central issue in conservation and development initiatives. Using an anthropological complex system approach, forest-based market participants are considered as a web of actors set within a dynamic socio-economic and political environment and multi-level spatial and temporal scale. Social heterogeneity can add complexity to a system, since different groups can face unique sets of risks, opportunities and available resources. This study examined the impact of a new buriti (Mauritia flexuosa L.f.) handicraft market on the livelihood strategies of different user groups of buriti leaf users and sustainable harvesting in Maranhão, Brazil. It was hypothesized that peoples? participation in the market was impacted by their livelihood assets and constraints, access to resources, and value chain dynamics.  Data was collected by conducting interviews with 149 selected individuals who were landowners, extractors, artisans, vendors of buriti handicrafts, non-users of burití leaves, and non-participators in the burití market. Interviews with ten individuals from governmental and non-governmental institutions were used to provide a broader context for the study. Results included an assessment of the livelihood system, typology of livelihood strategies, identification of significant socio-economic variables, and buriti value chains.  Conclusions showed that it is necessary to consider heterogeneity within forest user populations in order to understand factors that impact participation in forest-based markets. Different groups are faced with varying constraints and resource access that determine their livelihood strategy and decision-making process. This study contributes towards understanding the extent to which theories on human-environmental interactions, livelihood strategies, and knowledge generation can be applied to forest-based markets and stratified user groups. Conclusions from this study can contribute towards developing more effective policies that reduce poverty among forest-based people while maintaining forest resources. Among the study community, results can lead to increased empowerment and more informed decision-making among individuals regarding their forest-based livelihood strategies.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by Arika Virapongse.
Thesis: Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Florida, 2013.
Local: Adviser: Schmink, Marianne C.

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2013
System ID: UFE0044919:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

1 FOREST PRODUCTS FOR SUBSISTENCE AND MARKETS: LIVELIHOOD SYSTEMS AND VALUE CHAIN S OF BURITI ( MAURITIA FLEXUOSA ) IN BRAZIL By ARIKA VIRAPONGSE A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 201 3

PAGE 2

2 201 3 Arika Virapongse

PAGE 3

3 To my husband

PAGE 4

4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I must begin my acknowledgements with a special thanks to my chair, Marianne Schmink, for her perseverance and commitment to my training and education. Thanks to her high expectations I was driven to push well beyond the boundaries that I set for myself I thank my committee members for their support Tamara Ticktin, Sherry Larkin, Noemi Miyasaka Porro, and Jack Putz. Noemi Miyasaka Porro, from University Federal de Par and Roberto Porro from ICRAF, were invaluable for their in country assistance including facilitating my research permits in Brazil I thank faculty from University of Fl orida and University of Hawaii, including Will McClatchey, Michael Thomas, Eric K eys, Jon Dain, Peter Hildebrand Hugh Popenoe, Rick Stepp Mike Heckenberg er Dan Zarin and Bob Buschbacher I thank my many friends an d colleagues from University of Flo rida including Dawn, Ari, Vivian Simone, Allison, Ane, Jon, Katie, Nick, and Mason with a special thanks to Mariano G. Roglich for making the study area map I thank James Colee at the UF stat i s tics IFAS C onsulting Unit office for helping guide my initial statistical analyse s. I thank the members of Soci ety for Economic Botany, who have been my academic family through my long degree seeking journey. I thank Botany in Action in Pittsburgh and particular ly Paul a Scull ey, for always reminding me of the social responsibility of science as an inspiration to keep moving forward A doctoral d issertation improvement grant from the U.S. National Science Foundation, a Brazilian Initiation Scholarship from BRASA and a Botany i n Action fellowship provided the funding that made my research possible I extend my gratitude to the Wo rking Forests in the Tropics IGERT NSF program for funding much of my doctoral studies and, most im portantly, supporting my endeavors to discover my

PAGE 5

5 research topic and grow intellectually through this exploration. I thank the staff at the School of Natural Resources and Environment and particular ly former director Stephen Humphrey, for their incredible support throughout my program I thank the peopl e of Barreirinhas municipality and especially, the Lar an jeiras and Atins communities I owe a special thanks to Dona Rita de Souza who made all the logistics of working in the communities so easy. I thank the family of Seu Alcino and Dona Joci who welcomed me into their home. I thank Luis Carlos, Ma iron, and Silmara, who were my irmos at my home away from home and my many field assistants including Nilda Larissa, Ana Rose Adriano and Piu Piu I thank the staff at ICMBio and SEBRAE in Barrerinhas for th eir regional assistance. My fieldwork was truly an unforgettable experience that I will always treasure I thank my parents and family for their lifelong support and encouragement to aim high. I am thankful for my dogs, who offered unwavering companionship and reminders to get out of my chair and go outside. Finally, I thank my husband, Mario, who wore many hats during my research as a language teacher, cultural interpreter, and field assistant. He truly inspired my research work in Brazil.

PAGE 6

6 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 4 LIST OF TABLES ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 8 LIST OF FIGURES ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 9 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ................................ ................................ ........................... 10 ABSTRA CT ................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 11 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 13 Non Timber Forest Products (NTFPs) ................................ ................................ .... 14 NTFPs as a Conservation and Development Strategy ................................ ..... 15 Sustainability and Management ................................ ................................ ....... 17 Property Rights ................................ ................................ ................................ 20 Local Markets and Value Chains ................................ ................................ ...... 22 New Directions in NTFP Research ................................ ................................ ... 25 Livelihood Strategies ................................ ................................ ............................... 26 The Livelihood Approach ................................ ................................ .................. 26 Decision making ................................ ................................ ............................... 29 Social Heterogeneity and Livelihood Strategies ................................ ............... 31 Participating in the NTFP Market ................................ ................................ ...... 38 Overview of Methods ................................ ................................ .............................. 40 Study Site ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 42 Sampling Strategy ................................ ................................ ............................ 43 Data Colle ction ................................ ................................ ................................ 45 Dissertation Outline ................................ ................................ ................................ 48 2 THE ROLE OF BURITI IN THE LIVELIHOOD SYSTEM ................................ ........ 53 Chapter Summary ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 53 Background ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 54 Methods ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 57 Analytical Framework ................................ ................................ ....................... 57 Study Site ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 57 Sampling Strategy ................................ ................................ ............................ 59 Data Colle ction ................................ ................................ ................................ 60 Analysis ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 60 Results ................................ ................................ ................................ .................... 62 Resource Base ................................ ................................ ................................ 62 Livelihood Activities and Income Sources ................................ ........................ 65

PAGE 7

7 Participation in the Buriti Le af Activities ................................ ............................ 73 Final Comments ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 80 3 EFFECT OF BURITI RESOURCE ACCESS ON MARKET PARTICIPATION ........ 91 Chapter Summary ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 91 Background ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 92 Methods ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 95 Study site ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 95 Sampling Strategy ................................ ................................ ............................ 96 Data Collection and Analysis ................................ ................................ ............ 97 Results ................................ ................................ ................................ .................... 98 Regional History ................................ ................................ ............................... 98 Participatio n in Buriti Fiber Handicraft Market ................................ ................ 106 Discussion ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 115 Final Comments ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 120 4 LIVELIHOODS AND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT BY BURITI VALUE CHAIN ACTORS ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 127 Chapter Summary ................................ ................................ ................................ 127 Background ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 128 Methods ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 132 Study Site ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 133 Sampling Strategy ................................ ................................ .......................... 134 Results ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 136 Buriti Value Chains ................................ ................................ ......................... 136 Socio economic Factors Affecting Value Chain Actors ................................ .. 142 Discussion ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 147 Final Comments ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 150 5 CONCLUSI ONS ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 1 56 LIST OF REFERENCES ................................ ................................ ............................. 161 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ................................ ................................ .......................... 175

PAGE 8

8 LIST OF TABLES Table page 1 1 Number of individuals interviewed in each community in the two study areas ... 52 2 1 Socio economic variables evaluated in the study ................................ ............... 85 2 2 Description of livelihood activities conducted b y interviewees and household members ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 86 2 3 Active months and required time investment of main livelihood activities ........... 88 2 4 Combinations of activities based on required time investments ......................... 88 2 5 Means of socio economic variables according to participation in buriti market .. 89 2 6 Logistic regression results of participation in the buriti leaf market ..................... 90 3 1 Definitions of socio economic variables ................................ ............................ 122 3 2 Sub sample groups compared in the study ................................ ...................... 124 3 3 Means of socio economic factors among market participants and non participants in Laranjeiras and Atins study areas ................................ ............. 125 4 1 Definitions of explanatory variables ................................ ................................ .. 153 4 2 Means of socio economic variables for different value chain actors (n=97). .... 154 4 3 Results from logistic regression models for different va lue chain actors reporting coefficients, odds ratio, and p value in parentheses. ......................... 155

PAGE 9

9 LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 1 1 Map of the study site (created by Mariano Gonzlez Roglich) ........................... 51 2 1 Schematic showing resources (boxes) and inputs and outputs as a result of using resources (arrows) that are available to a typical household of Barreirinhas, Maranho. ................................ ................................ ..................... 84 3 1 Map of the study site (created by Mariano Gonzlez Roglich) ......................... 121 4 1 Schematic model of the buriti handicraft value chain showing different options and scenarios for property regimes, extractor and artisan relationships, intermediaries, and consumers ................................ ................... 152

PAGE 10

10 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS IBAMA Brazilian Institute of Environment and Renewable Natural Resources ICMBio Chico Mendes Institute for Biodiversity Conservation IRB Institutional Review Board NTFP Non timber forest product SEBRAE Brazilian micro and small businesses support service

PAGE 11

11 Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy FO REST PRODUCTS FOR SUBSISTENCE AND MARKETS: L IVELIHOOD SYSTEMS AND VALUE CHAINS OF BURITI ( MAURITIA FLEXUOSA ) IN BRAZIL By Arika Virapongse May 2013 Chair: Marianne Schmink Major: Interdisciplinary Ecology Forest based markets are important tool s for conservation and development although their impact both on forest users and resource sustainability is often debatable Using a complex system approach, forest based market participant s were considered as a web of actors set within a dynamic socio economic and political environment operating on mul ti level spatial and temporal scale s The effects of an emergent buriti ( Mauritia flexuosa L.f.) leaf handicra ft market among residents in Barreirinhas Maranho w ere assessed by evaluating livelihood strategies and socio economic differences among value c hain actors I also assessed the effect of resource access on market participation and perceptions of sustainability of leaf harvesting. Socio economic d ata were collected through interviews with 149 landowners, extractors, artisans, vendors, and non par ticipators in the buriti market and 7 community experts of history and 10 governmental and non governmental stakeholders Qual itative and quantitative analyse s were conducted by identifying patterns among interview responses, and by comparing means of socio economic variables between different types of buriti users

PAGE 12

12 By shifting from buriti based subsistence to income earning activities, people in Barreirinhas adapted their livelihood strategies to reflect an increasingly globalized economy. Buriti reso urces were important as a security net and part of a diversified livelihood strategy. People chose to participate in buriti activities depending on gender roles household cycle, personal perceptions, and relationship s among different activities. Contrary to expectations, p overty, tradition of use of buriti, and affinity to handicraft production did not always ensure market engagement. P roperty regimes and social networks a buriti resources depending on their distance to the forests. Value chain actors who were characterized by their economic relationship with buriti resources and market, differ ed by livelihood strategies socio economic characteristics, and perceptions about the sustainab ility of leaf collection. The emerging buriti handicraft market introduced new actors and resource demands that interact with pre existing users and livelihood needs and threaten sustainability of buriti resources By demonstrating the social and ecologic al challenges of a g lobal forest product market this study can be help ful for informing more effective policies for reaching conservation and development goals through the application of forest markets

PAGE 13

13 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION The social and environmental impact s product markets are a central issue in many conservation and development initiatives. Although it has been proposed that biological conservation can be achieved by demonstrating the economic importance of natural resources (Pearce and Moran, 1994) it remains debatable whether or not forest based markets actually reduce forest degradation and poverty (Crook and Clapp, 1998; Kusters et al., 2006; Shackleton, 2001) F orest products however, do contribute to livelihood stability by providing households with an important source of insurance, security and income diversity (Shackleton et al., 2007) Forest product commercialization is often based on existence of prior local knowledge and tradition regarding utilization and harvest of the forest product as a subsistence source. When financial value for a forest product grows, commercial harvest of ten expands rapidly out side of regions with a history of traditional use (Shackleton e t al., 2009) Development organizations may aid this expansion by encouraging people to participate in new forest based market opportunities Because of complex human e nvironment relationships and social economic heterogeneity p eople react differently towards exploitation of forest resources and new market opportunities This can have varying consequences on the impact s of forest product exploitation on livelihoods and resource sustainability. This study seeks to evaluate the conditions under which peo ple are driven to maintain or join forest product exploitation activities as a part of a livelihood strategy. The case study used was a community of buriti palm ( Mauritia flexuosa L.f.) leaf users

PAGE 14

14 in Barreirinhas, Maranho, Brazil where a recent increase of tourism offered new market opportunities for buriti handicrafts. The following research questions are addressed : How do new markets for NTFPs affect people s livelihood strategies and their perception of sustainable harvesting of forest resources? Wh at is the impact of resource access and value chains on participation in the market and their perception of sustainable harvesting? Does commercialization of buriti derivatives contribute towards increased livelihood security and sustainable use of forest resources among forest based people in Barreirinhas? The remainder of this chapter presents an overview of literature that evaluates forest product markets as a conservation and development strategy. L iterature regarding livelihood systems and st rategies is used to demonstrate how livelihood constraints and advantages vary among individuals and affect their relationship with forests. In the last section, the research methods and case study are presented. Non Timber Forest Products (NTFPs) N on timber forest products (NTFPs) were initially defined to counter the perspective that timber is the only valuable resource of forests and to draw a ttention to the value of other forest products that can be extracted. NTFPs are biological resources that are neither timber resources nor agricultural crops I t has been estimated that there are 4,000 6,000 NTFP plant species with commercial importance worldwide (Iqbal, 1993) Global trade of NTFP is easily several times the value of internationally traded timber (Molnar et al., 2004; Shanley et al., 2005) NTFPs include wild products, managed products and cultivated products. Most NTFPs worldwide are collected from wild areas (Shanley et al. 2005) including fallow, secondary forests or mature forests that regenerate naturally. Wild products require little

PAGE 15

15 human management, less transportation infrastructure and low labor inputs product yields per unit area, and human population density (Belcher et al., 2005) Managed products are collected from semi domesticated areas, which are forests partially transformed through treatments to improve the production of NTFP speci es that regenerate natu rally. Cultivated products are planted in domesticated areas, which are transformed forests including managed fallow forest gardens and specialized plantations. P lant based and wild collect ed NTFPs are the focus of this discussion A lthough household level d ynamics will be emphasized, it is recognized that NTFP use is part of a larger spatial and temporal scale of human environmental interactions. NTFPs as a C onservat ion and Development S trategy NTFPs entered into the g lobal dialogue in the late 1980s and early 1990 s as part (WCED, 1987) which recognized a relationship between poverty and deforestation (Sayer, 1995) Sustainable development merged conservation and development concepts under a market orientated approach to conservation (Pearce et al., 1989) This approach was based on economic theories that assume d increased monetary ben efits from standing forest could out compete alternative and destructive land uses, such as agriculture, pastures, and plantations (Pearce and Moran, 1994; Swanson and Barbier, 1992) Driven by economic incentives to maintain the for est as a whole, forest users would be encouraged to sustainably manage and conserve the forest. The underlying logic of these arguments is that utilization is a necessary component for conservation strategies (Crook and Clapp, 1998) and poverty alleviation can be achieved through economic growth and participation in market value chains (Shackleton et al., 2007) Other tools proposed for market incentive conservation have include d recreation and tourism,

PAGE 16

16 ecosystem services, carbon credits, and potential future uses (Edwards and Abivardi, 1998; Godoy, 1992; Pearce and Moran, 1994; Wunder, 1999) Although m arkets are recognized as major drivers for promoting change in tropical forests t he mechanisms and linkages by which these market forces operate still remain a topic of debate (Angelsen and Kaimowitz, 1999; Geist and Lambin, 2002) O pponents express concern that market oriented conser vation strategies legitimize exploitation and development of nature (Ehrenfeld, 1988) although most scholars recognize that these strategies are useful for reaching some conserv ation goals. Theoretically, NTFPs have high potential to produce economic benefits for local people (Beer and McDermott, 1989; Panayotou and Ashton, 1992; Plotkin and Famolare, 1992) Of all forest market segments, NTFPs involve the largest number of low income prod ucers ; many poor people engage in extractive activities (Neumann and Hirsch, 2000) NTFPs account for as much as 25 percent of income for close to 1 billion people (Molnar et al., 2004) Extractive activities are a substantial component of the non farm rural enterprise sector by providing rural income and employment (Mead and Liedholm, 1998; Scherr et al., 2004) and this sector appears to be growing (Arnold et al., 1994) NTFPs can be especially important as a cash income for people in remote areas (Enriquez et al., 2006) L ocal NTFP trade also tends to be one area where women are free to earn income with little interference from men (Schreckenberg et al., 2006) Although the contribution of NTFP s to international and global ma rkets is often highlighted, NTFPs also play an important role on a household and local scale by contributing to subsistence goals and local markets (Shackleton et al., 2007) livelihood

PAGE 17

17 security (Scherr et al., 2004; Shackleton and Shackleton, 2004) and poverty prevention rather than alleviation (Angelsen and Wunder, 2003) Once proposed as a simple solution for achieving conservation and development goals, more extensive research has shown that NTFP use dynamics demonstrate the high c omplexity that is evident in most human environmental relationships. Just as simple models based on few factors are not effective in demonstrating land use/land cover change (Lambin et al., 2001) or deforestation (Angelsen and Kaimowitz, 1999; Geist and Lambin, 2002) NTFP dynamics are determined by multiple underlying facto rs (Runk et al., 2004) Although improved livelihood outcomes can have a negative relationship with NTFP sustainability, sustainable NTFP use systems do exist. Sustainable NTFP systems are characterized as having a well understood forest system, high NTFP growth rate, cost effectively produced resource s property rights high direct use value to local communities opportunities for multi purpose la nd use, and low human population density (Crook and Clapp, 1998; Shackleton, 2001) E cological, social and economic factors associate d with successful commercialization of NTFPs have been identified (Lacuna Richman, 2007) to help predict the impact and changes of NTFP markets. There is insufficient evidence to resolve debates that po or people are more likely than wealthier people to engage in deforestation activities (Angelsen and Kaimowitz, 1999; Wunder, 2001) and if NTFP markets are a failure or success (Shackleton, 2001) T he contexts that drive people to engage in forest product markets are highly diverse Sustainabilit y and M anagement Early efforts to understand NTFP sustainability were based on maximum sustainable yield theory, which assumed stable equilibrium (Zimmerer, 1994) that

PAGE 18

18 environments were spatial ly and temporal ly homogeneous, and that resources were most valuable when exploited. T he environment was treated as a set of discrete boxes of resources from which yields could be individually maximized and forest management problems could be approached by fixing individual parts of the problems T o demonstrate the potential of NTFPs to outcompete destructive forest use valuation studies estimated the potential per hectare revenue generated from NTFP e xtraction (Balick and Mendelsohn, 1992; Chopra, 1993; Muiz Miret et al., 1996; Peters et al., 1989) Later, these economic models were considered by critics to be too simplistic (Browder, 1992; Coomes, 1 996; Godoy et al., 1993; Godoy and Bawa, 1993; Southgate and Clark, 1993) More recent c omplex systems theor ies assume that stable equilibria do not exist and rather move about an area of equilibrium. P roblem s are viewed as a system in which the interactions among parts must be examined (Shindler and Cramer, 1999) For t hese reasons, complex system theory was used in this study as a basis for understanding NTFP sustainability. Sustainability can be defined as when use does not exceed the population capacity to replace individuals (Hall and Bawa, 1993) Overharve sting or overexploitation occurs when products are harvested until the NTFP population is no longer sustain ed (Varghese and Ticktin, 2008) Management can be defined as deliberate steps that are taken by people to modify the environment in ways that enhance the availability of natural resources (Bale and Erickson, 2006) NTFP sustainability is dependent on such factors as a rapid reproductive rate (Ticktin, 2004) cheap and reliable production, whether sufficient scientific knowledge and ecological knowledge is available for users and managers, and what incentives may be available

PAGE 19

19 for people making land use decisions (Crook and Clapp, 1998) Understanding NTFP sustainab ility is challenging because effects of harvesting are spe cific to the NTFP species and the ecosystem, region, and adopted management practices and harvesting strategies (Ghimire et al., 2005; Runk e t al., 2004; Ticktin and Johns, 2002) In some cases, increased demand for NTFPs leads to more intense management to improve the quality and quantity or timing of production in order to increase their earnings (Be lcher et al., 2005) Intensity of harvest can also vary due to changing socio economic circumstances (Ticktin, 2004) There is a lack of ecological knowledge about most NTFPs (Peters, 1994; Shanley et al., 2005; Ticktin, 2004) although local and traditional knowledge can help to overcome this gap. Besides the ecological aspect of NTFPs, political, socio economic and cultural criteria must be considered regarding any natural resource utilized by people (Berkes et al., 1998) particularly in regards to harvesting strategies (Ghimire et al., 2004; Kusters et al., 2006) Newer valuation methods now look to broader definitions of value, such as cultural (Pieroni, 2001; Reyes Garca et al., 2006) and subsistence (Ganesan, 1993) Identifying drivers that lead to overharvesting is a necessary step to achieve sustainability of NTFP exploitation (Ticktin and Johns, 2002) Proposed d rivers include increased commercialization (G odoy et al., 1993; Homma, 1992) specialization of NTFP products (Ruiz Perez et al., 2004a) systems of land tenure and governance (Gibson et al., 2000) socio econ omic status, population and cultural pressure, government policies and distance to resource (Murali et al., 1996; Sampaio et al., 2008; Uma Shaanker et al., 2004) Macro studies are useful for understand ing pattern s of socio economic and political characteristics that characterize different NTFP cases

PAGE 20

20 (Ruiz Perez and Byron, 1999) Sustainability must be assessed using a large scale, comparative approach to consider social and ecological variation among a broader range of environments, resources, and contexts (Runk et al., 2004; Shackleton, 2001; Ticktin, 2004) Clear er theoretical framework s and a functional typology of NTFP cases are also needed (Belcher et al., 2005) In g eneral, it is still not well understood which circumstances and context creates sustainable NTFP markets and how NTFPs contribute to livelihood improvement and conservation objectives Property R ights Different types of l and tenure, such as private prope rty, common areas, and open access, can influence access to and sustainability of forest resources Private property is governed by restricted use unless permitted through sale or case by case permission. Open access resources are available to all individu als with no restrictions for harvesting. Common property areas are shared by a group of people and local rules and regulations restrict use of the resources (Gibson et al., 2000) The tragedy of the commons theory (Hardin, 1968) brought attention to the issue of land governance in regards to sustainable management of natural resources. It was proposed that common use inevitably leads to overexploitation of resources and external rules must be imposed to control resource use Having politi cal implications, in which it was assumed that people were bad for forests and nature was pristine before human contact governments sough t to protect forests by removing and banning some people forests. After scholars dispelled the myth of the pr istine forest (reviewed by Clark, 1996) and recognized het erogeneity among local management of resources, these types of conservation strategies have been accused of favoring or discriminating

PAGE 21

21 against different groups of people such as local communities (Schwartzman et al., 2000) Although a private property regime is sometimes considered the best solution for managing forest product resources (Hodso n et al., 1995) empirical studies have shown that users are indeed capable of managing their own use of resources under a common property regime (Ostrom et al., 1999) After all, traditional people have long been using social controls to manage resources. S ome extractors have been shown to practice forest management techniques to promote NTFP regeneration to increase the potential for NTFP sustainability (Anderson and Ioris, 1992) It is widely agreed that any existing local management and governance of resources must be taken into account before imposing external laws or strategies for resource management (McKean, 2000) Most unmanaged f orest products are harvested from common property and de facto open access land (eg. state forests) especially by people who derive a greater share of their overall needs from these forest resources. In contrast, people who seek to cultivate forest products tend to do so in more secure private land rights (Belcher et al., 2005) Tenure rights can also encourage harvesters to invest in higher quality products, which can reduce the destructive impact on the forest (Varghese and Ticktin, 2008) Some type of secure ownership such as common property or private property, which allow s extractors to enforce exclusive rights and control over the forest, is essential for sustainable management o f NTFPs or other natural resources (Crook and Clapp, 1998; Mendelsohn and Balick, 1995) Property rights can be used as barriers to reduce the impact of people entering the trade of harvesting (Hansis, 1998) Regulating access to resources can prevent over harvesting and promote good harvesting

PAGE 22

22 prac tices (Gibson et al., 2000) There is no single property regime that works efficiently and sustainably for all types of resources use. It is c lear, however, that poorly defined property rights are often linked to overexploitation and deforestation (Mendelsohn, 1994) While secure property rights do not guarantee long term well being, they do make an important contribution towards encouraging responsible management of natural resources. Local M ark ets and Value C hains Until recently, most NTFP research has focused on global markets, while local markets have been largely overlooked. Global markets are often unpredictable and risky when they (Coomes, 1995; Homma, 1992; Shanley et al., 2002) in which cheap NTFP resources are exploited unt il it is no longer profitable In contrast, l ocal markets may be more stable and robust, although they are dynamic and show evidence of constant adaptation and experimentation Local markets are important for strengthening livelihoods and providing income opportunities among poor people as well as among residents of urban and peri urban environment (Stoian, 2003) They are commonly based on long standi ng traditional knowledge and skills and are the result of considerable local initiative, innovation, self reliance and a continuing demand for the products offered (Shackleton et al., 2007) Studies show that villages located at varying distances from the urban local market can be faced with different challenges (Shanley et al., 2002) People from distant villages who wish to sell NTFPs in the urban markets are often poor, with little education and market expertise, depend on forest pr oducts for their health an d nutritional welfare and cannot afford to bear additional r isk P rices for NTFPs may also be low and poorly compensate for collection and transport time. In contrast, villages close to large city

PAGE 23

23 markets often have well developed physical and social infr astructure s which greatly facilitate the marketing of extractive products. These communities, however, often have problems with for est degradation, which they sometimes try to overcome by more intensely managing resources (Anderson and Ioris, 1992) The small enterprises and emerging markets that characterize local markets are often part of market va lue chains, which consist of the activities required to bring a product from conception, through phases of production, and to final delivery to consumers (Kaplinsky, 2004) NTFP market value ch ains are made up of several sub sets of activities including production, collection, process ing storage, transport, marketing and sale (Belcher and Schreckenberg, 2007) Actors who carry out these a ctivities are extracto rs who collect forest products, producers who process forest product s into a marketable item, intermediaries who facilitate trade, vendors who sell products, and consumers who purchase the product. Local forest product markets tend to be simpler than global markets ; activity chains can be shorter and actors may carr y out more than one activity. Different actors in a value chain contribut e towards the overall success of the forest product value chain (Belcher and Schreckenberg, 2 007; Velde et al., 2006) I ntermediaries were once considered as extraneous and even harmful to the process of an NTFP market because they sometimes reduce the amount of income that a ctually reaches the extractors. Yet, some intermediaries help to link local production systems and potential buyers (Keys, 2005; Padoch and de Jong, 1989) such as among p oor producers who rely on intermediaries to organize their small and irregular surpluses.

PAGE 24

2 4 Bypassing intermediary role s can lea d to greater market risk exposure among extractors and producers of NTFPs (Padoch, 1992) E fficient governance of market value chains and social organization among users can lead to more efficient NTFP production and sustainability and ensure better returns for actors at t he beginning of the chain (Padoch and De Jong, 1992; Velde et al., 2006) S tate regulated marketing cooperatives have been successful in India, for example in reducing the level of exploitation by middlemen and protecting producers from marketplace volatility (Neumann and Hirsch, 2000) NTFPs collected from communal land may be best managed by using community organizations to ensure that over exploitation does not occur. Cooperatives are also sometimes appropriate for managing NTFPs coll ection from individual privately owned plots (Marshall et al., 2006) Social organization can provide more negotiating power with intermediaries and within larger market systems (Ghimire et al., 2004) The structure and functioning of mar ket value chains, as well as relationship s between value chain actors, their defined roles, and profit returns can be highly dynamic (Neumann and Hirsch, 2000) Relationships between actors can shift through time, from locale to locale, and at diff erent points along the market chain. Shifts in roles can be tied to changes in the market structure relation ships between actors and actor s available livelihood assets and market proximity to end consumers (Jensen, 2009) Overall, studies on NTFPs have suffered from a lack of rigor in identifying different social actors who participate in NTFP markets and their roles in market chains (Neumann and Hirsch, 2000)

PAGE 25

25 New Directions in NTFP R esearch This section has demonstrate d that some underlying theoretical assumptions that have been guiding NTFP stu dies are changing. Recent approaches in NTFP research focus on understanding the social, economic and political conditions that affect NTFP use within a local household economy (Amacher, 2002; Kline et al., 2000; Parks et al., 1998; Shackleton, 2001) R elationships between p overty and deforestation are more complex th an originally thought Advances in land governance studies have recognized that loc al people can efficiently manage their own resources through local rules and institutions. Traditional management and monitoring can be useful for overcoming gaps in scientific ecological knowledge and management strategies. As complex system theories are integrated into NTFP sustainability concepts, m aximum sustainable yield is no longer recognized as the sole goal for NTFP production and use among local peop le A broader array of values generate d from NTFPs is now considered. Forest users are seen as a heterogeneous population in which values of NTFPs do not reach all people equally. The importance of forest markets and small enterprises are particularly imp ortant among marginal groups and women. M arket value chains are particularly important in local markets, and social organ ization can help these chains function more efficiently Roles and relationships between differen t actors of value chain s are complex, because they reflect a shifting socio economic and political environment and structural changes in NTFP market s Although NTFP dynamics are much better understood today, f orest resources are still being depleted rapidly and new forest markets are emerging and presenting new challenges for local people. More studies are needed to improve NTFP resource management, market structure and institutions, enforcement, and property rights (Crook

PAGE 26

26 and Clapp, 1998; Ehringhaus, 2006) Better understanding o f the drivers and context that contribute to engagement in the NTFP market (Neumann and Hirsch, 2000) and mechanics underlying local markets are needed to evaluate the impact of n ew commercial enterprises on established patterns in household systems Livelihood Strategies The Livelihood Approach Household studies highlight for themselves despite numerous social and economic constraints (Schmink, 1984) D efined as a group of people residing together and sharing a common pool of resources to ensure a certain standard of living h ouseholds are often chosen as the fundamental u nit for studying decision making and behavior in relation to exploitation and production of local resources (An et al., 2005) The household, as a unit of analysis, provides an intermediate step for bridging microeconomic studies on the individual and understanding dynamics in the socio econom ic and political environment. Ho usehold studies of the 1980 (Duque and Pastrana, 1973) (Long, 1984) by examining such issues as labor, land allocation, and income strategies. A strategy is a broad overall plan that refers to long range goals, not short term practices or activities (Sutton and Anderson, 2004) Strategies entail using resources as efficiently as possible and in different combination depending on the constraints, goals, opportunities and composition of the household. Households retain freedom of choice, although their decisions are made within t he confines of structural social constraints (Guy er and Peters, 1987; Schmink, 1984) The term by recognizing that households may not

PAGE 27

27 always have control over their assets and environment and instead react opportunistically to make decisions based on their circumstances (Rakodi, 2002) (WCED, 1987) (1992) t introduced a new direction by emphasizing liv elihood sec urity and interpreting sustainability as a trade off between vulnerability/risk and poverty. A livelihood system consists of the capabilities and activities required for a means of living. It is sustainable when it can cope with and recover from stresses a nd shocks, as well as maintain or enhance its capabilities and assets, while not undermining the natural resource base (Carney, 1998) This def inition is tied to theories regarding resiliency and diversification of livelihood strategies (Ellis, 1999; Marschke and Berkes, 2006 ) T he sustainable rural livelihoods framework (Carney, 1998; Scoones, 1998) is often applied in studies on rural and urban livelihood strategies (Ellis, 1999) This framework is an analytical structure that aims to encompass the complexity of livelihoods. It assumes that people draw on a range of assets to pursue a variety of activities and livelihood outcomes. People are rational decision makers who invest in asset building depending on their preferences and priorities, although their choices are influenced by vulnerabilities (eg. natural shocks, trends, and seasonal variations), social structures (eg. government, private sector), and processes (eg. po licy, culture). H ousehold and env ironmental conditions determine access to assets and liveliho od opportunities and how they can be converted into outcomes. Assets or resources, are made up of material capital like land and wealth, and non material capital, such as circulation of information, skills, management of

PAGE 28

28 relationships and affirmation of personal significance. Beside s providing resources needed to make a living assets give meaning to a for them to act, challenge and change rules that govern the control, use and transformation of resources (Bebbington 1999) Assets have been defined as the following (Department for International Development, 2006; Scoones, 1998) : 1. Natural capital: natural resources extracted from ecosyste ms and environmental services sustained by the workings of ecosystems. 2. Financial capital: financial resources including savings, credit, and income from employment, trade and remittances. 3. Human made capital: skills, knowledge, health, labor resources and other resources generated through human ingenuity and economic activity 4. Physical capital: basic and essential infrastructure such as roads, water, sanitation, schools, shelter, transport, energy, tools and equipment. 5. Social capital: features of social or ganization such as trust, norms, formal support groups and informal networks. C ultural capita l, which includes social/political institutions, environmental ethics, and traditional ecological knowledge, has been proposed as an additional category to explain how society uses natural capital to create human made capital (Berkes and Folke, 1994; Buchmann, 2009) The combination of different assets is flexible; capital can be traded to acquire resources that are lacking. For instance, social cap ital can be exploited by an individual who seeks to acquire a plot of land through his or her network of social relations. H uman capital in the form of labor can be u sed to transform a forest into an agricultural plot. The following discussion explore s livelihood strategy concept s by considering decision making theories and variability caused by heterogeneity among populations and households, the role of NTFPs in liveliho od strategies, and socio econ om ic factors that affect NTFP market participation.

PAGE 29

29 De cision making Households must make complex livelihood decisions that consider their available assets, risks, opportunity costs, benefits, and perceived uncertainty. Although decision making is often evaluated as a process i n reality individual s most like ly use a mixture of different ways to make the many decisions needed on a day to day basis. Rational choice theory (Green and Shapiro, 1994) asserts that people, as rational choosers, set g oals and then methodologically decide how to achieve these goals. Their decisions are made on the basis of deliberate consideratio n of all available information although their choices may be affected by emotion, social pressures, and cultural traditions (Sutton and Anderson, 2004) It is assumed that people seek out better information and that they are good calculators of changes and have a good gra sp of knowledge regarding their livelihood activities. In an evolutionary sense, natural selection theory predicts that people make the best (optimal) decision in a rational manner, because poor choices are subject to negative selective pressure. A number of trends have emerged to question the perspective that behavior is strategic and rational (Moran, 2008) H uman behavior however, may not always be rational First, a household may not be a homogeneous unit of corresponding interests. I ndividualization may accelerate the breakdown of households when men, women and children pursue different goals and have different interests. Second livelihoods are diversified because multiple motives prompt households and individuals to diversify assets, incomes and activities. Third for example, by travelling to work. In addition, s ome choices are made for people before they are able to make their own decisions. People are born into some traits, such as language and diet. They may also take shortcuts by imitating others or following habits

PAGE 30

30 in order to minimize decision making. Forced change can result in irrational decisions, and previously considered rational decisions can morph from rational to irrational. For instance, a cultural practice is adopted when it seems the most rational thing to do under the existing circumstances, but can still pe rsist even after the practice is no longer needed. External social constraints have an impact on decision making and livelihood strategy. S ocial pressures may steer the individual away from making ind ependent and conscious choices Past routine and social ly constructed ru les, such as common property regimes, can constrain choice. Use and access to livelihood opportunities are governed by social factors (eg. social relations, institutions, organizations) power (De Haan and Zoomers, 2005) i nfrastructure and services, policies, institutions and processes, livelihood opportunities, vulnerability context (Carney, 1998) trends (e.g. economic trends) and shocks (eg. drought, disease, floods, pests) (Ellis, 1999) T he role of risk and opportunity costs in determining livelihood outcomes must also be addressed Risk can be favorably managed with intelligence, creativity, and prior planning (Saaty, 1987) Uncertainty, defined by the level of knowledge and confidence that an individual has about his/her knowledge is a major component of risk management Uncertainty can be reduced by generating knowledge (Sigel et al., 2009) People consider opportunity costs or cost of forgone opportunities after making a ch oice, to decide their best options. Opportunity is particularly important for making decisions regardin g income. People make land chang e decisions, for example, by weighing opportunity costs, labor availability, economics, and institutional constraints or benefits (Evans et al., 2001) If opportunity costs for working with NTFPs are high,

PAGE 31

31 people may choose to invest in other land uses, such as agric ulture and cattle ranching, which require less time investment and generate more income (Shone and Caviglia Harris, 2006) Social H eterogeneity and Livelihood Strategies I mportant characteristics that determine heterogeneity among natural resource users are personality traits, household composition, wealth and gender. People with similar characteristics are considered part of a c ommon social group, although dividing lines between individuals and groups are variable and never rigid (De Haan and Zoomers, 2005) Interactions between groups using the same resources can result in conflicts, which are resolved in local and extra local political arenas, or specialization into different livelihood strategies and niches as groups take advantage of their strengths or are limited by their constraints. Social exclusion can also occur when groups try to monopolize opportunities to their own advantage. To legitimize their monopoly, people often rely on social and physical char acteristics such as status race, gender ethnicity, religion, wealth and a common historical trajectory of livelihood strategies (De Haan and Zoomers, 2005) D ifferent perceptions of resource values can lead towards conflict between groups, and managing for rights to use resources can help to resolve some conflicts (Hansis, 1998) Previous assumptions, linked to the tragedy of the commons theory, consider ed all indivi duals as selfish, norm free maximizers of short run results. More recent studies show that people react differe ntly to opp ortunities to exploit resources (Ostrom et al., 1999) Selfish individuals never coope rate in dilemma situations Some individuals will not cooperate unless they are assured that they will not be exploi ted by selfish individuals. Some i nd ividuals willing to cooperate hope that others w ill return their trust.

PAGE 32

32 Altruists try to achieve higher returns for the group P ersonality traits, which may be grounded in the personal experience and history of the individual, can a ffect how people interact with natural resources. Household composition can impact livelihood goals and household resources. Household composition is often defined by its age, which refers to the maturation of a household from a young couple, to a fa mily with children, and finally, to an aged household in which the children take over the possessions of the parents. Behavior and goals change as a household ages, because labor resources in proportion to consumption demands ha ve an impact on household in come and wealth (Friis Lund and Meilby, 2006) A household with small children for example, is under more financial pressure (Schmink, 1984) Middle aged households with more working family members are re latively wealthy. By considering household composition, differences in wealth among households may be just a moment in the cycle of household demographics Household livelihood strategies are always evolving, because opportunities and household composition are always changing. Livelihood strategies change depending on the condition of the household available opportunities and shifting assets. Strategies, therefore, can be conceived as a stage rather than a structural category. To understand livelihood st rategies it is important to characterize the objectives priorities and assets As a common economic approach to explain local household behavior r isk averse peasant theory (Ellis, 1992) considers that most local p eople live under high levels of uncertainty induced by natural hazards, market fluctuations, and social instability Therefore, they are cautious in their decision making by choosing to engage in activities that reduce risk

PAGE 33

33 rather than maximize their profi t. In terms of poor versus wealthy people, poor people generally do not use their own assets as efficiently as the rich nor have the resources to deal with any downside associated with some risks. In general, the poor select a low risk, low return portfoli o, while the rich take on riskier activities (Mendola, 2007) H ousehold composition, which describes the gender and age groups of people in the household, relates to different categories of rural livelihood strategies consisting of accumulation, consolidation, compensatory and security (Zoomers, 1999) Accumulation strategies involve establishing a minimum resource base and preparing for f uture expansion. These strategies including migration, land acquisition and labo r recruitment, are common among recently married couples and families with young childre n seeking to accumulate capital Wealthier and often older households, who have more surplus assets to invest, apply consolidation strategies which involves investing to being and improve quality in the short term. Compensatory strategies are used by peop le recovering from a sudden shock, such as crop failure or loss of labor, or dealing with a structural sh ortage of in livelihood assets. The household employs this strategy in order to survive and seek a to recover from downward social mobility Security s trategies such as diversification, are used by families with young children and whose lives are more insecure. NTFP use is shaped by need, opportunity, local markets and institutions, resource abundance, and relative level of development (Ruiz Perez et al., 2004a) Most NTFPs p rovide a subsistence function among households, either through direct consumption or trade. A much smaller subset of NTFPs are regularly traded in local, regional, or international markets. In a subsistence economy, people devote their

PAGE 34

34 available resources to producing food and maintaining shelter and security. In a cash based economy, households have the opportunity to specialize in activities that offer the best economic opportunities. If food and other necessities can be purchased, people concentrate thei r efforts on activities that provide the highest rewards. This implies that ation into the cash economy both influence s and is influenced by the way they use forests and other resources (Shackleton an d Shackleton, 2004) Broad typologies of forest based livelihood strategies have been defined based on availability of assets, risk management (Belcher et al., 2005; Jensen, 2006) and involvement in comme rcialization. Commercialization is defined as any use in which the extractor does not use the product directly and exploits the product to gain a different value (Ruiz Perez et al., 2004a) People who use a coping strategy depend on forest products mostly for household subsistence ; few products are sold in markets (Belcher and Kusters, 2004) People who use a divers ified strategy utilize forest products as a supplement to other household livelihood activities (Arnold and Townson, 1998) and as a safety net (Shackleton and Shackleton, 2004) A specialized strategy focuses on specific forest products as a major contri bution to income and high household integration into the cash economy because it is driven by market opportunities for these products (Belcher and Kusters, 2004) Definitions of forest based livelihood strategies can vary according to the socio economic and political characteristics of the case context (Ruiz Perez et al., 2004a) Diversified livelihood strategies are adopted to spread out risks, smooth out consumption and labor allocation, and cope with credit market failures, shocks and surprises. By diversifying assets, incomes, and activities households can be more

PAGE 35

35 resilient (Marschke and Berkes, 2006) reactive and opportunistic. D iversificatio n can increase ability to participate in seasonal activities reduce risk, and increase income but it can also worsen income distribution and have adverse gender effects (Ellis, 1999) NTFPs play a role in divers ified strategies by acting as part of a safety net among households that engage in seasonal activities (Shackleton and Shackleton, 2004) and particularly for poorer resource dependent communities without acc ess to markets (Pyhala et al., 2006) NTFPs seldom account for a large share of a househ income They are more important in terms of timing, by filling seasonal or other cash flow gaps, and helping families cope with expenses shocks, and risks, and to respond to unusual opportunities. Seasonality may reflect availability of the ra w material, needs for additional cash at particular points in the annual cycle fluctuations in demand, and availability of labor (Arnold and Townson, 1998) In cases where people are prevented from diversification, forest pr oducts may turn from safe ty nets into poverty traps (Belcher et al., 2005; Browder, 1992; Neumann and Hirsch, 2000) Much of the literature on so cial heterogeneity among forest users revolves around wealth inequalities Revenue from NTFPs is often unevenly distributed among community members (Padoch and de Jong, 1989) Through market value chain s much less of the v alue of NTFPs cited by consumers or intermediaries actually reaches local people and extractors (Angelsen and Wunder, 2003; Coomes, 1996; Neumann and Hirsch, 2000) NTFP trade can also increase inequality between households ( Kusters et al., 2006) Poor people rely on NTFP resources for subsistence, while wealthier people are in a better position to exploit NTFPs commercially (Arnold and Perez, 2001; Belcher and Kusters, 2004; Cavendish, 2000; Warner, 2000) because they control opportunities

PAGE 36

36 and have more resources to devote towards production (Arnold and Townson, 1998) For activities requiring access to skills, technology, capital, or more labor, the poor may find it difficult to take advantage of market opportunities (Arnold and Townson, 1998) because of low education, h igher risk, and lack of organization and financial and physical capital (Shanley et al., 2005) Poorer people are also more likely than wealthier people to divert their subsistence resources towards new market opportunities, which increases their risk level (Falconer and Koppell, 1990) The poor are more dependent on NTFPs, because they tend to be located in rural and remote areas, are engage d in diversified household strategies and are partially subsistence oriented. T he poor and wealthy generally have diverse livelihoods, while middle ranges of income have less diversity. W ealthier families typically diversify more successfully than poor rural families because t hey have more resources to devote to forest gathering and production and are the heaviest users (Arnold and Townson, 1998) In contrast, poverty induces people to intensify ways of generating incom e in order to optimize their use of available capitals (Elli s, 1999) NTFPs, as part of a diversification strategy, can preve nt poverty by helping people maintain a minimum standard of living (Angelsen and Wunder, 2003) and by providing subsistence and a safety net against unexpected eve nts among local communities (Shackleton a nd Shackleton, 2004; Wunder, 2001) D iversification can make the difference between viable livelihoods and destitution of poorer people M en and women have different assets, access to resources, and opportunities. M en usually have more options than wom en to diversify In comparison, w omen have a disadvantage because they have less access to livelihood resources, reduced range of

PAGE 37

37 labor markets, and lower wage rates and men often mediate their resources In this sense, diversification can improve household livelihood security while at the same time trapping women in customary roles. Women can be disproportionately more reliant on local NTFP trade than men (Neu mann and Hirsch, 2000) because they can easily enter market s and combine NTFP activities with household tasks (Arnold and Townson, 1998; Marshall et al., 2006) In rural areas, where the opportunity cost of their labor is relatively low, there is even great er participation of women in NTFP markets Involvement of women i n the NTFP production system can have a positive impact on intra household equity (Kusters et al., 2006) as w omen become more empowered, head household s, and dominate some important NTFP markets (Hecht et al., 1988) such as handicraft production (Coomes, 2004) In some areas of the world, such as among the baba ss u proce ssors in Maranho, Brazil (Pinheiro and Frazao, 1995) and basket mak ers in Botswana (Bishop and Scoones, 1994) NTFPs are the main source of income for women and children. For this reason, g ender must be considered in social development strategies regarding NTFP commercialization (Neumann and Hirsch, 2000) As a specialized strategy, c ommercial NTFP trade drives a process of intensified production and household specializa tion among forest peoples (R uiz Perez et al., 2004a) High value products tend to be managed intensively by specialized producers and yield higher inc omes than those generated by less specialized producers of less managed, low value products (Ruiz Perez et al., 2004a) Specialized NTFP extractors mo stly p ractice extraction for lack of better alternatives (Neumann and Hirsch, 2000) and their activities can often hav e a detrimental effect on species population (Kusters et

PAGE 38

38 al., 2006) These extractors usually fill a profitable market niche, which allows them to earn an exceptionally competitive income from the ir activity (Wunder, 2001) Participati ng in the NTFP M arket A s a tool to prevent poverty (Neumann and Hirsch, 2000; Wunder, 2001) NTFPs play a positive and import ant role in the livelihood stability of rural people (Angelsen and Wunder, 2003; Scherr et al., 2004) G rowth and development of local markets is a popular development strategy used among co mmunities with access to natural resources and sustenance based livelihoods. Development initiatives, however, are often successful at reaching only sub set s of the population that are better prepared to take adva ntage of new market opportunities. M arkets are not for everyone because rapidly changing commercial forest mark ets can be too risky or present too low potential returns to be important as part of a livelihood strategy (Scherr et al., 2004) Market oriented forestry strategies may be unsuitable for local communities where market incentives are culturally incompatible with traditional institutions, the resource base is not easily managed sustainable, or there is a high level of conflict betwe en different groups (Richards, 1997; Schmink, 2004) Despite the risks, it is almost inevitable that people who live in forest areas will use NTFPs to generate income. Diversified households are likely to abandon NTFP markets if more lucrative opportunities arise because they lack alternative means for reaching livelihood goals In contrast, h ouseholds that respond to market opportunities by specializi ng in forest products for income usually remain in the market, unless other constraints arise (Arnold and Townson, 1998) B usiness and marketing capacity, access to capital, and good organization are necessary for successful enterprises, and wealthier people tend to have better access to these resources than poor people K nowledge, skill (Arnold and

PAGE 39

39 Townson, 1998) and availability of household labor resources (Ruiz Perez and B yron, 1999) are needed for an individual to participate in the NTFP market economy A case study o f argan oil markets in Morroco however, showed that people with m ore sophisticated processing, market development and wealth can outcompete l ocal people who have greater k nowledge, skill, and ownership of the resource (Lybbert et al., 2002) Skills are easier to attain than knowledge (Reyes Garca et al., 2007) P ractical skills are acquired later in life than theoretical knowledge. In contrast, knowledge is usually acquired before adolescence (Zarger, 2002) Household cycle s also affects household NTFP enterprises, because labor roles are often divi ded among hous ehold members according to g ender and age (Punch, 2002) Households of younger average age that have fewer members and less land dedicated to subsistence crops have greater time constraints for producing forest products (Coomes, 2004) Households lacking labor resources must seek it elsewhere, often through social ties (Montgomery, 1991) Gender must also be considered amo ng NTFP market dynamics, because NTFPs are often importa nt to women as an income source. Household goals balance of risks and opportunity costs, and personal motivation play s role s in how individuals, as part of househo ld s decide if and how they engage i n market s Although livelihood assets may be building blocks of livelihood outcomes, the decision making process and environmen tal constraints a ffect how livelihood assets are used. Participation and financial returns from forest markets can be improved when favorable contexts and appropriate support are available such as access ible market information or improved harvesting and processing techniq ues (Shackleton et al., 2007)

PAGE 40

40 Increasing demand makes NTFPs an attractive market for new participants who are often more productive than pre existing forest users because they respond directly to market opportunities. New participants, who often lack comprehensive knowledge regarding extraction and management of natural resources, can have negative impacts on forest resources (Jensen and Meilby, 2008) C hanging populations, such as new consumer groups or rapidly urbanizing populations, can also a ffect demand for NTFPs (Cunningham, 2001; Williams et a l., 2000) Emerging NTFP markets remain an important issue among developing countries, as the y become globalized There is much to be learned about the impact of new and growing NTFP markets on forest product users and sustainability of forest product resource s In this study, a case study of the buriti palm leaf users in Barreirinhas Maranho, Brazil was used to understand the conditions under which people are driven to maintain or join forest product exploitation activities as a part of a livelihood s trategy. Overview of Methods I first visi ted the field site in June 2009, while conducting exploratory research in the Barreirinhas region. It was hard to miss the r oadside vendors of brightly colored buriti fiber handicrafts who were strategically locat ed underneath the giant buriti palms that dominated the riverbanks. Vying for the attention of tourists vendors were eager to explain to me the origin of their wares. Further inquiry with community members led me to discover that the buriti fiber handicra ft market provided a unique glimpse into a complex human forest system that included different actors with varying resource access, market opportunity and pressure, and socio economic assets. Through these initial interactions, I consider ed theoretical que stions about the impact of new markets dynamics between

PAGE 41

41 subsistence and market use of forest products, and the factors and context that lead people to exploit and interact with the forest in differe nt ways. In spring of 2010, I received research grants to support my project from the Botany in Action program from the Phip ps Conservatory, Pittsburgh, PA ; Brazil Initiation Scholarship from Brazil Studies Association (BRASA) ; and Doctoral Dissertation Research Improvement Grant (DDRIG) in Decision, Risk and Management Sciences from the National Science Foundation. After submitting my research proposal and interview surveys for review by the Institutional Review Board ( IRB ) at Unive rsity of Florida my project was considered exempt from IRB protocols in January 2010 ( #2010 U 003) An application for a Brazilian research visa was made possible through collaboration with Dr. Noemi Mayasaka Porro Ncleo de Cincias Agrrias e Desenvolv imento Rural at Federal University of Par. To formalize the collaboration, Dr. Porro added my study to her and defense of traditional territories: legislation and public politics for the protectio n of traditional knowle dge and pluri In addition, Dr. Roberto Porro of World Agroforestry Center (ICRAF) provided institutional support by linking my project to their Amazon Initiative Consortium on markets and value added strategies for agrof orestry products, which included a focus on economic palms. Through the support of these formal associations, my Brazilian research visa was granted in May 2010 Aside from the research visa, t hese collaborations also helped improve the design, poten tial application and overall success of my research project. Field data collection in the region of Barreirinhas, Maranho was conducted in three phases F our weeks during June July 2010 were used to identify research

PAGE 42

42 participants, test interviews, and co llect baseline data ; d ata were analyzed and used to construct semi structured and structured interviews that were used in the next data collection phase. S even weeks from October November 2010 were used to conduct the interview surveys developed in the first phase. T hree weeks during July 2011 were used to verify data and conduct interviews on oral history and among governmental and non governmental representatives of different stakeholder grou ps in order to obtain a broader picture of the study context. F inal data analyses and di ssertation writing was carried o ut during 2011 2012 at Unive rsity of Florida under the guidance of di ssertation committee members. Study Site B uriti fiber is one of the top ten most economically valuable forest product s recorded in Maranho state (IBGE, 2012) Buriti fiber is extra cted from young leaves of buriti trees, which are single stem, dioecious, and arborescent palms reaching up to 25 m tall. According to IBGE, only four districts of Maranho harvest buriti fiber commercially, and Barreirinhas was the highest producer. Barreirinhas has produced 95 to 125 metric tons of fiber annually from 2004 2012. Value for the fiber in the distric t has increased over the years; adjusted for inflation rates of 201 1 one ton of fiber was worth R$ 7,178 ( US$ 3460 ) in 2004 and R$10, 791 ( US$5 200 ) in 201 1 (IBGE, 2012) Although accurate values of NTFP production are notoriously difficult to obtain, these figures demonstrate federal recognition of an increasingly important NTFP in the region. Barreirinhas district covers an area of 3,112 km 2 and has 54,930 inhabitants (IBGE, 2010) who are mostly caboclos or mixed des cendants of indigenous, European, and African people. B uriti palm trees gr o w naturally in swamp forests as a dominant tree species. According to exploratory field research conducted in 2008, local

PAGE 43

43 people exploited all parts of buriti trees but fruit, matu re leaves, and young leaves were most popular. In contrast to fruit and mature leaves, which were used to meet subsistence needs, the young leaf market has changed considerably in the previous fifteen years. Traditionally used to make hammocks and cords, y oung buriti leaf fiber has been increasingly exploited by community members to make handicrafts for a rapidly growing tourism market (Lobato, 2008) stemming from the nearby Lenis Maranhenses National Park In 2005, buriti fiber handicrafts were considered the second most important source of income in Barreirinhas (Prefeitura Barreirinhas, 2005) In comparison to buriti fruit and mature leaf markets, increasing demands and production of fiber handicrafts have great potential to affect the dyn amics of buriti use. Within the Barreirinhas region, two study sites were selected during exploratory research to represent areas with varying access to buriti resources and market s (Figure 1 1 ) Laranjeiras consist s of communities with di rect access to buriti located less than 30 min away from Barreirinhas via p ublic transport. Atins consist s of communities that lack direct access to buriti forests located 2 3 hours travel time ( 28 45 km ) from Barreirinhas via public transport Both field sites have h ouseholds that participate i n the buriti handicraft market and rely on Barreirinhas as the main market and political cente r. Sampl ing Strategy The unit of study is the individual, while household was used as an intermediary unit of measure. Adult head s of households were usually targeted for interviews. The responsibilities of a mature individual such as managing a household, working for household income or subsiste nce, and raising children. The sample group consisted of 149 individuals, who represent ed 129 households. Table 1 1 shows the sample group

PAGE 44

44 according to their community and field site. The total population of the study communities was about 12,800 people (a ccording to records of the City Health Department, Barreirinhas, 2010) Individuals for the sample group were selected during two phases of data collection using a mixed approach of multi stage stratified sampling (Neyman, 1934) Respondent driven sampling, which is appropriate for making estimations about hidden populations (Salganik and Heckathorn, 2004) was applie d by asking community members to name individuals who participated in the buriti market in different ways. In the first phase, 47 individuals were selected to ensure that the sample group included at least three individuals per user role in the buriti mark et and per study site, if the role existed, and individuals from as many different households as possible in order to maximize the available data on livelihood strategies. User roles, which were identified based on exploratory dat a, consisted of owners of buriti resource s (owners), extractors of buriti derivatives (extractors), artisans of buriti handicraf ts (artisans), vendors of buriti handicrafts (vendor s), and general non users. I nitial interviewees were identified using triangulation (Mathison, 1988) in which community members were asked to identify an individual who fulfilled one of the user roles. Then, snowball sampling was utilized by asking interviewees to identify other potential interviewees who fit the desired criteria. In the seco nd phase of data collection, criteria e stablished for non participant individuals were used to select 102 individuals Data from the first phase of data collection were analyzed to re define user roles. Demographics fro m user roles were used to create criteria for selecting comparable individuals who do not currently extract buriti derivatives (non extractor), do not currently prod uce buriti handicrafts (non

PAGE 45

45 artisan), and do not currently sell buriti handicrafts (non vendor). Criteria for non extractors were male, aged 15 55 years, and re sident of Laranjeiras Criteria for non artisans were female and ag ed 16 65 years. Criteria for non vendors were all individuals aged 18 65. Individuals were selected using a purposive sampling strategy in which individuals were selected based on the specific criteria developed through the process of the study (Coyne, 1997) The sample numbers were limited by constraints on time and human resources, although efforts were made to include as many individuals as possible for each user group and from each field site. Individuals could fill more than one user ro le. Few buriti o wner s and extractor s were located in Atins because there were no buriti forests in this region. In addition to the sample group of community members, ten stakeholder representatives and seven community elders were selected for collecting s upplementary data that could provide a broader qualitative context to the study. Individuals from stakeholder groups were representatives of Brazilian Service of Support for Micro and Small Enterprises (SEBRAE), Chico Mendes Institute of Biodiversity Conse rvation (ICMBio), Ministry of the Environment, Ministry of Education, Sindicat o de Trabalhadores Rurais ) buriti handicraft/vendor cooperatives, and a tour operator. Community e xperts on regional history were selected based on their reputation among community members as long time residents of one of the study communities who were knowledgeable of local history and good lucid storytellers Data C ollection M ain research tools were semi st ructured interviews, which were conducted with the sample group during the first and second phases of data collection. Participant

PAGE 46

46 observation and semi structured interviews with stakeholders and community elders were conducted mostly during the third phas e of data collection. Data w ere collected from the following sources: L iterature review Regional data, such as statistics, maps, informal studies, and observations, collected from organizations based in S o Luis and Barreirinhas, Maranho S emi structured i nterviews with the sample group, representatives of stakeholder groups, and experts of regional history in the study communities Participant observation (Smith and Kornblum 1996) in the study communities to provide ethnographic data GPS mapping of interview sites, location of buriti forests, and location of roads/travel routes I nterviews were used to collect data on livelihood strategy, buriti value chain participation, and history. The livelihood interview was a semi st ructured interview used to collect data about livelihood ac tivities and demographics of interviewee s and their household s Market chain interviews were conducted with buriti resource o wner, extractor, artisans and vendor sub sample groups to collect data on buriti value chain s H istory interview s were used to understand the historical context of the buriti market, community infrastructure, changing access to buriti resources, and stake holders. Livelihood and value chain interviews averaged 54 minutes. History interviews averaged 35 minutes. I nterviews were conducted by th e author in Portuguese, which was the nati ve language of the interviewees home, although some interviews were conducted in their workplace. A local field assistant was present at most interviews to facilitate introductions and negotiate cultural nuances. Responses to in terviews and field observations were documented as

PAGE 47

47 handwritten notes by the author, although some interviews were recorded as voice recordings. After e ach data collection phase, hand written notes were expanded into more detailed accounts and later, coded to identify socio economic factors that affected participation in the buriti market in order to facilitate data analysis. Research questions were explored from the cultural po int of view of the interviewees ponses (Spradley 1979). Validity, which was defined as whether or no t the response honestly reflected the reality from the point of view of the culture, was verified by cross checking responses during an interview or between interviews with other responden ts. Accuracy of the data was enhanced by repeated listening to voice recordings to double check hand written notes taken during interviews. Data analysis was spec ific to each research question ; detailed descriptions of data analysis are found in each chapt er B oth q ualitative and quantitative analys e s were used. Qualitative analysis was usually the first step in the analysis, by grouping together interview responses, cross checking between interviews, and identifying patterns and factors that could be analy zed quantitatively. Socio economic factors (explanatory variables) were quantitatively presented as descriptive statis tics, by using frequency tables Relationships between variables were statistically tested using correlation analysis. Statistic al comparison of means was conducted using two sample t test, wilcoxon rank sum test, ANOVA, and kruskal wallis test. L ogistic regression analysis was used to identify statistically significant factors of socio economic models Quantitative analysis was co nducted using Microsoft Excel and SAS 4.3 software.

PAGE 48

48 I focus ed my compensation efforts on Laranjeiras and Atins communities, where I spent the majority of my time on the field. I took all opportunities to purchase products from interviewees during data collection Products were mostly buriti handicrafts purchased value chain). To provide additional income to the study communities, I hired local field assistants and resided in a rented ho use in the community during data collection. As part of each interview, I asked interviewees to discuss problems in their community Their responses were used to generate different ideas for contributing to the greater community. During the third phase of data collection, I discussed ideas for community compensation with field assistants and community members. Based on their advice I interviewed school directors to identify the needs of the schools. S chool supplies were purchased and delivered to four scho ols in the study communities at the same time that research results were presented ( 2013) D issertation Outline In Chapter 2, the importance of buriti in the livelihood system is explored. In this chapter, a household schematic is made to identify the res ources and activities that are available to interviewees. Livelihood activities are explored in detail, including the limitations and benefits of each activity. By comparing between people who participate and who do not participate in the buriti market, im portant socio economic factors that characterize participation in the buriti market are identified. Results showed that participation in livelihood activities was affected by environmental constraints, demographics, and personal preferences. Burit i use was influenced by cultural identity, governance, social and cultural perceptions, and relationships between different livelihood activities. Participation in the buriti market was favored by people, and

PAGE 49

49 particularly among women, as an income earning activity because it allowed for high flexibility, low risk and investment, fast cash, and participation in diverse livelihood strategies. Although subsistence use of buriti leaves was becoming replaced by commercialization of young leaf fiber, subsistence use of buriti persisted due to cultural identity, current utility, land development restrictions, and its good fit with other activities in the livelihood system. In Chapter 3, the impact of resource access on participation in buriti markets was evaluated. Results included an overview of the history and policies of natural resource use in the region, and comparison between people who had direct and indirect access to buriti resources. Regardless of their access to resources, p eople participated in the buriti market because it provided a good income source. Some p eople with direct access to buriti forests did not participate in the buriti market because of lack of interest, skills, and household cycle. Their resource access was most affected by property regimes and ecological attributes of trees. People with indirect access to buriti forests were indeed prevented from market participation because of their lack of access to buriti resources but also because of their existing time commitments to other acti vities. Their lack of access to buriti forests was most affected by competition for resources and lack of social networks. In Chapter 4, value chain analysis was used to examine the impact of the emerging fiber handicraft market on livelihoods and resour ce management. Result s included c onstruction of b uriti value chain diagrams, analysis of relationships between actors, and identification of socio economic patterns among actors. The new market introduced new actors who interact with pre existing buriti us ers and resource demands

PAGE 50

50 that compete with pre existing loca l and subsistence uses of buriti derivatives Actors can be classified according to their proximity to the resource or market on t he value chain. Actors differ in their livelihood strategies soc io economic characteristics, and perceptions regarding sustainability of young leaf collection. Historical exposure to buriti and household cycle both shape roles in the value chain. New market demand for young leaves poses a threat to sustainability of bu riti harvesting Chapter 5 concludes the dissertation. The shift from buriti based subsistence to income earning activities that was apparent in the Barreirinhas region demonstrated how people adapt their livelihood strategies to an increasingly global eco nomy. Although individuals may be part of the same livelihood system, socio economic engagement in buriti activities. S ocial heterogeneity should be considered by conservation and development initiatives that seek to influence participation in NTFP markets, evaluate effects of commercialization on livelihoods, and effectively design and implement resource management strategies

PAGE 51

51 Figure 1 1 Map of the study site (created by Mariano Gonzlez Roglich)

PAGE 52

52 Table 1 1. Number of individuals interviewed in each community in the two study areas Laranjeiras area communities Number of individuals Atins area communities Number of individuals Barreirinhas city 5 Atins 18 Baixao 3 Bar da Hora 1 Cantinho 9 Mandacaru 8 Ilha de Paraiso 1 Santo In cio 16 Laranjeiras 47 Vassoura 2 Piaus 6 Tapui 33 Total 104 Total 45

PAGE 53

53 CHAPTER 2 THE ROLE OF BURITI I N THE LIVELIHOOD SYS TEM Chapter Summary Although the growth of new NTFP markets (non timber forest products) among forest users is often promoted as a strategy to meet conservation and development goals markets are not for everyone. A livelihood systems analysis was used to explore subsistence and market dynamics of forest products by assessing parameters of the livelihood system and identifying socio economic factors that affected participation in the buriti market. First, data colle cted from interviews with 149 individuals in Barreirinhas, Maranho were analyzed to identify resources, activities, and livelihood strategies within the livelihood system; preferences and limitations that influenced selection of activities were assessed Secondly, socio economic characteristics of participators (n=83) and non participators (n=66) in the buriti market were compared. Results showed that interviewees prioritized livelihood stability. Their reliance on resources and livelihood activities varie d according to environmental constraints, demographics, and personal preferences. Buriti use was influenced by cultural identity, governance, social and cultural perceptions, and relationship between buriti activities and other traditional livelihood activ ities. As an income earning activity, buriti was favored by interviewees, particularly women, because it allowed for high flexibility, low risk, fast cash, low investment, and participation in diverse livelihood strategies. Subsistence use of buriti persis ted due to cultural identity, potential value, current utility and politics, and role of buriti within a traditional livelihood system. Although individuals may be part of the same livelihood system, socio economic heterogeneity wi thin the

PAGE 54

54 region different ially affected activities Background Although the growth of new NTFP markets (non timber forest products) among forest users is often promoted as a strategy to meet conservation and development goa ls, markets are not for everyone. Ne w global markets for NTFPs (non timber forest products) must often compete with pre existing subsistence forest uses and local markets. L ocal NTFP markets are commonly based on t raditional knowledge and skills, and are the result of community based initiative, innovation, and self reliance (Shackleton et al., 2007) In contrast, g lobally oriented markets are more complex and foreign to most NTFP users (Philip, 2002) Exploitation of aai ( Euterpe oleracea ) fruit provides a well documented example of the complexity of shifting from local use to global market (Brondizio et al., 2002) Although the growth of new NTFP markets is often encouraged by development initiatives, p articipation in rapidly ch anging forest markets can be risky for some people (Belcher and Schreckenberg, 2007) Shaped by need and opportunity, NTFPs form part of livelihood strategies by helping them meet their subsistence and income earning needs. M ost forest products provide a subsist ence function among households through direct use or trade. A smaller subset of NTFPs are regularly traded and targeted commercially in different types of markets. NTFP use is influenced by local institutions, resource abundance, and relative level of deve lopment (Ruiz Perez et al., 2004a) In a subsistence economy, people devote their available resources to producing food and maintaining shelter and security. In a cash ba sed economy, households have opp ortunities to specialize in activities that offer the best economic opportuniti es. If food and other necessities can be

PAGE 55

55 purchased, people can concentrate their efforts on activities t hat provide the highest rewards (Shackleton and Shackleton, 2004) Broad typologies of forest based livelihood s trategies have been defined based on availability of assets, risk management (Belcher et al., 2005; Jensen, 2006) and involvement in commercialization. Commercialization is defined as any use in which the extractor do es not use the product directly and exploits the product to gain a different value (Ruiz Perez et al., 2004a) People who use a coping strategy depend on forest products mostly for household subsistence; few products are sold in markets (Belcher and Kusters, 2004) People who use a diversified strategy utilize forest products as a supplement to other household livel ihood activities (Arnold and Townson, 19 98) and as a safety net against unexpected events (Shackleton and Shackleton, 2004) A specialized strategy focuses on specific forest products as a major contribution to income and high household integration into the cash economy because the household is driven by market opportunities for these products (Belcher and Kusters, 2004) Definitions of forest based livelihood strategies can vary according to the socio economic and political characteristics of the case context (Ruiz Perez et al., 2004a) Socio economic factors that are influential in forest livelihoods include weal th, gender, education, and personal preference. As part of diversification strategies, NTFPs can prevent poverty within household economies by helping people maintain a minimum standard of living (Angelsen and Wunder, 2003) and prov iding subsistence and a safety net against unexpected events among local communities (Shackleton and Shackleton, 2004; Wunder, 2001) D iversification can also provide convenient seasonality combinations, less risk, and

PAGE 56

56 higher income. D iversification however, can also lead to adverse gender ef fects and unequal income distribution (Ellis, 1999) Men more easily take advantage of diversification activities, as women are usually limited to the domestic and subsistence sphere. In comparison to men, women have fewer livelihood options, less access to livelihood resources, and lower wage rates. par ticipation in NTFP trade, however, can be an important source of self esteem, pride and independence, even if little income is earned (Shackleton, 2004). Women are disproportionately reliant on local trade of NTFPs (Neumann and Hirsch 2000) because they c an easily enter NTFP markets and combine their activities with household tasks (Arnold and Townson 1998; Marshall, Schreckenberg et al. 2006) W ealthier people are better positioned than poor people to diversify in labor markets They can secure higher inc omes from NTFP commercialization (Arnold and Perez, 2001; Belcher and Kusters, 2004; Cavendish, 2000; Warner, 2000) by controlling opportunities and devoting more re sources towards production (Arnold and Townson, 1998) Poor people have a difficult time taking advant age of market opportunities (Arnold and Townson, 1998) because of their low education, higher risk, and lack of organization, skills, and capital (Shanley, Pierce et al. 2005, Arnold & Ruiz Prez 2001). Although NTFPs provide poor people with important safety net and supplementary income (Pyhala et al., 2006) they are likely to divert their subsistence resources towards new market opportunities, which increases their risk level (Falconer and Koppell, 1990) Nevertheless, barriers to entry in NTFP market are relati vely low in comparison to other livelihood options, so use and trade of NTFPs is often a viable

PAGE 57

57 strategy for poor people (Dubois 2003). Overall, diversity helps households to be more resilient (Marschke and Berkes, 2006) as well as more reactive and opportunistic. Considering that there are both positive and negative impacts of engaging in NTFP markets, this study sought to understand: W hy people participate in NTFP markets when other livelihood options are available? This study explore d the role of buriti ( Mauritia flexuosa ) in livelihood strategies by examining peop the buriti palm leaf market in Barreirinhas, Maranho, Brazil A livelihood approach was used to evaluate the resources, economic activities, external constraints and personal pref erences decision to participate in buri ti markets Methods Analytical Framework The sustainable rural livelihoods framework (Carney, 1998; Scoones, 1998) or liveliho od approach is useful for assessing different capitals and external environmental factors that shape the livelihood system (Berkes and Folke, 1994; Department for International Development, 2006; Scoones, 1998) A livelihood system consists of a group of people who share common access to resources and livelihood activities. L ivelihood strategies are the combination of activities that people undertake in order to achieve their livelihood goals (DFID 2011). As strategies, resources are used as efficiently as possible and in different combinations depending on constraints, goals, opportunities and co mposition of the household. Study Site Maranho many palm species, including baba ss u ( Attalea speciosa) aai ( Euterpe oleracea ) carnauba ( Copernicia prunifera) and buriti substantially contribute to lo cal livelihood strategies. The buriti palm

PAGE 58

58 is a dioecious, arborescent palm that grows up to 25 m tall, with a single stem. Buriti fiber, which is extracted from young buriti leaves has been recorded as one of the top ten most economically valuable forest product s in Maranho (IBGE, 2012) According to IBGE, only four municipalities of Maranho st ate have harvested buriti fiber for the market, and during 2004 2011 Barreirinhas was the highest recorded producer. Barreirinhas (95 1 39 metric tons of buriti fiber per year) Fieldwork was conducted in Barreirinhas among 12 communities lo cated along the Preguia River (Figure 1 2). Barreirinhas district covers an area of 3,112 km 2 and has 54,930 inhabitants (IBGE, 2 010) who are mostly caboclos or mixed descendants of indigenous, European, and African people. Buriti palm trees grew naturally in swamp forests as a dominant tree species in Barreirinhas. Results from exploratory research showed that people in the re gion popularly exploited fruit, mature leaves, and young leaves from wild grown buriti trees. Fruit was usually collected from the ground and used for household consumption, although some people sold fruit to the local market in Barreirinhas. Mature and yo ung leaves were collected manually by extractors who climbe d trees to cut the leaves. M ature leaves were harvested by extractors to sell to community members who used the leaves for construction such as roof thatching or for building temporary structures Traditionally, young leaf fiber was used to make hammocks and ropes or cordage At the time of the study, community members were increasingly engaging in young leaf exploitation to make and sell handicrafts to rapidly growing tourism (Lobato, 2008) stemming from the nearby Lenis Maranhenses National Park Maranho S tate Secretariat of Tourism (SETUR) estimated that 350,000 tourists visited Barreirinhas in 2010 (Maranho, 2011) Buriti fiber handicrafts made up

PAGE 59

59 the second most important source of income in Barreirinhas (Prefeitura Barreirinhas, 2005) and buriti handicraft production was growing in popularity as a way to earn income. In comparison to buriti fruit and mature leaf markets, increasing demands and production of fiber hand icrafts have great potential to impact dynamics of buriti use. Sampling Strategy Using a quasi experimental research design, the sample group (n=149) co nsisted of a target group of market participants and control group of non participants with key demograp hic characteristics similar to the target group. Individuals for both groups were selected based on a purposive sample strategy and respondent driven sampling methods. Purposive sampling strategy entails selecting individuals based on criteria developed du ring the study (Coyne, 1997) Respondent driven sampling, which is appropriate for making estimations about hidden populations (Salganik and Heckathorn, 2004) was used by asking community members to name individuals who participated in the buriti market in different ways. The target group consisted of 83 individuals who participated in the b uriti market as owners of buriti resources (n=13), extrac tors of bur iti derivatives (n=12), artisans (n=5 1), and vendors (n=19) of buriti handicrafts. For the control group (n=66) demographics of individuals in the target group (eg. gender, age, region) were used as criteria for selecting matching groups of individuals wh o did not participate in the buriti m arket, or did not extract buriti derivat ives nor produce and sell buriti handicrafts. Criteria for non owners were individuals from Laranjeiras area aged 20 88 years (n=39). Criteria for non extractors were male individ uals from Laranjeiras area aged 15 55 years (n=11). Criteria for non artisans were female and aged 16 65 years (n=38). Criteria for non vendors were all individuals aged 18 65 years (n=53). Individuals could fill more than one role in the buriti market.

PAGE 60

60 Ba sed on this sampling strategy, a sample group was selected that represented both buriti market part icipators and non participators Data Collection Prior to collecting data, a Brazilian research visa was obtained and Institutional Review Board (IRB) process completed by submitting a research proposal and field interviews to the IRB office at University of Florida (protocol #2010 U 003). Data were collected over 18 weeks from 2009 2011 using semi structured interviews a nd ethnographic techniques. A semi structured livelihood interview was used to collect data from sample group individuals on demographics, available resources, activities, income earning sources, and livelihood necessities. Ethnographic techniques were use d to collect data from community members not included in the sample group. As a case study, participatory mapping was used to survey market participation in Laranjeiras community. Three community members cooperated to draw a map of houses in the community. For each household, they identified the number of residents, age of head of households, and members of the household who participated in the buriti handicraft market. Analysis Analysis consisted of first, identifying parameters of the livelihood system a nd, second, examining participation in the buriti market. Qualitative analysis of interview responses and descriptive statistics were used to identify parameters of the livelihood system ts, activities, and socio economic factors that impacted their participation in livelihood activities. Socio economic variables were elicited from interview responses to represent individual and household demographics, wealth, personal history, perceptions regarding

PAGE 61

61 sustainable buriti harvesting, participation in livelihood activities, and household income sources (Table 2 1) Qualitative analysis of interview responses was conducted by grouping together interview responses, cross checking between responses and identifying patterns. Descriptive statistics included frequency tables (standard deviation reported). Participation in buriti leaf activities was examined in f our different steps. First, subsistence use of buriti leaves in the region was evaluated by using qualitative analysis of interview responses to group together and cross check between responses, and identify patterns. Second, the magnitude of buriti market participation within the case study of Laranjeiras community was assessed by reporting and interpreting statistical summaries. The objective of the third step was to identify socio economic limitations and drivers for participating in the buriti market am ong a sample group of 149 individuals. Means of the variables were statistically compared between people who participated in the buriti market (n= 83) and people who did not participate in the buriti market (n=66 ) by using two sample t test and Wilcoxon ran k sum test (p<0.05). As the fourth and final step in the analysis, a logistic regression model of socio economic factors was tested among the sample group to determine the most influential factors that impact participation in the buriti market. Socio econo mic factors identified in the previous step as being significantly different between sub sample groups were used to build maximum models, so that as many explanatory variables as possible were included. Variables that demonstrated collinearity were exclude d from the models. Preliminary models were tested until models with the lowest Akaike Information

PAGE 62

62 Criterion (AIC), as a measurement for best fit models, were attained. All logistic models were determined to be good fit of data based on the likelihood ratio (p<0.05) and high percent concordant value (> 82 ). Statistical significance of factors was measured at a 5% level or better. Quantitative analysis was conducting using Microsoft Excel and SAS 4.3 software. Results Resource Base The sample group of 149 indi viduals consisted of 40 men and 109 women who represented 129 households. A household schematic was used to depict available resources and household utilization of resources within the livelihood system (Figure 2 1). As depicted in the figure, households p articipated in activities and invested inputs, such as labor and cash, to convert resources into beneficial outputs, such as income, goods, and subsistence materials. Although interviewees shared access to similar resources, their use of resources differe d. Barreirinhas was the main market center for the region. Atins area communities were more isolated than Laranjeiras area communities, because of greater distance to Barreirinhas and impassable roads during some parts of the year. As a measure of dependence on subsistence resources, 68% of interviewees had homegardens for cultivating fruits, vegetables, and herbs for household consumption. About 48% of interviewees had agricultural land for raising livestock, growing staple crops, and managing use ful native trees, such as juara (aai), buriti, and carnauba. Agricultural soil was replenished using compost from burned wood and carnauba leaves from off farm resources, and manure from domesticated animals, and by alternating crops. Half the interviewe es collected off farm/forest resources, which were plant based forest

PAGE 63

63 products and aquatic resources. Plant based forest products were mostly wild fruits (20% of sample group); other products were wood for charcoal and building construction and plants used for medicine, dyeing fiber, and food. Ocean resources in Atins were mostly fish (50% of sample group). For 33% of women from Atins, collection of shellfish and marine invertebrates provided important household food and income. Although most interviewees ( 87%) had year round access to freshwater through wells and natural water sources, some interviewees in Atins had difficulty accessing any type of fresh water during the dry season. Important sources of income came from the government and through employment by community members or private businesses outside of the community. Federal and municipal government provided important social resources, including subsidies and basic infrastructure, such as health care, education, and law enforcement. Environmental co nstraints influenced how interviewees converted their livelihood resources into benefits. Some interviewees perceived all aspects of their life to be difficult, while others believed that life was much easier than in the past. Most interviewees identified specific livelihood constraints, including health care (44% of sample group), access to fresh water (18%), scarcity of cash (10%), lack of education and training (9%), availability and/or high costs of electricity (8%), access to food (5 % ), and politics an accessing livelihood necessities such as healthcare, food, and job skill training. Health care was perceived as expensive, low quality, and with limited facilities. Food was difficult for peo ple who relied on purchased food out of personal choice or to make up for failed crops. Without subsistence and natural resource based activities, such as

PAGE 64

64 agriculture, fishing, and collection of forest products, basic necessities were out of reach for some people with low incomes. Lack of fresh water was blamed on poor community organization and faulty implementation of political initiatives to improve water utilities. High living expenses were related to limited access to goods, and rising costs, due to increased tourism and develo pment. Interviewees believed that a recent political conflict, in which there were essentially two mayors of Barreirinhas, had led to stagnancy in decision making and governance in the region. Governmental assistance was expected to improve access to healt hcare, education, job training, and basic utilities. Few formal employment opportunities were available for people who earned secondary or post secondary education. Electricity was also unreliable, although there was subsidized use for poor people. Relianc e on natural resources and subsistence activities fueled frustration about increased land use regulations. With growing attention to the National Park, there was increased federal enforcement of restrictions on tourism and land development within and adjac ent to conservation areas. Community members felt that these restrictions reduced their few options for earning cash income, and that officials sought to remove them from their land and prevent their practice of a traditional lifestyle. For interviewees, s ubsistence based activities were often as important, or more important, than cash earning activities because they provided a vital security net. Although interviewees shared the same livelihood system, use of resources and impact s of constraints varied amo ng households. To understand this variation, participation in activities and income sources was analyzed in the next section

PAGE 65

65 Livelihood Activities and Income Sources Individuals of the sample group averaged 2.2 livelihood activities/person (s=0.19) and 3. 3 household income sources/person (s=1.46). Livelihood activities were defined as activities that individuals reported to carry out on a typical day to day basis. Income sources were sources of household income reported by an individual of the household. A ctivities and income sources were evaluated for their contribution towards frequency of participation, demographic patterns, constraints, and benefits (Table 2 2). Activities w ere classified by livelihood goals of fulfilling subsistence or income needs, and were listed by descending order of frequency. H igh frequencies for handicraft production and owning a business were influenced by a sampling bias towards handicraft artisans and vendors, respectively. Most common activities were housework, handicraft production, agricultural activities, fishing activities, and owning a business. Most common household income sources were Bolsa Famila a governmental cash transfer program awarde d to women with school aged children, handicraft production, fishing activities, retirement, and owning a business. Except for activities only for subsistence (eg. housework and studying), the most frequently reported livelihood activities and household in come sources were similar. In spite of targeting buriti leaf extractors for the sample group, the frequency of individuals who reported extracting palm leaves as their main activity and household income source was lower than expected, and not always linked directly to market sales. H alf of the extractors interviewed consider ed buriti leaf extraction t o be only a minor livelihood activity because they collected young leaves only infrequently, for an artisan in their household and did not earn direct income from the activity In contrast extractors who did report

PAGE 66

66 palm leaf extraction as a main livelihood activity and household income source extracted and sold buriti leaves to people outside of their household Description of activities The most frequently reported livelihood activities, described here, demonstrate the complexity of constraints and incentives among activities Housework consisted of all domestic activities carried out in the home. usework often was so time consuming that women had little time to engage in income earning activities. Intensity of these housework duties, however, changed with household composition and age. For example, young households with small children often require d a larger time investment. Palm leaf handicrafts were made of young buriti and carnauba leaves; carnauba was used to make brooms sold locally. Almost all artisans made buriti leaf handicrafts, which had a stronger market demand. Women made complex handic rafts, while some men made simple handicrafts, such as cords. Women carried out the labor intensive process of preparing buriti fiber by stripping the epidermal layer from young leaves (the fiber), then boiling, dyeing, drying, and knotting fiber together before making handicrafts. Potential costs for making handicrafts included buying young leaves, processed fiber, and dye, transportation to markets, and hiring tailors to complete handicrafts. By investing labor and time, artisans could avoid costs by aski ng male relatives to extract leaves, using natural dyes, and carrying out all steps of the production independently. Although most artisans aspired to be self reliant, they were often limited by lack of skill, time, and access to resources. Women who lacke d skills to strip leaves into strong fibers, depended on other artisans to carry out this task. Artisans lacking free time purchased ready made fiber to quickly make and sell handicrafts. Access to resources

PAGE 67

67 was dependent on extractors, seasons, and region al access. During rainy and windy seasons, extractors were often reluctant to climb tall trees to extract leaves, and artisans could not easily dry buriti fibers. Artisans in Atins area lacked direct access to buriti palm stands, so they depended on interm ediaries to obtain fiber from Laranjeiras. The handicraft market could be unpredictable and risky. Most women had unreliable market access, and improperly stored handicrafts could be ruined by environmental conditions. In general, handicraft production was a desirable income earning activity with potential to grow in the future. Buriti handicrafts provided one of the few cash sources available to women, because it combined well with home based activities and provided immediate cash. Entrepreneurial individ uals owned shops that sold groceries, dry goods, and buriti handicrafts, as well as small industries to make boats and bricks. With the exception of buriti handicraft shops, almost all shops were in homes because the main consumers were community members. Main limitations for shop owning were having available resources to invest in infrastructure and inventory. Risks included paying rent for a shop location, investing in perishable products, and giving credit to clients. Business ownership, however, was a s ought after activity that provided a fast and consistent return of dependable cash. Ocean and river based activities consisted of fishing, making nets, and maintaining boats. Commercial ocean fishing was carried out by groups of men in open water for up t o 15 day periods. Fishing for household consumption was conducted by a few men on small riverboats or along the shoreline, where women and children often assisted. There were high maintenance costs for boats and nets. Ocean fishers in Atins

PAGE 68

68 were active thr oughout the year. Seasonal fishers in Laranjeiras spent winters fishing and summers engaged in other activities, such as making and mending nets. Net making was a skilled task that provided good income because it could be carried out at home with little ov erhead and flexible hours. Due to reduced fish stocks, most fishers supported increased regulations to reduce overfishing and environmental damage by large commercial boats. Brick making activities were conducted only in Laranjeiras, where good sources of clay were available. Community members were hired by factory owners to make ceramics by excavating clay that was mixed, shaped, dried, and fired in kilns. Men made bricks and roof tiles; women made floor tiles. Clay based products were made during the dry season, when products could dry in the sun. Drawbacks of working in a factory were heavy physical work and delayed payment. Benefits included working close to home and having dependable annual work; it was one of the few consistent income earning activiti es located within communities. Government employment was one of the best sources of income because it provided a dependable monthly salary that could be long term and based close to home. Only some types of work, such as health providers and teachers, req uired skills training. Although a strict schedule limited participation in other activities, most work did not require full day and all year commitments. Most positions were not permanent but rather lasted for one to several years. Often linked to politics government employees could be replaced when new political parties entered office. Providing transportation was a popular income source for men. Vehicles and pack animals were used to transport people and goods. Because few community

PAGE 69

69 members had the means to own a vehicle, they were hired as operators. Driving vehicles for tourists and as public transportation often required training and certification. The government supported most public transportation, such as river crossings and school transport. Most o perators could work from their community. Although considerable investment was needed to purchase and maintain a vehicle, providing transportation was a desirable activity. This evaluation of activities demonstrated that people participated in activities based on potential benefits and constraints of each activity, and their livelihood priorities. The following section focused on identifying the influence of socio economic Socio economic factors t hat affect participation in a ctivities Relationships between socio economic factors, activities, and household income sources were analyzed using correlation analysis and frequency tables. Gender patterns were evident among activities. According to correl ation analysis between gender and activities, f emale interviewees dominated housework (r=0.68), Bolsa Famila (r=0.50), handicraft production (r=0.47), owning a business (86% were women), and working for the government (85% were women). Male interviewees we re correlated to brick making (r=0.40), agricultural activities (r=0.44), palm leaf collection (r=0.34), and fishing activities (r=0.50). No strong relationship was found between gender and education. Interviewees averaged 41.7 years of age (s=16.3) and h ad 4.7 years of formal education (s=3.5). Although there was a negative relationship between education and age, because high schools had been accessible to study communities only within the last ten years, some activities were more strongly related to age or education level.

PAGE 70

70 Brick making, housework, and government employment were all conducted by individuals aged 32 40 years old, which was an age group that often had a growing household with dependents. Older and younger people were more likely to be retire d and studying, respectively. More highly educated individuals were more likely to be government employed. Less educated people were more likely to engage in agricultural activities and receive retirement pension, which were statistically correlated (r=0.3 8). Retirement and handicraft production were negatively correlated (r= 0.37), partly because of age differences; artisans averaged 40.7 years (s=11.6) and retirees averaged 66.6 years (s=9.8). A wealth index, based on the presence of six wealth indicator s (eg. tile roof, bathroom inside the house, well made floor and walls, water plumbing, and vehicle ownership), averaged 3.82 per person (s=1.94). I ndividuals who earned a retirement pension and owned a business were wealthier. Poorer households earned inc ome from brick making and had a high num ber of income sources Households had an average of 4.9 people (s=1.8). Labor per capita, defined as the number of people earning income in a household/number of household members, averaged 0.41 (s=0.23). Higher hous ehold labor was related to earn ed income from Bolsa Familia and owning a business Bolsa Familia was also correlated to an making handicrafts (r=0.37). Lack of correlation between Bolsa F amilia and other income sources suggest ed that Bolsa Famila was often a main income source, because women had limited income earning choices while raising children. As people aged within the household, their roles changed but almost all age groups were valuable as

PAGE 71

71 househ old labor. Elderly who received retirement pensions were some of the most valuable members of a household because of their consistent and high income. Most interviewees (83%) came from households headed by couples; the remaining households were headed by a single woman. The majority of men and women head of households were involved in income earning activities. Women who did not earn incomes (7%) participated in housework and assisting their spouse. Of the 11% of men that did not earn income, most partici pated in subsistence activities, such as fishing, farming, and maintaining the structure of the home. Seasonality was analyzed to assess the feasibility for an individual to participate in more than one activity. Seasonality described months of the year t hat activities could be carried out, based on climatic seasons and demand (Table 2 2). Climatic seasons in Barreirinhas were distinguished as rainy or winter (January to June), dry or summer (July to December), windy (Atins, November to January; Laranjeira s, October to November), and non windy season. Seasons drove activities dependent on natural resources, such as fishing and handicraft production. Activities linked to the tourism market were also dependent on the seasonal popularity of the Lenois Maranhe nses National Park, which was popularly visited at the end of the rainy season (June July) and on national holidays. Time investment referred to the amount of time required to participate in an activity during its active months. Full time activities requi re full days of commitment during all active months. Some day activities required full days of commitment for short periods during active months of the activity. Part time activities required only part of the day during active months. Sporadic activities w ere determined by the availability of

PAGE 72

72 unpredictable work. Activities that were some day, part time, and sporadic were more likely to be combined together ( Table 2 4). An individual could carry out more than one full time activity that was active during dif ferent months of the year. F or example, men often engaged in both fishing and brick making activities (r=0.39), which were both full time activities and seasonally compatible, and transportation and palm leaf collection (r=0.46), which were part time and sporadic, respectively. Most work categorized as male dominated. Most part time and sporadic work was female dominated. Women with reduced housework loads often participated in handicraft making, owning a business, agriculture, and working as a government as, fishing, brick making, and agriculture activities, wer e seasonal full time and some day activities. Women engaged in an average of 2.13 activities (s=0.75); men engaged in an average of 2.03 activities (s=1.03). Most interviewees had strong cultural and historical ties to the Barreirinhas region; almost all i nterviewees were born and raised in the region and about half of interviewees had at least one parent who was born in their current community of residence. Activities with historical significance, such as fishing, agricultural, and brick making dominated a mong interviewees because they were socially familiar activities. Fishers in Laranjeiras, for example, often engaged only in fishing related activities, such as making/repairing nets and repairing boats; they rarely engaged in land based activities like ag riculture and brick making. In some cases, participating in these familiar traditional activities was a priority over earned income.

PAGE 73

73 Constraints, benefits, and socio economic trends influenced how activities were combined into strategies for meeting livel ihood goals. Gender, age, and education usually responsible for domestic activities, while men participated in subsistence based activities outside of the home. Commitment to these gender roles meant that men and particularly important income source for women. Participation in activities changed with eeds and access to resources changed as household members aged. Most interviewees engaged in diverse livelihood strategies, so seasonality and combination with other activities were important determinants of participation in activities. Wealth was associat ed with the most lucrative and stable income earning activities. Finally, people chose activities that were most culturally comfortable. Participation in the Buriti Leaf Activities In this section, parti cipation in the bu riti leaf activities was examined in a series of four steps First, the persistence of subsistence use of buriti leaves in the region was evaluated. Second, a comprehensive survey with residents in the Laranjeiras community was conducted. Third, socio economic limitations and drivers for participating in the buriti market were identified among a sample group of 149 individuals. Fourth a logistic regression model of socio economic factors was tested among the sample group to determine the most influential factors that impact parti cipation in the buriti market. Subsistence use of buriti leaves Throughout the study communities, s ubsistence use of buriti leaves had become less important because industrial

PAGE 74

74 substitutes such as for construction purposes, were more accessible and there was social stigma associated with remaining at subsistence levels. Only t he poorest households still used buriti thatch. Young leaf fiber handicrafts were rarely used in the household. Instead, they were sold to tourists to earn cash income. Regardless bu riti leaf resources continued to provide community members with a security net of both subsistence and income resources. Reflecting these values, landowners who did not exploit buriti derivatives were more likely to abandon buriti trees, rather than replac e them with more useful species. Removal of buriti trees was more likely to be carried out by new migrants who cleared forest for new building construction Although mark et use of buriti was increasing, subsistence use of buriti still persisted because of cultural preference, current utility and politics, and role of buriti within a traditional livelihood system. To community members, buriti was aesthetically pleasing and representative of clean fresh water, which was one of the most important natural reso urces in the region. Some buriti handicraft artisans reported making handicrafts primarily because they enjoyed it. Mature leaves were still used to build temporary constructions, such as fishing huts on the beach. Laws also protected conservation zones, s uch as areas along waterways and within the national park, from permanent development by requiring that buildings be made of traditional and degradable materials like buriti leaves and clay. Strong relationships between buriti activities and other traditio nal activities within the livelihood system, such as fishing and making manioc flour, helped to maintain subsistence use of buriti. Among fishermen, buriti fiber hammocks were popular and fishing huts were commonly made from mature

PAGE 75

75 leaves. For production o f manioc flour, buriti leaves were often used as thatch to cover the processing area and to make equipment used to prepare the manioc flour. Case study of Laranjeiras community A comprehensive survey was conducted to measure the prevalence of buriti mar ket participation within the entire population of current residents in the Laranjeiras community, which was located among buriti forests. Of the 375 community members, 20% participated in buriti leaf market activities. P articipators were 19% of the total m ale heads of household who mostly extracted buriti leaves, 44% of the total female heads of household who made buriti fiber handicrafts, and 10% of the total male and female younger family members. There were twice as many women than men working with burit i, so an extractor collected leaves for more than one artisan. Men who did not extract buriti averaged 46 years of age (s=14.2); men who extracted buriti averaged 60 years of age (s=18.2). These older men most likely collected leaves for their artisan wive s from smaller trees (<3 m tall), although most artisans considered small trees to produce inferior quality fiber. Among women, participators and non participators in the buriti market were similar ages, averaging 41 years (s=14.1) and 48 years (s=21.1), r espectively. Buriti leaves provided an important income source wi thin the community. Although this survey did not capture the importance of buriti as a subsistence source, ethnographic data showed that most, if not all, households in Laranjeiras community had experience with buriti. Influential s ocio economic factors To identify socio economic limitations and drivers for participating in the buriti market, the means of socio economic factors (Table 2 5) were statistically compared between a sample group of individuals throughout the Barreirinhas region who participated in the buriti market (n=83) and did not participate in

PAGE 76

76 the buriti market (n=66) by using two sample t test and Wilcoxon rank sum tests. A lmost all household demographics and most individual history characteristics were the same between both groups. About half of individual demographics, perceptions, and activities and household income sources varied between groups. The socio economic differences and similarities between group s are reported in this section. An analysis of individual demographics showed that g ender differed between sub groups, which was a realistic picture of the buriti market. A higher proportion of women than men do p articipate in the buriti market, principally as handicraft a rtisans To explore the impact of personal history on participation in the buriti market, personal and parental history regarding ties to their current community of residence and buriti forests were measured. Both p articipants and non participants showed similar lengths of residence and parental ties to their current community of residence, so they were equally accustomed and integrated into their community. Both groups reported having planted a buriti tree in t he pa st and having had parents with extensive exposure to buriti resources. Frequency of household use of buriti leaf derivatives for subsistence purposes was the same (50%) for both groups. Although participa n t s had more extensive personal exposure to buriti r esources and had learned a buriti market trade from their parents non participants also demonstrated high levels of parental history and personal exposure to buriti ( at least 70% of non participants ). These results demonstrate that h istorical ties to the current community of residence and buriti helped to access the buriti market, but they were not factors that determined market participation.

PAGE 77

77 Although both sub sample groups had similar views that buriti trees were threatened much f e w er participants than non participants believed that young leaf collection was harmful. Although appear ing to be conflicting, these results can be explained by the greater percentage of artisans and vendors in the target group. Compared to other actors, a rtisans and vendors had greater contact with governmental small business promotion initiatives, such as by SEBRAE ( Brazilian micro and small businesses support service ) which emphasized sustainable harvesting. As a result, a rtisans and vendors familiar wi th this discourse often insisted to tourists that their involvement with handicraft production was ecologically sustainable while sustainability These results suggest ed that co ncern regarding sustainability was linked to market and exposure to green marketing ideologies Both sub sample groups reported having good personal health which was measured because interviewees had su ggested that good health was necessary for participating in the buriti market Un s urprisingly, participants were more likely than non participants to have an affinity to buriti meaning that they reported enjoying working with buriti or believed they would like to make, extract, or sell leaves. Of the non participants, some were f ormer artisans who had stopped working with buriti products because of changes in their household composition, health, o r access to resources. For example, women with young children lacked time to produce handicrafts. Artisans in Atins reported leaving the market upon moving to Atins because of lack of access to buriti fiber. Both sub groups had similar views that handicraf t production was a lucrative

PAGE 78

78 activity which demonstrated that non participants wanted to enter the market. These results suggested that although an individual had good health and perception that handicrafts could be used to earn good income, other factors prevented thei r participation in the market. An analysis of household demographics showed that both sub sample groups had similar frequencies of homegardens and active agricultural land, which were important for producing food crops. Both groups had simi lar household size and availability of household labor. Wealth was measured according to having a wealth index of household material goods access to credit to borrow cash, and having outside assistance and a source of consistent i ncome, such as a monthly salary In this way, wealth was examined according to income stability, current material wealth, and potential access to cash. All wealth measurements were similar for both groups The only household demographic that differed between groups was their total number of household income sources, which was higher for participants. An analysis of individual activities demonstrated that p eople who participated in the buriti market reported receiving more Bolsa Familia owned their own businesses, and collected pa lm leaves. People who attended school were less likely to participate in the buriti market. An analysis of household income sources demonstrated that people who participated in the buriti market received more household income from retirement pensions, prod ucing handicrafts, and employment by a private company than people who did not participate in the market. People who did not participate in the market were more likely than participators to receive household income from government employment. The analysis of wealth, activities, and household income, demonstrated

PAGE 79

79 that b oth sub sample groups had similar wealth and potential access to cash People who participated in the buriti market had a higher aver age number of household income sources and livelihood activ ities, which suggested that they practiced a more diversified livelihood strategy. Modeling participation in the buriti market Logistic regression analysis was used to build a model that described participation in the buriti market and to identify signif 6). The model was built using socio economic factors that were identified in the previous section as having statistically different means between participants and non participant s in the buriti market. Preliminary models were compared until the following best fit maximum model was identified: Predicted logit of (participation in buriti market)= 6.212 + (0. 555 )*GENDER + (1. 252 )*ATOTAL + (1. 546 )*LIVBUR + (0. 580 )*LEAPAR + ( 1.000 )*L IKBUR + ( 0.321 )*ITOTAL + (0. 522 )*BOLSAF According to logistic regression analysis, three out of seven variables were statistically significant (p<0.05) Positive coefficients indicated that individuals who participated in more livelihood activities, had more personal exposure to buriti resources, or more affinity with buriti were more likely to participate in the buriti market. These results indicate that buriti market participants were characterized as people with more diverse livelihood strategies, and who could rely on their existing skills, knowledge, and experience with buriti. In addition, most participants reported that they personally enjoyed workin g with buriti as a livelihood activity which suggests that attitude was an important factor for determining participation in buriti markets

PAGE 80

80 Final Comments The study group in Barreirinhas prioritized for livelihood security. Most interviewees engaged i n diverse livelihood strategies, so seasonality and combination with other activities were important determinants of their participation in activities. Culturally familiar activities such as farming, fishing and brick making, which were all based on local natural resource use, dominated among interviewees. People chose activities that were low stress and located close to home, allowed for high flexibility, offered dependable salary, provided fast cash, were low risk, and required low responsibility. Buriti activities had many of these preferred characteristics, so they fit well into the local livelihood system. In general, buriti handicraft production was a desirable income earning activity with potential to grow in the future. Although buriti could provide good income s not everyone participated in buriti activities to meet their cash needs. Socio economic heterogeneity among the study population determined whether people engaged in buriti activities. S ome people chose not to engage in buriti commercializati on as a personal preference or as part of their cultural identity because they identified with other livelihood activities such as fishing or agriculture. P articipants of the buriti market were more likely than non participants to practice a diversified li velihood strategy of which buriti handicrafts figured prominently. This was expected because people who engage in NTFPs commercialization often have diversified livelihood strategies in which forests products provide a supplement to other livelihood activ ities (Arnold and Townson, 1998) Participants of the buriti market relied on their existing skills, personal exposure to buriti forests and knowledge gained from their parents to participate in the buriti market.

PAGE 81

81 Although many types of resources and livelihood activities were available in the livelihood system, buriti had an important role in the livelihood system by providing both subsistence and market needs, and a security net of resources that could be used when needed Subsistence use of buriti persisted, due to perception of potent ial value, current utility and politics, and role of buriti within a traditional livelihood system. Contradictions between social stigma that discouraged subsistence use of forest products, and persistence of subsistence use due to cultural identity have b een documented in other forest markets, such as within the Brazilian Amazonian rubber industry (Vadjunec et al., 2011) Without subsistence and natural resource based activities, basic necessities were out of reach for some people who earned low income. Community members perceived that governmental restrictions limited their few options for earning cash income, and that forestry officials sought to remove them from their lands and prevent their practice of a traditional lifestyle. Although use of mature leaves will likely decline, its use will persist to be used to complement other traditional activities and to meet needs of development restrictio ns that require local natural materials, such as palm leaves, to be used for construction. In contrast, demand for young leaves is expected to increase and create pressure on buriti leaf resources. There are some recommendations that can be made as a res ult of this study. Social stratifications within communities must be recognized in order to anticipate the types of people who would be most receptive to forest product markets and their effect on the market. There were different types of social heterogene ity among the study community that could affect the outcomes of conservation and development initiatives to encourage NTFP commercialization. People who had h istorical ties to the ir current

PAGE 82

82 community o f residence and to buriti forests often participated in the buriti market, but these characteristics did not ensure that all of these people participated in the market. based activities changed as members of the household aged. As found in other studies, young households have less time to accumulate capital (Perz, 2001) so are often more reliant than older households on forest resources as a way to weather shocks and avoid risk (Ellis, 1998) For example, some non pa rticipants were former participants who were prevented from working because of changes in their household com position. Household composition, therefore, affected how people engaged in forest product markets. Another source of heterogeneity in the communiti es was the entry of new participants, who were attracted to a potentially lucrative market. This study showed that some individuals who did not participate in the market demonstrated an affinity to buriti because they wanted to earn more income. As elsewhe re, new participants to forest markets may exploit the market by becoming specialized users (Jensen and Meilby, 2008) in which they generate income from specific forest product markets (Wunder, 2001) i as a livelihood activity was one of the most important characteristics for participants of the buriti market. A ttitude and personal desire to engage in an NTFP market did not stand out in literature that evaluated different socio economic factors that af fect participation in forest markets. Instead, much of this literature focuses on demographics, such as gender (Ruiz Perez et al., 2002; Shackleton et al., 2011) and knowledge (Guest, 2002; Reyes Garca et al., 2007) an d financial incentives for joining forest markets (Angelsen and Wunder, 2003; Paumgarten and Shackleton, 2009) B ased on the results of this study, it is recommended that more

PAGE 83

83 personal and desire to work with forest products as an incentive for participating in forest markets. Forest based handicraft markets are often important income generators for women (Bishop and Scoones, 1994; Coomes, 2004) Likewise, b uriti activities were particularl y important to women, because handicraft production was one of the few activities that could be done at home, allowed for flexible hours, had accessible markets, and provided a means for earning fast money. No other activities fit so well into their liveli hood strategy. chains (Shackleton et al., 2011) which can lead to their receiving less policy support and attention The results showed that handicrafts should continue to be an important income source for all women in the study region, not only for more privileged groups. Finally, perceptions regarding sustainability of buriti use reflected buriti use. People who participated in the young leaf buriti market believed that their own impact on buriti forests was sustainable, but buriti trees were thre atened by other These results demonstrate that perceptions of NTFP sustainability can be discourses, which can have implications for resource management strategies that seek to use perceptions of local users as a basis for guiding sustainable forest use.

PAGE 84

84 Figure 2 1. Schematic showing resources (boxes) and inputs and outputs as a result of using resources (arrows) that are available to a typical household of Barreirinhas, Maranho.

PAGE 85

85 Table 2 1. Socio economic variables evaluated in the study Variable name Description Range INDIVIDUAL DEMOGRAPHICS Participates buriti market In terviewee participates in buriti derivative market 0,1 Region Interviewee lived in Laranjeiras (0) or Atins (1) area 0,1 Age Age (years) 13 88 Gender Gender; male (0) or female (1) 0,1 Education Education (years) 1 13 Total activities Number of livelihood activities reported 0 5 Years in community Number of years lived in current community 1 73 Individual >10 yrs buriti Individual >10 years close to buriti 0,1 Parent born in community 0,1 Parent >10 yrs buriti At least 1 parent lived >10 years close to buriti 0,1 Buriti learned parent Learned current buriti trade from a parent 0,1 Planted buriti tree Has planted a buriti tree 0,1 Good health Believes has good health 0,1 Buriti trees threatened Believes b uriti trees threatened 0,1 Young leaf harmful Believes y oung leaf collection harmful 0,1 Affinity to buriti Likes or would like working with buriti 0,1 Handicrafts lucrative Handicraft market provides good income 0,1 HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHICS Home garden Active home garden present 0,1 Agricultural field Active agricultural field present 0,1 Household labor Family members earning income/ people in household 0 1 Household size Number of members in the households 1,10 Head of household Head of household is a single person (0) or couple (1) 0,1 Buriti household use Buriti leaf derivative used for household subsistence 0,1 Consistent income Receives consistent income each month 0,1 Wealth index I ndex based on presence of tile roof, inside bathroom, well made floor and walls, water plumbing, and vehicle ownership 0 6 Access to credit Interviewee perceives has access to borrow money 0,1 Outside assistance People outside of household contribute cash/goods 0,1 Total income sources Number of household income sources reported 0 6 INDIVIDUAL ACTIVITIES Bolsa Familia Interviewee receives Bolsa Familia 0,1 Retirement Interviewee receives retirement pensions 0,1 Studying Interviewee attends school 0,1 Housework Housework is a main activity 0,1 Fi shing activities Fishing is a main activity 0.1 Private business activity Business owner or cooperative member 0,1 Brick making Making bricks and ceramics are a main activity 0,1 Agriculture activity Agriculture is a main activity 0,1 Employed by the government 0,1 Collecting palm leaves Collecting palm leaves 0,1 HOUSEHOLD INCOME Bolsa Famila income Bolsa Famila for household income 0,1 Retirement income Retirement for household income 0,1 Handicrafts income Handicrafts for household income 0,1 Employed private co. Private company employment for household income 0,1 Fishing income Fishing activities for household income 0,1 Brick making Bricks and ceramic making for household income 0,1 Government employment for household income 0,1 Selling goods Selling goods without a shop for household income 0,1 Selling agriculture Selling agricultural products for household income 0,1 Transportation Household income by providing transportation 0,1 Selling palm leaves Selling palm leaves for household income 0,1

PAGE 86

86 Table 2 2 Description of livelihood activities conducted by interviewees and household members Activity Frequency 1 Description and gender Costs Benefits INCOME ONLY Bolsa F amilia Hshold =79 Government subsidy given women to support school aged children. Must travel to city to withdraw cash. One of the few income sources for women Retirement Hshold=43 Elderly men and women who have invested in a retirement program. Must travel to city to withdraw cash. Elderly people can earn cash. Business owner Indiv=22 Hshold=30 Men and women own a grocery, boat/ brick making or handicraft shop or participate in co op. Investment: purchase products; build, rent, buy, or accessing shop space. Risk: Not selling products; non paying customers Consistent source of good income; can work from home/ community; brick factory owner earns R$300/month Government employee Indiv =13 Hshold=22 Men and women who work for the government (eg. health provider, school/street cleaner, teacher) Inflexible hours Reliable income source, can receive work benefits; work in community; est. R$540/month Providing transportation Hshold=21 Men drove tourist, river cross, and school boats, motorcycle taxi, oxen cart, and 4X4 public transport; tourist guide Sometimes large investment into owning and maintaining their vehicle Can work in the community; tourism work provides high income. Selling goods without owning a business Indiv=5 Hshold=16 Women sell cosmetics and clothes in community Men travel outside community to sell fish and goods. Risk: Non paying customers; fresh produce can go bad before sale. Long periods between income. C ombines well with other livelihood activities. Can work within community. Employee for private company Hshold=14 Men work for petrol company; women and men can work for a private company. Long periods spent outside community (ex.6 weeks several times a year); physically demanding work Consistent salary; receives work benefits; long periods at home between work assignments; high salary, est. R$850/month Day labor Hshold=6 Mostly men and some women who manioc, work with agriculture. Inconsistent source of income. Often physically demanding work. Combines well with other livelihood activities; est. R$25/day INCOME AND SUBSISTENCE Handicrafts Indiv=67 Hshold=75 Mostly women; few men; making buriti or carnauba based handicrafts. Inconsistent income; limited access to resources; investment for materials Fast cash; can work from home; combines well with other activities. Fishing activities Indiv=23 Hshold=49 Mostly men; some women. Income: ocean fishing. Subsistence : Ocean and river fishing. Income and household: Making/repairing fishing nets Less lucrative than in the past because of reduced fishing stocks and stricter management. Making nets: Inconsistent income. Familiar livelihood activity. Making nets: Can work from home. Income estimate: R$140/week making river fishing net Agricultural activities Indiv=33 Hshold=24 Mostly men; some women. Crops and livestock. Provides little income. Risk: failure of crops or livestock Good subsistence source. 1 Indiv frequency of individuals participating in activity; Hshold frequency of interviewee households participating

PAGE 87

87 Table 2 2 Continued Activity Frequency 1 D escription and gender Costs Benefits Brick making Indiv=13 Hshold=22 Men and women make bricks and tiles. Income: working at home industry brick factory. Subsistence: constructing home. For household consumption: must pay for access to good clay. Physically demanding. Can build their own house and work in community. Adult workers earn R$150/1000 bricks/week. Boys earn R$50 60/week. Collecting palm leaves Indiv=6 Hshold=9 Mostly men are extractors, some women collect for househ old use. Income and subsistence : Buriti and carnauba leaves. Inconsistent work, uncertain access to resources, and gathering from tall trees is dangerous. Provides additional income. Buriti income estimate: mat ure leaves: R$95 120/100 leaves. Young leaf: R$1.5 2/leaf Caretaking house Indiv=4 Hshold=7 Men and women who care take vacation home built in community. High responsibility taking care of Provides a place of residence. Can work in community. House construction Indiv=4 Hshold=7 Men who work with building construction within the community Can be inconsistent work. Requires skills. Can build family home and work in the community. Fixing boats Hshold=5 Men only. Income: ocean fishing. Subsistence: ocean/river fishing. Can require high investment of materials and equipment. High demand. Salary estimate: R$40/day to fix boats. Shellfish and forest products (not buriti) Hshold=4 Household: Men and women collect wood for construction and charcoal. Income and household: Women sell shellfish and fruits Large time and energy investment for little income return. Seasonal work, depending on the product. Provides much needed income when there are few options. Tailoring with sewing machine Indiv= 5 Mostly women; few men. Income: Women tailors. Men and women sew handicrafts. Household: Women sew for family. Investment: sewing equipment. Can be self employed and work from home. SUBSISTENCE ONLY Housework Indiv= 89 Mostly women, some adolescent boys. Running household by cooking, cleaning, doing laundry, and caring for dependents. Difficult to participate in income earning activities outside of the home. Can work from home Studying Indiv= 12 Young and adult men and women who study in formal institutions. Opportunity cost Can get better work in the future. 1 Indiv freque ncy of individuals participating ; Hshold frequency of interviewee households participating

PAGE 88

88 Table 2 3 Active months and required time investment of main livelihood activities Months of the year (January December) 1 Time investment and type of activity 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 FULL TIME Housework and rearing small children x x x x x x x x x x x x Tourist related activities: tourist guides, boat tours, restaurants, and guest houses x x x x x x x x x x x Working for a private non petrol company x x x x x x x x x x x x Brick making activities: workers and shop owner x x x x x x x Ocean fishing x x x x x SOME DAYS Ocean fishing maintenance of boats and nets x x x x x x Agricultural activities x x x x x x x x x x x x Construction or carpentry of houses x x x x x x x x x x x x Working for a petrol company x x x x x x x x x x x x Providing transportation x x x x x x x x x x x x Day labor and odd jobs x x x x x x x x x x x x PART TIME Housework without small children x x x x x x x x x x x x Employed by the government x x x x x x x x x x x x River fishing and fixing/making nets x x x x x x x x x x x x Tourist related activities: buriti handicraft production x x x x x x x x x Fruit production: agriculture and NTFPs x x x Hired to care take a house x x x x x x x x x x x x School related: students in school, workers in schools, and transportation for students x x x x x x x x x Gardening x x x x x x x x x x x x SPORADIC Selling items from door to door x x x x x x x x x x x x Selling leaves from buriti trees x x x x x Sewing x x x x x x x x x x x x Collecting NTFP and shellfish x x x x x x x x x x x x 1 denote s the months of activity. 2 Full time: full days of work during months of activity; Some days: full days of work, but for short periods only during months of activity; Part time: part of the day devoted to work throughout months of activity; Sporadic: work only some days, only when work is available. Table 2 4 Combinations of activities based on required time investment s Full time Some days Part time Sporadic Full time No No No Yes Some days Same month but not same day Same month but not same day Same month but not same day Part time Yes Yes Sporadic Yes No activities not likely to combine; Yes activities combine well.

PAGE 89

89 Table 2 5. Means of socio economic variables according to participation in buriti market Socio economic variables D ifferent means (X) Participation n=83 No participation n=51 INDIVIDUAL DEMOGRAPHICS Region 0.28 0.33 Age 41.25 (12.69) 42.29 (20.02) Gender X 0.81 0.64 Education 4.32 (3.02) 5.16 (3.98) Total activities X 2.46 (0.74) 1.85 (1.03) INDIVIDUAL HISTORY Years in community 30.78 (15.14) 30.28 (17.41) Individual >10 yrs buriti X 0.85 0.70 Parent born community 0.50 0.54 Parent >10 yrs buriti 0.81 0.74 Buriti learned from parent X 0.46 0.24 Planted buriti tree 0.53 0.53 INDIVIDUAL PERCEPTION Good health 0.71 0.77 Buriti trees threatened 0.67 0.54 Young leaf harmful X 0.14 0.59 Affinity to buriti X 0.85 0.47 Handicrafts lucrative 0.80 0.67 HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHICS Home garden 0.68 0.70 Agricultural field 0.52 0.42 Household labor 0.44 (0.21) 0.37 (0.21) Household size 4.89 (1.85) 4.82 (1.49) Buriti household use 0.74 0.74 Consistent income 0.54 0.65 Wealth index 2.92 (1.79) 2.94 (1.89) Access to credit 0.42 0.39 Outside assistance 0.16 0.27 Total income sources X 3.29 (0.96) 2.50 (1.27) INDIVIDUAL ACTIVITIES Bolsa Familia X 0. 70 0. 56 Retirement X 0.22 0.58 Studying X 0.04 0.14 Housework 0.61 0.58 Fishing activities 0.16 0.18 Private business activity X 0.22 0.06 Brick making 0.11 0.06 Agricultural activity 0.18 0.27 0.07 0.11 Collecting palm leaves X 0.07 0.00 HOUSEHOLD INCOME Bolsa Familia income 0.68 0.52 Retirement income X 0.24 0.56 Handicraft income X 0.84 0.08 Employed private co. X 0.67 0.18 Fishing income 0.35 0.33 Brick making income 0.16 0.14 X 0.10 0.21 Selling goods 0.11 0.11 Selling agricultural 0.19 0.12 Transportation 0.18 0.09 Selling palm leaves 0.08 0.03 *A ccording to T Test and Wilcoxon rank sum test (p<0.05); dash denotes no significant difference

PAGE 90

90 Table 2 6 L ogistic regression results of p articipation in the buriti leaf market Models Coefficient (MLE) O dds ratio p value, *p<0.05 Observations= 102 Model evaluation: Likelihood ratio= 38 .7 1 (p<0.0001 ) Percent concordant= 8 2 8 Gender GENDER 0. 555 1.75 0. 490 Total activities ATOTAL 1. 252 3.50 0.002 Individual >10 yrs buriti LIVBUR 1.546 4.69 0.013 Buriti learned from parent LEAPAR 0.580 1.79 0. 286 Affinity to buriti LIKBUR 1.000 2.72 0.024 Total income sources ITOTAL 0.321 1.38 0.119 Bolsa Familia BOLSAF 0.522 1.67 0.385

PAGE 91

91 CHAPTER 3 EFFECT OF BURITI RESOURCE ACCESS ON MARKET PARTICIPAT ION Chapter Summary Access to NTFP s (non timber forest products) can affect participation in forest markets and sustainability of resources. Distance to resources and systems of land tenure have been show to affect This study evaluated the impact of access to buriti ( Mauritia flexuosa ) palm leaf resou rces on market participation and resource use in Maranho, Brazil. Interviews were conducted with individuals who had direct access to resources (n=65) and individuals with only indirect access to resource (n=41) to collect data on socio economic patterns, livelihood strategies, oral histories, and perceptions regarding buriti use. To build context on regional history and resource governance, interviews were conducted with seven community experts of history and four governmental and non governmental officia ls. Qualitative analysis was used to evaluate interview responses and socio economic differences between groups. Regardless of having direct or indirect access to resources, people participate d in the buriti market because it provided a good income source that fit well into the ir livelihood system. Contrary to expectations, poverty, tradition with buriti, and affinity to handicraft production did not ensure market engagement. Some p eople with direct access to resources did not participate in the buriti mark et because of lack of interest and skills, and changes in the household cycle. Other p eople with indirect access to resources were prevented from participating in the market because of lack of access to resources and other time commitments. Property regime s and ecological attributes of trees affected resource access among people close to forests. Competition and lack of social networks impacted resource access among people far from forests.

PAGE 92

92 Background Access to NTFP (non timber forest products) can impact p articipation in forest markets and sustainability of resources. Distance to resources and property regimes are two measure s of access. Proximity to plants producing the raw materials has been suggested as a factor that can lead to overharvesting of NTFP resources (Murali et al., 1996; Sampaio et al., 2008; Uma Shaanker et al., 2004) Villages located at varying distances from the urban local market can be faced with different challenges (Shanley et al., 2002). People from distant villages who wish to market NTFPs in the urba n markets are often poor, with little education, scant market expertise, and risk averse These distant villages are more reliant on forest products to generate subsistence a contribution to their health and nutritional welfare. In contrast to remote forest communities, villages close to city markets ofte n have well developed physical and social infrastructure s which can make the marketing of extractive products considerably less difficult. They have problems, however, with forest degradation, which is associated with proximity to urban areas. Some stu dies show that this obstacle can be overcome by more intense management of resources lo cated close to urban areas (Anderson and Ioris, 1992). S ystems of land tenure and governance such as private property, common areas, and open access can promote or disc ourage sustainable use of resources (Gibson et al., 2000) No single property regime, however, works efficiently and sustainably for all resou rces, because local mana gement systems and use of NTFPs vary widely depending on the type of forest product and its ecological, political, socio economic and cultural context s (Berkes et al., 1998; Ghimire et al., 2004; Kusters et al., 2006; Ruiz Perez and Byron, 1999; Ticktin, 2004) Where there are market induced or other

PAGE 93

93 pressures on NTFPs, some type of secure ownership that allow s users to enforce exclusive rights and control ov er the forest is essential for sustainable management (Crook and Clapp, 1998; Mendelsohn and Balick, 1995) E xisting lo cal management and governance over resources must be considered before imposing external laws or strategies for resource management (McKean, 2000) As economic value and demand for NTFPs rises, commercialization of products often expand s outside of regions with histories of traditional use (Shackleton et al., 2009) Expansion can have negative impacts on NTFP resources, because of more intensive and damaging harvesting and uncontrolled competition for resources (Belcher et al., 2005; Marshall et al., 2006) Most NTFPs provide a subsistence source for households through consumption o r trade. Depending on the degree of integr ation into a cash based economy in which food and other necessities can be purchased, forest based households can concentrate their efforts in activities that offer the best financial opportunities and highest rewa rds (Shackleton and Shackleton, 2004) Changing consumer demands, such as to include urban based consumers (Williams et al., 2000) can also attract new NTFP marke t participants Although n ew participants in a forest market who respond directly to market opportunities can be more productive than traditional participants they can have negative impacts on forest resources One reason for this is their l ack of knowledge regarding extraction and management of natural resources (Jensen and Meilby, 2008; Schmidt and Ticktin, 2012) In contrast, p eople who have more i ntimate knowledge of their resources are more likely to practice sustainable harvesting.

PAGE 94

94 Without a favorable context or appropriate technical support, some people may not be prepared or willing to participate in markets (Shackleton et al., 2007) P roducers must have business and marketing capacity and access to capital, and be well organized to have successful enterprises. L ack of knowledge and skill (Arnold and Townson, 1998) and un availability of household labor (Ruiz Perez and Byron, 1999) c participation in the NTFP market economy Rapidly changing forest markets are often risky and present low prospect s for reasonable returns (Scherr et al., 2004) M arket incentives for forest conservation can be unsuccessful if they are culturally incompatible with traditional institutions, the resource base is not easily managed sustainably, or there is conflict between different groups (Richards, 1997; Schmink, 2004) Growing NTFP markets can widen divisions between socio economically disparate groups (Kusters et al., 2006) P oor people often experience difficulty in taking advantage of NTFP market opportunities because of low education, lack of social, financial and physical capital and diversified household strategies (Shanley et al., 2005) In contrast, w ealthier and more powerful community members often control opportunities and resources. P oor people are more likely to intensify ways of generating income in order to use their available capitals as efficiently as possible (Ellis, 1999) as well as divert their subsistence resources towards new market opportunities, which increases their risk level (Arnold and Townson, 1998; Falconer and Koppell, 1990) M ost poor people engage in extractive activities as part of a diversification strategy (Neumann and Hirsch, 2000) NTFPs prevent poverty by helping people fill seasonal or other cash flow gaps, cope with expenses and risks, and respond to unusual

PAGE 95

95 opportunities ; they also provide subsistence, insurance and a safety net (Angelsen and Wunde r, 2003; Shackleton and Shackleton, 2004; Wunder, 2001) This study evaluate s the impact of access to buriti ( Mauritia flexuo sa ) leaves on market participation and resource use in Barreirinhas, Maranho state, Brazil. The following research questions were asked: How does resource access effect market participation and perceptions of sustainability of buriti leaf harvests ? How do people with different resource access compare in regards to buriti market participation, livelihood strategy, historical ties to buriti wealth, and perceptions about the impacts of buriti use? Research questions were addressed by evaluating socio economic patterns, livelihood strategies, oral histories, and perceptions of participators and non participators of the buriti leaf market. Methods Study site Barreirinhas of Maranho, Brazil is well known as one of the few regions to produce high value a nd complex buriti palm fiber handicrafts. Buriti fi ber, which is extracted from young leaves of buriti palm trees, has been recorded one of the top ten most economically valuable forest product s in Maranho. Barreirinhas municipality has produced 95 to 1 39 mt of buriti fiber annually from 2004 201 1 which makes it the most productive municipality in Maranho (IBGE, 2012) Barreirinhas D istrict covers an area of 3,112 km 2 and has 54,930 inhabitants (IBGE, 2010) who are mostly caboclos or mixed descendants of indigenous, European, and African people. Buriti palm trees grew naturally in swamp forests as one of the dominant tree species in the region. Buriti fiber handicrafts provide the second most important sou rce of income in Barreirinhas

PAGE 96

96 (Prefeitura Barreirinhas, 2005) and when buriti production grew in popularity as a way to earn income. From 2010 2011, f ieldwork was conducted among 12 communities (Figure 3 1 ) which were all administered by the township of Barreirinhas. Laranjeiras area communities were located within 30 km (<30 minutes travel ) of Barreirinh as. Atins area communities were located 28 45 km (>2 hours travel ) from Barre irinhas Based on exploratory research, community members throughout the region engaged in young leaf exploitation to make and sell buriti fiber handicrafts to a rapidly growing tourism market (Lobato, 2008) stemming from the nearby Lenis Maranhenses National Park Participants in Laranjeiras area communities had dir ect access to buriti fiber through local extractors and resource rights. Atins area communities lacked direct access to buriti resources and depended on intermediaries to transport fiber from Laranjeiras. Variation of resource access within the study area provided an opportunity to evaluate the effect of resource access on market participation and sustainable resource use. Sampl ing Strategy Purposive and respondent driven sampling strategies were used to select individuals for the study group. Purposive st rategy consists of selecting individuals based on specific criteria developed during the study (Coyne, 1997) Respondent driven sampling is appropriate for making estimations about hidden populations (Salganik and Heckathorn, 2004) A sample group of 106 individuals was selected based on a quasi experimental research design; the sample group consisted of a target group and control group with key demographic c haracteristics similar to the target group. To select both groups, community members were asked to name individuals who participated and did not participate in the buriti market. The target group consisted of artisans and vendors

PAGE 97

97 of buriti handicrafts with direct and indirect access to buriti resources. The control group was individuals that did not produce and sell buriti handicrafts and had dire ct and indirect access to buriti resources; they were selected based on demographics of the target group (women aged 16 65 years). By categorizing individuals according to resource access, the two sub groups compared in the study were 65 individuals with direct access to resources (Laranjeiras area) and 41 individuals with indirect access to resources (Atins area) To understand regional history and natural resource laws, seven c ommunity e xperts were selected based on their reputation as long time residents of the study region knowledgeable of local history, and lucid storytellers, and f our representatives from ICMBio, Ministry of Education, Ministry of Environment, and Rural Workers Union in Barreirinhas were selected. Data Collection and Analysis To begin data collection, a Brazilian research visa was obtained and IRB process was completed through University of Florida (protocol #2010 U 003). A semi structured livelihood interview was used to collect data on personal history, demographics, resource use, livelihood activities, and income sources from the sample group (Table 3 1) Oral histories were collected fro m buriti market participants and seven community experts of history to understand the historical context of natural resource use and expansion of the buriti market in the region. Semi structured, open ended interviews were conducted with governmental and n on governmental representatives to understand natural resource use laws First, r egional differences among Atins and Laranjeiras such as history, livelihood system, and land and resource rights, were analyzed from data collected through oral histories with the sample group and interviews with governmental and non

PAGE 98

98 governmental representatives Qualitative analysis of interview responses consisted of grouping together and cross checking interview responses in order to identify patterns. Second, Laranjeiras an d Atins sub sample groups were described to identify socio economic characteristics that were specific to region. Among non participators from Laranjeiras and Atins, interview responses regarding buriti resource access and the market were analyzed to under stand barriers to market participation Finally, t o analyze socio economic differences and impact of resource access among interviewees, quantitative means of socio economic factors were compared between a) participators in the buriti fiber handicraft mark et from Laranje iras (n=47) and Atins (n=22), and b ) non participators in the buriti fiber handicraft market form Laranjeiras (n=18) with Atins (n=19) (Table 3 2) Quantitative means of socio economic factors were compared to identify statistical difference s between sub sample groups using two sample t test and Wilcoxon rank sum test (p<0.05). Quantitative analysis was conducted using Microsoft Excel and SAS 4.3 software. Results Regional History According to oral histories, the city of Barreirinhas was established over 200 years ago because of abundant fresh water, arable land, and easy access to the coast via the Preguica River. Inland Laranjeiras area provided agricultural staples, such as manioc and rice, and building construction material, such as cl ay and palm resources. Coastal Atins area provided ma rine resources, such as fish, shellfish, and mangrove wood for construction. Many inhabitants of Laranjeiras and Atins area were descendants of fishing migrants, who travelled along the coast and settled around the mouth of the Preguia River. S ome residents were descendents of migrants who moved from in land

PAGE 99

99 to the coast such as in Mandacaru where people migrated to the coast to commercially extract mangrove bark to make boat sails Although some communi ties were founded by indigenous groups and African slave plantations owned by European patrons, few interviewees recognized these ethnic differences in the region. As settlements have become more permanent over the last generation families have beco me ex tended across Laranjeiras and Atins areas Regional n atural resources defined the cultural identity of people who lived there. Atins was the Laranjeiras was a region of buriti palms. The two regions were linked by dependence on c ommon natural resources and a tradition of trade Both Atins and Laranjeiras relied on manioc flour ( farinha ) and fish. Because neither region produced both staples in abundance f ood and goods were exchanged between regions through market intermediaries a nd extended social networks. At the time of the study, some Laranjeiras households still traveled seasonally to the Atins coast to fish; they built and maintained temporary housing on beaches to base fishing operations. Atins households of whom many fished year round relied on the Laranjeiras area for inland goods and access to urban resources a nd services in Barreirinhas Atins and Laranjeiras were accessible by river and roads, although Atins was more isolated, with less access to goods and fresh w ater. There were no fully self sufficient households in either site; all households relied on urban markets for some essential goods. Over the past fifty years, the population in the region grew tremendously. Barreirinhas for example, has grown from thir ty households to a large urban center with over 3063 households (records from C ity Department of Health, 2010). In the past, p eople work ed almost entirely with subsistence based activities, such as fishing and

PAGE 100

100 agricultur e and earned little income. Intervi ewees rep orted that more recently, much fewer natural resources were available such as fish and forest resources, and there was more land development and pollution. Coastal res idents also noted changes in sea level which has begun to invade new areas, su ch as in Cabure community. Due to a rising population and increasing development, concern s regarding dwindling resources and increasing popularity of the Lenis Maranhenses National Park (founded in 1981), there has been more recent stringent enforcement of existing laws regarding land development and resource use. Today, people have become less willing to engage in subsistence activities. Instead, they focused on income earning activities such as working for petrol eum companies and the government. B urit i use Buriti leaves have always helped people in the region meet their subsistence For example, m ature leaves were used for house construction. Making handicrafts from the fiber of young leaves was recognized as a traditional skill, as one interviewee noted, rtisans reported learning to make traditional buriti fiber handicrafts such as hammocks, for household use from older g enerations. Newer handicrafts for external market s required different skills. S ome female artisans from Laranjeiras and Atins reported being invited to enter the handicraft market around fifty years ago, when male vendors offered training opportunities and market access outside of Barreirinhas, such as in the state capital of So Luis. Other women learned new skills through artisan cooperatives although external vendors may have also stimulated these cooperatives. In those early years, the new handicrafts provided important household cash income. As one interviewee

PAGE 101

101 remarked agricultural fields during the day. At night, we gathered around Some w omen also reported entering the market because handicra ft production looked interesting H aving the desire to learn and affinity to work with buriti were, and continued to be, important qualitie s of working with handicrafts. With the growing population in the region, intensified subsistence and market use of mature and young buriti leaves led to overharvesting. According to interviewees, enforcement of laws to control access to natural resources as well as increased access to industrial substitutes for roof thatch, have help ed to revive buriti forests over th e last fifteen years. In 1975, a Barreiri nhas municipal law (no. 161 ) was enacted to restrict buriti collection to nearby residents C ommunity members were prohibited from selling raw buriti leaf derivat ive outside of the municipality, although s ale was al lowed if the derivative was in a processed form, such as rendered buriti fiber. According t o the Brazilian Forest Code (4.771/1965) land within 50 m from river edge s was protected from development Because buriti trees often grew on riverbanks, they were also protected under these laws (N. Lisboa, Ministry of Environment, July 8, 2011 ). At the time of the study, l ocal residents could collect buriti leaves for subsistence purposes as long as trees were not permanently damaged, such as by felling trees or c ollecting the apical meristem, or palm heart (E. Macedo, ICMBi o, Oct 13, 2010). A representative from the Ministry of Environment (N. Lisboa, July 8, 2011) estimated that 80% of the Barreirinhas population relie d on buriti for at least part of their livelihood needs. Both study regions had similar access to the tourism market, although Laranjeiras was more integrated into the market economy due to its proximity to Barreirinhas.

PAGE 102

102 Barreirinhas was the main handicraft market for the region, but Mandacaru provide d a secondary market because of high tourism in the community At the time of the study (2010) the older handicraft cooperatives that helped early artisans join the handicraft market no longer existed. N ew cooperatives supported by SEBRAE ( Brazilian micro and small businesses support service ) however, dominated the market for high quality handicrafts. SEBRAE was a government supported organization that sought to improve income earning opportunities for buriti fiber art isans in Barreirinhas (SEBRAE, 2007) They provided artisans with infrastructural support, skills training, equipment and access to new ma rkets. Recognizing the benefits of handicraft cooperatives, some artisans tried to unsuccessfully to start community based cooperatives These cooperatives failed beca use members lacked marketing skills, distrust ed each other, and lacked confidence that th ey could compete with other handicraft sources. The only successful cooperatives id entified in the study that had managed without the support of SEBRAE were in Mandacaru (Atins area) where artisans were new participants with less than five years in the market Lacking a tradition working with buriti, their entry into the market would have been very difficult without the social structure of the cooperatives. In addition, c ooperatives helped Mandacaru artisans to overcome intra community competitio n for buriti fiber and sale to tourists who demanded a diverse range of handicrafts. For Atins area residents, buriti res ources have always been distant but in earlier times they still could be accessed directly could no longer extract resources because buriti forests had become privately owned and enclosed with fences. Barreirinhas municipal laws, as described previously, also legally

PAGE 103

103 prohibited Atins community members fr om extracting buriti derivatives, and law enforcement had recently become more stringent. Still dependent on buriti resources, however, Atins residents accessed buriti leaf fiber through intermediaries who transported goods from the Laranjeiras region. These intermediaries purchased buriti fiber from Laranjeiras artisans. Laws stipulated that fiber must be processed (boiled and dried) before being transported, but it also served a practical purpose because young leaves and raw fiber spoiled quickly. Surprisingly, Atins artisans paid similar prices for buriti fiber as Laranjeiras artisans (R$20 25/kg) because they usually purchased fiber through family and acquaintances in the Laranjeiras area showing the importance of social networks in providing indirect access Of the Atins study area the Mand acaru community was an exception Their residents c ited higher prices for purchasing fiber (R$25 30) because the y had high intra competition for fiber and few er social ties with people living in regions with buriti M ore stringent ly enforced laws and protection by private landowners had restricted access to buriti resources, but Atins participators believed that buriti trees were better conserved today. Laranjeiras area residents had legal rights to access nearby buriti res ources, but access varied among community members due to different types of land tenure. Buriti grew on private land, government owned land, or communally managed land, of which only members of specific c ommunities had rights to use resources (C. Farias, R ural Workers Union, July 8, 2011). In the Laranjeiras area only Baixo and Cantinho communities relied on buriti resources from community managed forests. P eople lacking ownership of buriti trees purchase d or ask ed for rights to collect from tree owners, or collect ed without permission. Although there were no immediate open

PAGE 104

104 access buriti forests in the study region, large forest areas with absent owners were often treated as open access. Increasing land development also restricted access to buriti trees s uch as in Cantinho where most riverside land had been sold to outsiders. Interviewees in Cantinho reported that production of handicrafts in the community had reduc ed over the years in part because of lack of access to buriti trees At the same time, they reported that trees in Cantinho had become healthier because of restricted access. As additional restrictions, buriti swamp forests and trees were also often physically difficult and dangerous to access. Mud flats could be inaccessible depending on tides and seasons. When the trees became very tall, only the most experienced and skilled extractors could reach the young leaves. Some people reported planting buriti trees so they could have access to shorter trees. At the household level, extraction restrictions varied depending on the type of buriti derivative collected. From a local perspective, fruit and mature leaves were necessary for meeting subsistence needs and could be sustainably harvested, so l and managers were more willi ng to negotiate access rights for collecting these resources. In contrast, young leaf collection was used for meeting income needs through a new external market and had more potential for overharvesting due to the biological vulnerability of young leaves Because m ost landowners refused to sell ri ghts to collect young leaves, extractors collected most young leaves from forests with absentee owners from government owned land, and sometimes without permission from privately owned land. Many private owners r eported that young leaf theft was a problem that threatened the sustainability of their small, young, and more accessible buriti trees. Laranjeiras artisans usually obtained young leav es from r elative s (68% of

PAGE 105

105 Laranjeiras interviewees) who collected on fa mily owned land or riverside forests with unrecognized ownership. Infr equently, young leaves were un available, s o processed fiber was purchased for R$25 30/kg. Recognizing that young leaves and fiber were once easier to find and buy, interviewees reported that lack of resources was due to population growth, higher market demand, increasing number of people joining the market, reluctance of people to cultivate trees, and overharvesting Sustainable harvest ru les were widely known, but often ignored. Communit y members reported that it was important to collect from tr ees over 3 meters tall, to allow time for the tree to recuperate after harvesting, and to collect young leaves without injuring the apical meristem. According to participants, newcomers to the market lacked knowledge about sustainable harvesting practices so they were more likely to injure trees and overharvest Although i nterviewees expressed interest in explori ng su stainable harvesting strategies and had community mee tings to discuss these issues they often found it difficult to attract more men, who were the extractors, to the ir discussions. Contrasts between local perspectives on resource rights and the viewp oints of government officials affected harvesting strategies and created conflict s between stakeholders. Interviewe es believed that young leaves had become scarce due to high demand and competition for resources but they also believed that it was unlikely that they would run out of buriti in the future. Interviewees believed that private ownership and planting trees was the solution to overcome lack of resources because then they c ould manage their own resources without government interference In contrast to existing government laws that were discussed previously, c omm unity members believed that adjacent property owner s owned resources on riverbanks and that removing young

PAGE 106

106 leaves in any form w as prohibited by law. It was unclear who enforced these restrictions (E Machedo ICMBio, Oct 13, 2010 ), although it was suspected that it was representatives of community manage d buriti resources who sought to protect their resources (N. Lisboa, Ministry of Environment, July 8, 2011 ). Miscommunication b etween law makers/enforcers and community members could be an obstacle to sustainable m anagement of buriti resources. between Atins and Laranjeiras regions had become more restricted, so that people had beco me permane nt residents in one of the regions. Although there were few apparent historical differences in terms of buriti use between both regions, increased law enforcement had restricted access to buriti resources, so that Atins community members could no longer di rectly collect their own resources At the time of the study, Atins participators relied on intermediaries and most importantly, their social network to ensure lower prices and dependable access to buriti fiber Increasing demand for buriti young leaf and strict er enforcement of resource access could lead to use conflicts within the region To understand the impact of resource access on participation in the buriti handicraft market, the next section compare d participants and non participants of the market with dire ct and indirect access to buriti resources P articipat ion in Buriti Fiber Handicraft Market To examine if access for leaf collection present ed a barrier for participating in the buriti market socio economic characteristics of people from Laranj eiras, which had direct access to buriti trees, and Atins, which only had indirect access to buriti trees were evaluated. The first section describes the s ocio economic characteristics that distinguish sub sample groups from Laranjeiras and Atins sites. I n the second section,

PAGE 107

107 socio economic factors are statistically compared between participants and non participants of the buriti fiber handicraft market from Laranjeiras and Atins ( Table 3 3) Laranjeiras sample group Laranjeiras intervi ewees included non participants (n=18) and participants (n=47). Almost all Laranjeiras interviewees were women (91%) Due to a sampling bias non participants were about ten ye ars younger and better educat ed than participants Interviewees of both groups demonstrated similar dependence on subsistence based agriculture and homegardens, and household use of buriti Non participants were more likely than participants to have personal and parental ties to their community of residence. Both groups had similar p ersonal and parental exposure to buriti including learning a buriti leaf craft from their parents. A surprisingly high number of non participants (about 75%) reported that they would like to work with buriti, that working with buriti was worth the investe d time and energy, and that it was easy to learn to make buriti products. These results suggest ed that having a strong history related to the community and buriti resources, buriti skills, affinity to buriti, and belief that engaging in the market was wort hwhile did not ensure Laranjeiras engagement in the market. The n on participators sampled had younger households ( less household labor and more household members ) than participants when women often lacked time and energy to participate in income earning activities In comparison to participants, n on participan ts were less financially stable because of lower wealth index (measured by the presence of material goods, including tile roof, bathroom inside the house, well made floor and walls, wa ter plumbing, and vehicle ownership and less access to credit ) which suggested that participation in the buriti market was not necessarily stimulated by

PAGE 108

108 financial need. An analysis of household income sources and activities showed that non participa nts had few other livelihood activities, including those that brought in cash income Participants dominated the more lucrative and dependable income sources such as Bolsa Familia working for private companies, and owning shops. In comparison to participants non participators were more engaged with housework. Atins sample group Atins interviewees which included non participants (n=19) and participa nts (n=22) were all women who had similar education, age, engagement in subsistence level activities (homega rden and agriculture), and hous ehold composition. P articipants had more people in the household and higher labor index than non participants. Non participants had more household income sources than participants Non participants received lucrative and depe ndable household income from such sources as retirement pension s and selling goods In contrast, handicraft production and sale through owning shop were the main income sources for participants which demonstrated the importance of buriti handicraft produc tion as part of a livelihood strategy. At an individual level, however, non participants had little engagement in income earning activities; almost all participated in housework. Non participants were generally wealthier than participants as measured by h aving assistance from outside of the household, a high wea lth index, and access to credit These results suggest ed that non participants were financially stable, due to another member in their household earning the main household income. Both participants and non participants of Atins had simil ar personal and parental histories related to their current community of residence as well as similar rates of buriti household use Although participants had greater personal and parent al exposure to

PAGE 109

109 buriti resourc es and more learned buriti skills from their parents at least a quarter of non participants demonstrated these same characteristics. Both groups were also equally likely to report that working with buriti was worth the invested time and energy, it was eas y to learn, and they liked or believed they would like working with buriti, so personal preference did not prevent people from participating in the buriti market. Overall, Laranjeiras interviewees who did not participate in the buriti marke t failed to do so because they lacked time and because their place in the household cycle was not conducive to market participation. In contrast, strong history exposure to buriti resources and financial needs increased the likelihood for Atins interviewees to engage i n the buriti market. Resource access c omparison of participants Socio economic characteristics of p articipants in the buriti market from Laranjeiras (n=47) and Atins (n=22) were compared to assess how access to buriti trees shaped market participation Laranjeiras pa rticipants were 77% artisans, 19% vendors, and 4% vendor/artisan. Atins participants were 64% artisans and 36% vendors. A f ew interviewees reported owning (n=6) and extracting (n=4) buriti resources. Laranjeiras and Atins participants were socio economically similar Out of the 45 socio economic factors evaluated in the analysis, only 9 were statistically different These significantly different factors are specified in the following discussion. Participants were similar ages (38 43 years ol d) and had similar levels of education and number of livelihood activities Most household demographics, such as household size, labor, and number of income sources were similar for participants of both region s In comparison to Atins households, Laranjeiras households were more engaged with homegardens

PAGE 110

110 and agriculture, which contributed towards meeting subsistence goals, although only engagement in homegardens was significantly different between the two regions. I nterviewees from Laranjeiras had a statistically significant higher wealth index than Atins interviewees, although all other wealth measurements including consistent source s of income, help from outside sources, and access to credit were similar between b oth regions. Participants from both sites had similar profiles of livelihood activities and sources of income The only household income sources that demonstrated significant differences between regions were employment by a private company which was grea ter in Laranjeiras because of their close proximity to Barreirinhas, and income earned through fishing which was more common among Atins interviewees because of their close proximity to the ocean. C ollection of buriti leave s and brick making were more common in Laranjeiras whereas fishing activities were common to Atins because of ecological characteristics of the natural resources Participants in both sites were more likely to receive Bolsa Familia than retirement pensions because interviewees were of an age group with young dependents in the household There were almost no statistically significant differences between the factors used to measure individual history from Laranjeiras and Atins. The only exception was that Laranjeiras p articipants had significant ly higher personal exposure to buriti resources. Almost all Laranjeiras participants were originally from the Laranjeiras region and had learned their buriti craft there. They also had higher rates of personal exposure to buriti than parental ties to buriti. In contrast to Laranjeiras participants Atins participants had weaker historical ties to their current community of residence About

PAGE 111

111 50% of Atins participants were originally from the Laranjeiras area, which expl ained why over half of Atins participants reported having personal exposure to buriti and parental ties to buriti trees. About 55% of Atins participants had learned b uriti skills as children living in Laranjeiras or fro m their mother who came from Laranjeiras and ta ught buriti skills to their children upon migrating to Atins Nevertheless, Atins participants reported greater parental ties than personal exposure to buriti and they were also more likely than Laranjeiras participants to learn their buriti trade from th eir parents. In contrast, many Laranjeiras participants reported learning new handicraft skills from people around them. H in the buriti fiber market. People who lacked direct acce ss to buriti were more reliant on their parental ties to buriti to gain the skills that they needed to participate in the market. In contrast, people with direct access to buriti could rely on their own personal and current experiences with buriti. Almost half of participants from both regions had planted buriti in the past, which demonstrated a shared interest in buriti resources. Participants also had similar frequencies of earning a main household income source from buriti. In comparison to Laranjeiras, Atins participants were more likely to report that engaging in the buriti market was worth the invested time and energy. More isolated tha n Laranjeiras participants Atins participants were more dependent on income from handicraft production. An equal num ber of participants in both regions reported liking to work with buriti and that it was easy to learn. Although household use of buriti was statistically significantly greater in Laranjeiras, about 40% of Atins participants also built with buriti lea ves In comparison to Atins, participants in Laranjeiras had a statistically significant

PAGE 112

112 higher number of household members who engaged in buriti activities which demonstrated high household integration in the buriti market and greater involvement in the ful l production chain, including extraction, production, and sale. Both sites reported difficulty in obtaining buriti fiber and leaves In summary, participants of both sites had a shared interest and dependence on buriti derivatives although Atins demonstr ated more reliance on handicrafts as an income source. Participant households of both sites were in an early stage of the participation in the buriti fiber market. Laranje iras participants relied on their personal and on going experiences with buriti to engaged in the market, but Atins participants reli ed on their parents to teach them the craft. Laranjeiras participants were involved in all parts of the b uriti market chain while Atins participants were limited to the market end of the value chain because of their lack of access to buriti resources. Both sites reported difficulty in obtaining buriti fiber and resources, which suggested that participants from both regions we re affected by different types of resource controls. Resource access c omparison of non participant s Non participant groups from Laranjeiras (n=18) and Atins (n=19) were compared to determine if resource engaging in the buriti market. According to statistically comparison, most of the socio economic factors were similar between Laranjei ras and Atins non participants. Out 46 socio economic factors included in the analysis, only 13 were statistically different betwe en the regions. Due to a sampling bias, Laranjeiras non participants were statistically significantly younger ( average 29 years old) than Atins non participants (average 41

PAGE 113

113 years old). Because y ounger age was correlated to higher education (lack of access to educational institutes in the past) Laranjeiras non participants were also statistically significantly more educated than Atins non participants. Most factors used to measure wealth including wealth index, consistent source of income, and access to credit, were similar between both groups. An exception was having assistance from outside of the household, which was statistically significantly higher among non participants in Atins than in Laranjeiras. The only househo ld demographic that was statistically different between regions was buriti household use, which was higher in Laranjeiras. There engagement in livelihood activities and number of household income sources although Atins non participants had a higher number of household income source s Both groups had similar profiles of engagement in different livelihood activities. Non participants from both regions, as women, engaged overwhelmingly in housework (95%). There were interviewees in obtaining household income from b rick making and shellfish, which were both region specific. Laranjeiras households obtained statistically higher household income from government employment, which was a consistent and often lucrative source of income. About 30% of non participants from both regions had learned a buriti craft from their parents, so they had skills to engage in the buriti market but did not Participants and non participants also demonstrated similar affinity to buriti products; about 75% of non participants believed that engaging in the buriti market was worth the i nvested time and energy and that they like d working with buriti. Laranjeiras non participators were

PAGE 114

114 more likely than Atins non participants to report lack of interest to work w ith buriti handicrafts. N on participants from Atins (100%) were more likely than Laranjeiras non participants to believe it was easy to learn to work with buriti. As previously pointed out, t hese differences were most likely because of Laranjeiras nal engagement in the resource end of the handicraft production chain, which was complex, labor intensive, and required more skill. In comparison to Laranjeiras non participants Atins non participants showed statistically high er interest to join the burit i market and higher beliefs that handicraft production was a lucrative activity. Atins non participators believed that participating in the buriti market could bring greater personal independence. Non participants from both regions, who were interested in joining the buriti market cited that they lacked skills and time availability due to commit ments with other income sources and raising children Only 20% of Atins non participants and 5% of Laranjeiras non participants listed lack of young leaves and fibe r as a reason to not participate in the market. Contrary to join the market. Laranjeiras non participants who chose not to engage in the market were poorer (averaged 1.33 wealth index) than people wh o were interested in engaging in the market but lacked time and skill (averaged 3 wealth index). About 33% of Laranjeiras and 72% of Atins non participants had engaged in the buriti market in the past. Although some Atins non participants had made handicr afts while living in Laranjeiras, most had worked with handicrafts while in Atins. There were no significant differences among the factors used to measure individual buriti participation between regions. Surprisingly, however, Atins non participants repo rted

PAGE 115

115 higher frequencies than Laranjeiras non participators of having made buriti products in the pas t and knowing h ow to process buriti fiber which hinted at their strong background with buriti. Non participators from both regions reported that they stopp ed working with buriti because of lack of free time. In addition, Atins non participators cited that access to buriti fiber and bad health were their main reasons for stopping their work with buriti. Laranjeiras non participators had left the market because they believed buriti production was not worth their invested time and energy and that they had lacked sufficient skills to transition into making new products in a changing market. Both groups equally had experience with sales (about 70%), which co uld help them to participate in the buriti market as a vendor. About 75% of Laranjeiras and Atins non participators had no interest in participating as vendors, although lack of money to invest was the main reason for not participating. Laranjeiras non par ticipators also listed lack of time and opportunity as a reason. In summary, non participants from both regions were limited from participating in the buriti market because of conflicting time commitments and household responsibilities. Laranjeiras non par ticipants had less interest to join the buriti market than Atins non participants Laranjeiras non participants perceived the buriti handicraft process to be difficult and time consuming, because Laranjeiras artisans were usually in volved in the full burit i production chain. Although some Atins interviewees were prevented from participating in the market because of lack of access to buriti resources, resource access was not the main factor that affected their participation. Discussion People within t he stu dy area once shared common access to the same natural resources by moving throughout th e region to take advantage of different resources

PAGE 116

116 available inland and on the coast. With population growth and increased pressure on natural resources, movement beca me restricted and most people beca me permanent residents in one region or another. At the time of the study in 2011 only immediate residents had rights to direct access of forest resources through enforced law s and property regimes. Despite having direct access to buriti trees, however, Laranjeiras users did not have the advantage of resource access over Atins users that was expected. In Laranjeiras, property regimes prevented trees from being legally available to all Laranjeiras interviewees Amon g Atins users, legal restrictions had less impact because y oung leaves were traditionally t ransported to their region as processed fiber and continue to be legally traded in this way. Both sites reported difficulty in obtaining buriti fiber and resources, although different types of resource controls affected interviewees from both regions Atins were more reliant on handicrafts as an income source because they had fewer options for i ncome Located closer to Barreirinhas, Laranjeiras interviewees were wea lthier had access to more subsistence sources, and had more options for income, so they could decline to work with buriti even if they had the skills and opportunities. Although it was expected that poor people were most likely to engage in NTFP commercia lization, w ealth was negligible for predicting participation in the buriti market as some other studies have shown (Cocks et al., 2008; Paumgarten and Shackleton, 2 009; Shackleton and Shackleton, 2006) Poverty did not ensure that people who had all of the necessary skills and access to resources participated in the buriti market. In addition, h istory with burit i, affinity to buriti, and beliefs that entry into the market was feasible and worthwhile did not ensure that Laranjeiras interviewees engaged in the

PAGE 117

117 market. Regardless of the region, the buriti market help ed interviewees meet their income needs through a diversified livelihood strategy, which helps households to be more resilient reactive and opportunistic (Marschke and Berkes, 2006) Participants used buriti handicrafts as a major income source in their livelihood strategy, while non participants were more diversified in their household i ncome sources. Some recommendations can be made from the results of this study. The buriti case study demonstrated that l egally limiting the use of NTFP reso urce to immediate residents did not prevent the resource from being used by outside rs Although Ati ns participants were legally prevented from directly collecting buriti derivatives, they gain ed access to these resources by relying on their social networks As more Atins based artisans have joined the market, however, competition has made access to buriti resources more difficult. Mandacaru community for example, responded to buriti market opportunities even though they lacked historical and family ties to areas with buriti. Mandacaru participants therefore, paid high er prices for buriti fiber rep orted more difficult y than other participants in the Atins area to gain access to fiber and depended on social cooperation to learn buriti skills and compete for buriti fibe r. In addition, interviewees from both regions obtained their knowledge and skills of buriti from different sources. Most Laranjeiras interviewees relied on their own personal and current experiences with buriti to learn how to make buriti products In contrast, Atins interviewees were more reliant on their parental ties to buriti to ov ercome barriers to gaining the skills and knowledge that they needed without immediate access to the buriti forests. Social organization is a common strategy for making NTFP value chain s more efficient and sustainable (Padoch and De Jong, 1992; Velde et al., 2006) which

PAGE 118

118 ensures better returns to participants by providing more negotiating power (Ghimire et al., 2004) Social networks, which provided people outside of the forest area with the means to overcome barriers to obta ining NTFP resources, knowledge, and skills, should be recognized in resource sustainability strategies that depend on limiting the use of forest to nearby residents. The buriti case study demonstrates that women located closer to the NTFP resource had gre ater involvement in the overall handicraft production system. Handicraft production by women in Laranjeiras involved extracting and preparing the fiber, which was the most difficult, strenuous, and time consuming part of the handicraft process. In contrast most interviewees in Atins only participated in the market end of the buriti value chain. As a result, women in Atins may have shown more interest in the buriti market than women in Laranjeiras because buriti production appeared to be an easy way to earn cash. Women are often disproportionately more reliant on local trade of NTFPs (Neumann and Hirsch, 2000) because local NTFP trade is one area where women are ofte n free to earn income with little interference or threat of take over from men (Schreckenberg et al., 2006) T heir participation in NTFP markets can also lead to greater intrahousehold equity (Kusters et al., 2006) roles in NTFP production, however, tend to be poorly visible and inadequately acknowledged (Shillington, 2002) often because their activities are carried out at home between family responsibilities (Marshall et al., 2006; Shackleton et al., 2011) To encourage NTFP commercialization as an effective conservation and development strategy, divisions of labor within NTFP value chains by men and women and different labor requireme nts that must be invested by women should be considered.

PAGE 119

119 Lack of skills, time commitments and place in the household cycle were the main reasons that Laranjeiras interviewees who had access to buriti forests, did not participate in the buriti market. Skil ls training is a main capacity building strategy used by SEBRAE (Brazilian micro and small businesses support service) to help women gain access to the buriti market in Barreirinhas (SEBRAE, 2007) Most interviewees had young growing families, so they were limited by conflicting time commitments and household responsibilities. Unfortunately, younger families are more vulnerable than more established families because they have not yet have time to accumulate capital (Perz, 2001) Forests resources can provide them with a way to weather shocks and avoid risk (Ellis, 1998) P articipation in buriti markets can be encouraged among women with young families by providing more local access to resources and markets, such as a market point or vendor located in their community. P eople who enter th e buriti market may also leave the market as their socio economic situation changes, such as household cycle, which can contribute to forest sustainability by reducing use pressures on forest products. Finally, local people suggested that cultivating burit i trees and stronger ownership of trees was the key to access problems. They did not perceive that r esources were becoming limited, however. Instead, they viewed government management as a barrier to their use. By owning their own resources, they believed that their access would improve because the government would have less rights to decide how they should manage their resources. T his helps to illustrate the divide between local and governmental managers and users of buriti resources. Better partnerships b etween

PAGE 120

120 local forest users and stakeholders from other sectors have been suggested as a way to improve governance of NTFP resources (Mayers and Vermeulen, 2002) Final Comments In conclusion, resource access was listed more by Atins interviewees than Laranjeiras interviewees as a barrier to participation in the buriti market. Interviewees from b oth regions, however, felt the impacts of increasing restrictions on resource use. Alt hough Atins interviewees were expected to represent an expanding market, the study showed that Atins interviewees were part of an extended traditional local market and subsistence use of buriti. Atins participants were able to rely on intermediaries to gai n access to buriti resources. These intermediaries were part of a traditional system for transporting natural resources between both regions. In contrast, Laranjeiras ow ned buriti resources. Instead, t hey depended on resources collected by extractors, who were rarely permitted by owners to collect young leaves from their property. As demands for resources continue s to grow, it is expected that enforcement of property and resource use laws will intensify and restrict access to buriti even further Although Atins users may continue to gain access to buriti resources through their traditional s ocial networks they will ultimately fee l the effects of restrictions on buriti res ources as Laranjeiras extractors have more difficul ty gaining access to resources.

PAGE 121

121 Figure 3 1. Map of the study site (created by Mariano Gonzlez Roglich)

PAGE 122

122 Table 3 1 Definitions of socio economic variables Variable name Description Range INDIVIDUAL DEMOGRAPHICS Education Education (years) 1 13 Age Age (years) 13 66 Gender Gender; male (0) or female (1) 0,1 INDIVIDUAL HISTORY Born community Interviewee was born in current community 0,1 Individual >10 yrs buriti Individual >10 years close to buriti 0,1 Parent born in community 0,1 Parent >10 yrs buriti At least one parent lived >10 years close to buriti 0,1 Buriti learned parent Learned current buriti trade from a parent 0,1 Planted buriti tree Has planted a buriti tree 0,1 HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHICS Main income buriti Buriti provides a main source of household income 0,1 Buriti household use Buriti leaf derivative used for household subsistence 0,1 Household size Number of members in the households 1,10 Household labor N umber of household members earning income / number of household members 0 1 Home garden Active home garden present 0,1 Agricultural field Active agricultural field present 0,1 Household member buriti Number of household members participating in buriti activities 0 5 HOUSEHOLD WEALTH Consistent income Receives consistent income each month 0,1 Outside assistance People outside of household contribute cash/goods 0,1 Wealth index I ndex based on presence of tile roof, inside bathroom, well made floor and walls, water plumbing, and vehicle ownership 0 6 Access to credit Interviewee believes has access to borrow money 0,1 INDIVIDUAL BURITI PARTICIPATION Association Has participated in association of artisans or vendors 0,1 Family member collects Young leaves collected by family member 0,1 Experience selling Has worked with selling things (not buriti products) 0,1 Made handicraft past Has made buriti fiber handicraft in the past 0,1 Knows strip fiber Knows how to strip fiber and has done it before 0,1 Independence Feels that working with buriti offers more independence 0,1 No access buriti Has had difficulty accessing buriti resources 0,1 INDIVIDUAL PERCEPTION Handicrafts lucrative Invested time and energy worth income for making handicrafts 0,1 Affinity to buriti Likes or would like working with buriti 0,1 Easy learn buriti Believes it is easy to learn to work with buriti 0,1 Interest buriti Has interest in participating in buriti market 0,1 INDIVIDUAL ACTIVITIES Bolsa Familia Interviewee receives Bolsa Familia 0,1 Retirement Interviewee receives retirement pensions 0,1 Housework activity Housework is a main activity 0,1 Handicrafts activity Handicrafts production is a main activity 0,1 Business owner activity Business owner or cooperative member 0,1

PAGE 123

123 Table 3 1 Continued Variable name Description Range Studying Interviewee attends school 0,1 Number of activities Number of livelihood activities reported 1 5 HOUSEHOLD INCOME Retirement income Retirement for household income source 0,1 Bolsa Famila income Bolsa Famila for household income 0,1 Brick making Bricks and ceramic making for household income 0,1 Handicrafts income Handicrafts for household income 0,1 Employed private co. income Private company employment for household income 0,1 Business owner income Household income from owning private business or as a cooperative member 0,1 Selling goods Selling goods without a shop for household income 0,1 Employed by government Government employment for household income 0,1 Fishing income Fishing activities for household income 0,1 Care takes house Care takes a house for household income 0,1 Shellfish income Sells shellfish and other NTFPs (aside from buriti) 0,1 Number of income Average number of household incomes 0 7

PAGE 124

124 Table 3 2 Sub sample groups compared in the study Laranjeiras area direct access to buriti trees Atins area indirect access to buriti trees Total Non participators 18 19 37 Participators 47 22 69 Total individuals 65 41 106

PAGE 125

125 Table 3 3 Means of socio economic factors among market participants and non participants in Laranjeiras and Atins study areas Participators (n=69) Non participants (n=37) Different means* Laranjeiras (n=47) Atins (n=22) Different means* Laranjeiras (n=18) Atins (n=19) INDIVIDUAL DEMOGRAPHICS Education 4.80 (3.01) 4.55 ( 3.31 ) X 7.78 (4.15) 4.68 (2.60) Age 38. 72 (11.5) 42.91 (11.4) X 28.50 ( 10.67) 40.53 ( 13.52) INDIVIDUAL HISTORY Born community 0.51 0.36 X 0.78 0.42 Individual >10 yrs buriti X 0.96 0.55 X 0.83 0.32 Parent born in community 0.51 0.32 X 0.69 0.39 Parent >10 yrs buriti 0.84 0.63 X 0.88 0.47 Buriti learned parent 0.43 0.55 0.31 0.28 Planted buriti tree 0.43 0.45 0.50 0.53 HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHICS Main income buriti 0.68 0.73 Buriti household use X 0.89 0.41 X 0.83 0.58 Household size 4.66 (1.68) 5.05 (2.15) 5.17 (1.42) 4.79 (1.58) Household labor 0.46 (0.22) 0.45 (0.21) 0.32 (0.15) 0.35 (0.20) Home garden X 0.76 0.50 0.72 0.42 Agricultural field 0.48 0.36 0.44 0.26 Household member buriti X 1.70 (1.01) 0.82 (1.60) HOUSEHOLD WEALTH Consistent income 0.64 0.41 0.72 0.47 Outside assistance 0.14 0.27 X 0.22 0.42 Wealth index X 3.08 (1.75) 2.36 ( 1.59) 2.56 ( 1.89) 2.68 ( 1.86) Access to credit 0.4 6 0.36 0.22 0.47 INDIVIDUAL BURITI PARTICIPATION Association X 0.22 0.71 Family member collects X 0.6 8 0.16 Experience selling 0.67 0.76 Made handicraft past 0.53 0.79 Knows strip fiber 0.14 0.44 Independence 0.73 0.81 No access buriti 0.73 0.72 INDIVIDUAL PERCEPTION Handicrafts lucrative 0.71 0.91 X 0.71 0.87 Affinity to buriti 0.93 0.90 0.76 0.76 Easy learn buriti 0.88 0.92 0.79 1.00 Interest buriti X 0.33 0.56 INDIVIDUAL ACTIVITIES Bolsa Familia 0.68 0.47 0.44 0.56 Retirement 0.04 0.15 0.06 0.26 Housework activity 0.64 0.82 0.94 0.95 denotes statistically significant different means a ccording to T Test and Wilcoxon rank sum test (p<0.05); d ash signifies that the factor was not significantly different

PAGE 126

126 Table 3 3. Continued Participators (n=69) Non participants (n=37) Different means* Laranjeiras (n=47) Atins (n=22) Different means* Laranjeiras (n=18) Atins (n=19) Handicrafts activity 0.94 0.95 0.06 0 Business owner activity 0.23 0.27 0.00 0.16 Studying 0.04 0.05 0.17 0.05 Number of activities 2.43 (0.85) 2.55 ( 0.86) 1.56 (0.62) 2.05 (0.85) HOUSEHOLD INCOME Retirement income 0.17 0.18 0.22 0.37 Bolsa Famila income 0.76 0.53 0.56 0.56 Brick making 0.21 0.05 X 0.22 0.00 Handicraft income 0.91 0.91 0.11 0 Employed private co. income X 0.21 0.05 0.06 0 Business owner income 0.25 0.36 0.11 0.21 Selling goods 0.11 0.14 0.06 0.32 Employed by government 0.13 0.09 X 0.50 0.05 Fishing income X 0.23 0.55 0.22 0.53 Selling palm leaves 0.02 0 0.11 0.00 Shellfish income 0 0 X 0.00 0.21 Number of income 3.62 (1.29) 3.68 ( 1.25) 2.94 (1.63) 3.37 (1.46) ccording to T Test and Wilcoxon rank sum test (p<0.05) ; d ash signifies that the factor was not significantly different

PAGE 127

127 CHAPTER 4 LIVELIHOODS AND RESO URCE MANAGEMENT BY BURITI VALUE CHAIN A CTORS Chapter Summary Participation in NTFP markets is a popular conservation and development strategy used among communities with su bsistence based livelihoods and access to natural resources Interventions to encourage the growth of NTFP markets, however, often succeed at reaching only specific sub set s of the population To address impacts of changing NTFP markets on livelihoods and perceptions regarding sustainable fore st management v alue chain and livelihood systems analyses were used to evaluate the impact of a new buriti ( Mauritia flexuosa ) handicraft market on users in Maranho Brazil. Purposive and respondent driven sampling strategies were used to select a sample group of 97 individuals. Data were collected through semi structured interviews over 18 weeks from 2009 2011. Buriti value chain diagrams were constructed by identifying patterns among interview responses. Socio economic characteristics of actors were ide ntified using frequency tables, means comparisons, correlation analysis, and logistic regression analysis. Results showed tha t the new market has introduced actors who interact with pre existing buriti users. Actors differ by livelihood strategy, socio eco nomic factors, and perceptions regarding sustainability of leaf collection. Historical exposure to buriti and household cycle both shape participation. S ocial heterogeneity in NTFP value chains should be considered by initiatives that seek to influence par ticipation in NTFP markets, evaluate effects of commercialization on livelihoods, and effectively design and implement resource management strategies

PAGE 128

128 Background G rowth and development of local non timber forest product (NTFP) markets is a popular develop ment strategy for poor communities with su bsistence based livelihoods and access to rich natural resources Although participation and financial returns from forest markets can be improved when favorable contexts and appropriate support are available such as access ible market information or improved harvesting and processing techniq ues (Shackleton et al., 2007) specific sub set s of the population are often better prepared to take ad vantage of new market opportunities. Forest markets are not for everyone To have successful enterprises, people must have good business and marketing capabilities and access to capital and resources, and be well or ganized (Scherr et al., 2004) F or many rural communities and farmers rapidly changing forest market s are too risky (Belcher and Schreckenberg, 2007) culturally incompatible with traditional institutions, ecologically unsustainable, or there is high level of conflict between different groups (Schmink, 2004) Despite the risks and obstacles to participating in NTFP markets most people in forest areas will use NTFPs to generate income. Increasing commercialization of NTFPs has led to concerns regarding benefit distribution, socio economic divisions, and overharvesting. Due to social heterogeneity, market benefits can be u neven ly distribut ed across forest users (Ruiz Perez et al., 2004b; Wynberg et al., 2002) as well as widen divisions between socio economically different people, such as poor and wealthy groups (Kusters et al., 2006) These social dynamics h ave been well described in other parts of Brazil among wild rubber harvesters of the Amazon (Schwartzman, 1992) and babassu collectors in Maranho (May, 1986) where less privileged groups were excluded from benefits of growing lucrative global markets. I nc reased

PAGE 129

129 commercialization of NTFPs can also lead to overharvesting (Godoy et al., 1993) as people intensify extraction activities to take advantage of market opportunities. Long term NTFP marke ts depend on resource sustainability (Homma, 1992) in which use does n ot exceed the population capacity to replace individuals (Hall and Bawa, 1993) Better understanding of NTFP market dynamics and social actors who participate in markets (Neumann and Hirsch, 2000) can help to p redict impacts of using NTFPs as a conservation and development tool. V alue chains offer a way to provide insights on NTFP m arket s and livelihood dynamics, distribution of benefits, and sustaina ble management of forest resources Value chains are composed of different activities required to bring a product from conception, through phases of production, and to final delivery to consumers (Kaplinsky and Morris, 2001) The structure and functioning of value chains, and relationships between actors and their defined roles, can be highly dynamic according to time, locale, and different points along the marketing chain (Neumann and Hirsch, 2000) roles are affected by shifts in market structure, relationships between actors, available livelihood assets market proximity to end consumers (Jensen, 2009) and changing populations, such as new consumer groups or rapidly urbanizing populations (Cunningham, 2001; Williams et al., 2000) Value chain dynamics impact how benefits are distributed in a market. For instance, the financial value of NTFP s that actually reach extractors is often much less than values cited by consumers or intermediaries (Angelsen and Wunder, 2003; Neumann and Hirsch, 2000) R elationships among actors in the value chain are not always economically exploitative Value chains can help lead to more successful enterprises for all actors (Belcher and Schreckenberg, 2007)

PAGE 130

130 I nterme diaries for example, often have important role s linking local production systems and potential buyers (Jensen, 2009; Keys, 2005) As a complement to value chains, livelihood strategies provide a lens to assess how different actors respond to environmental changes. Livelihood strategies refer to long range goals (Sutton and Anderson, 2004) in which resources are used as efficiently as possible and in differ ent combination depending on constraints, goals, opportunities and composition of t he household. Households retain freedom of choice, although their decisions are made within the confines of structural social constraints (Guyer and Peters, 1987; Schmink, 1984) H ouseholds may not always have control over their assets and environment and instead react opportunistically to make decisi ons based on their circumstances (Rakodi, 2002) Most NTFPs provide a subsistence source for households through consumption or trade D egree of integration in the cash economy also affects how households use forest resources (Shackleton and Shackleton, 2004) In a cash bas ed economy in which food and necessities can be purchased households often concentrate their efforts in activities that offer th e b est financial opportunities and rewards. T ypologies of forest based livelihood strategies have been defined based on availability of assets, risk management (Belcher et al., 2005; Jensen, 2006) and involvement in NTFP commercialization A coping strategy is depend ent on forest products for household subsistence; few products are sold in markets (Belcher and Kusters, 2004) People who use a diversified strategy utilize forest products as a supplement to other household activities (Arnold and Townson, 1998) and safety net (Shackleton and Shackleton, 20 04) A specialized strategy depends on specific forest products as a major income contribution; the household is

PAGE 131

131 highly integrated into the cash economy (Belcher and Kusters, 2004) L ivelihood strategies change depending on household condition available assets, and opportunities so livelihood strategies should be conceived as one moment in an evolving long term process. Demonstrating a complexity common in human forest relationships (Berkes et al., 1998) s to NTFP markets are shaped by socio economic characteristics of the population, such as wealth, education, gender, and history, and environmental context, such as governance, resou rce abundance, development level, livelihood system, and supply and demand dynamics (Kanji et al., 2005; Ruiz Perez et al., 2004a) H arvesting strategies and intensity which are a response to NTFP markets vary according to ecological, political, socio economic and cultural aspects of NTFPs (Ghimire e t al., 2004; Kusters et al., 2006; Ticktin, 2004) such as the species, ecosystem, and ad opted management practices (Ghimire et al., 2005; Runk et al., 2004; Ticktin and Johns, 2002) Overharvesting has been linked to s pecialization of NTFP products (Ruiz Perez et al., 2004a) governance systems and policies (Gibson et al., 2000) population and cultural pressures and access to resource (Sampaio et al., 2008; Uma Shaanker et al., 2004) As economic value and demand for NTFPs rise, commercialization of the product often expands outside of regions with a history of traditional use (Shackleton et al., 2009) which can lead to more intensive and damaging harvesting and uncontrolled competition for resources (Belcher et al., 2005; Marshall et al., 2006) New participants, who often lack knowledge regarding extraction and management of natural resources, can have more negative impacts on forest resources (Jensen and Meilby, 2008; Schmidt and Ticktin, 2012) In contrast, p eople

PAGE 132

132 with extensive exposure to resources have more intimate knowledge of their resources, and therefore are mor e likely to practice sustainable harvesting Perspectives from people with exposure and tradition using natural resources can be used to help create sustainable management plans (Ruiz Perez et al., 2004a; Ticktin and Johns, 2002) This study examines the relationship between NTFP commercialization and social h eterogeneity of forest users by looking at a case study of buriti ( Mauritia flexuosa L. f. ) palm leaf users in Maranho, a northeastern state of Brazil Value chain and liveliho od analysis are used to evaluate the impact of a growing market for young leaf fiber handicrafts on livelihood strategies and sustainab le use of buriti by comparing between different actors of the buriti value chain The following questions are asked: How does a new market for young buriti leaves affect livel ihood strategies of buriti value chain actors and their perceptions regarding buriti sustainability? Methods Analytical Framework V alue chain and livelihood systems analyses were used to evaluate the structure of buriti markets and dynamics between markets and livelihood s Value chain analysis is a methodological tool for identifying important actors and their activities, trade routes, and attributes of supply and demand (Kaplinsky and Morris, 2001; Marshall et al., 2006; Wilsey, 2008) Rather than focusing on competitiveness among actors in the NTFP chain, value chain analysis evaluates chains as a whole (Velde et al., 2006) by considering relationships between actors and transmission of benefits and costs along the c hain (Kanji et al., 2005) As a c omplement, l ivelihood systems analysis is used to examine strategies and decision making by people within a common livelihood system (Collinson, 2000) Reaching beyond monetary measurements, and assumptions that

PAGE 133

13 3 people prioritize income, livelihood analysis considers the importance of alternative outcomes such as food and income security or sustainable use of natural resources (Kanji et al., 2005) P olici es, institutions and processes are also recognized for influencing opportunities and constraints that people face while pu rsuing strategies in different context s Study Site B uriti fiber has been recorded as one of the top ten most economically valuable forest product in Maranho (IBGE, 2012) Buriti fiber is extra cted from young leaves of buriti trees, which are single stem, dioecious, and arborescent palm s reaching up t o 25 m tall. According to IBGE, only four districts of Maranho harvest buriti fiber commercially, and Barreirinhas was the highest producer. Barreirinhas has produced 95 to 1 39 metric tons of fiber annually from 2004 201 1 Value for fiber in the district has increased over the years; adjusted for inflation rates of 2011, one ton of fiber was worth R$7,178 (US$3460) in 2004 and R$10,791 (US$5200) in 2011 (IBGE, 2012) Although accurate values of NTFP production are notoriously difficult to obtain, these figures dem onstrate federal recognition of an increasingly important NTFP in the region. Fieldwork was conducted in Barreirinhas among 12 communities along the Preguia River ranging from the river mouth to 35 km inland (Figure 1). Barreirinhas district covered an area of 3,112 km 2 and had 54,930 inhabitants (IBGE, 2010) who were mostly c a boclos or mixed descendants of indigenous Eur opean, and African people. B uriti palm trees gre w naturally in swamp forests as a dominant tree species According to exploratory field research conducted in 2008, local people exploited all parts of buriti trees but fruit, mature leaves, and young leaves were most popular. In contrast to fruit and mature leaves, which were used to meet subsistence needs, the

PAGE 134

134 young leaf market has changed considerably in the previous fifteen years. Traditionally used to make hammocks and cordage young buriti leaf fiber ha s been increasingly exploited by community members to make handicrafts for a rapidly growing tourism market (Lobato, 2008) associated with the nearby Lenis Maranhenses National Park In 2005, b uriti fiber handicrafts were considered the second most important source of income in Barreirinhas (Prefeitura Barreirinhas, 2005) In comparison to buriti fruit and mature leaf markets, increasing demands and production of fiber handicrafts have great potential to effect dynamics of buriti use. Sampling Strategy The sample group consisted of 97 individuals who participated in different roles of the buriti value chain. A purposive sampling strategy was used to select individuals based on criteria developed during the study (Coyne, 1997) Respondent driven sampling, which is appropriate for making estimations about hidden populations (Salganik and Heckathorn, 2004) was applied by asking community mem bers to name individuals who participated in the buriti market in different ways. Individuals were priva te and communal owners of buriti resources (n=28), ex tractors of buriti derivatives (n=12), artisans (n=5 2), and vendors (n=19) of buriti handicrafts. Consumers and representatives of government managed land were not included in the sample group, although their impact on the value chain was considered. It was beyond the scope of this study to include consumers because they were a very diverse group. Repr esentatives of government managed land, such as ICMBio, were interviewed. As outsiders to the region, however, their demographics and experience with buriti represented outliers in the data analysis. Instead, data from these interviews were used to build c ontext for the study.

PAGE 135

135 Data Collection and Analysis A Brazilian research visa was obtained and Institutional Review Board (IRB) process completed (protocol #2010 U 003) prior to beginning data collection. Data were collected during 18 weeks from June 2009 to November 2011 Unstructured interviews were used to collect ethnographic data from community members and stakeholders of buriti leaf resources, such as governmental representatives and tour guides. S emi structured interviews conducted with the sample g roup generated d ata that were analyzed qualitative ly and quantitatively, using Microsoft Excel and SAS 4.3 software As a first step of the analysis, buriti value chain diagrams were constructed which included actors and production activities (Kaplinsky and Morris, 2001; Velde et al., 2006) based on results from qualitatively grouping, cross checking, and identifying patterns among interview responses. Value chains were used to identify actors and their importance in the chain, relationships between actors, differences between value chains of different types of buriti derivatives, and their potential i mpact on buriti forests. The next step in the analysis consisted of identifying socio economic factors ( explanatory variables ) that characterized value chain actors by comparing means between actors Socio economic variables were elicited from interview responses to represent individual and household demographics, wealth, personal history, perceptions regarding sustainable buriti harvesting, participation in livelihood activities, and household income sources ( Table 4 1) Variables demonstrated normal and non normal data distribution, so both ANOVA and Kruskal Wallis statistical tests were used to identify variables that showed statistically significant differences between means of actors (p<0.05). For these analyses, socio economic factors were dependent variables,

PAGE 136

136 To identify specific socio economic differences among actors, variables were examined using analysis (significance determined as p<0.0 001, correlation and qualitative comparison of means (Table 4 2). As the last step in the analysis, socio economic factors identified in the previous section were used to build models for logistic regression analysis Dependent v ariables for the models were actor roles (eg. owner, extractor, artisan, vendor), and explanatory variables were socio economic factors. Maximum parsimonious models were used so that as many explanatory variables as possible were included in the models a lthough a simpler model was chosen over more complex models. Variables that demonstrated low frequencies and collinearity, or close c orrelation to other explanatory variables were not included in models. Preliminary models were tested until models with th e lowest Akaike Information Criterion (AIC), as a measurement for best fit models, were attained (Table 4 3) All logis tic models were determined to have good fit of data based on the likelihood ratio (p<0.05 ) and high percent concordant value (>86). Stati stical significanc e of factors was measured at a 10 % level or better. Results Buriti Value Chains The production system and actors involved in buriti value chains are depicted in Figure 4 1 The figure shows property regimes for buriti extraction and different roles of landowners, buriti extractors, intermediaries, artisans and vendors to different consumer groups in the three existing value chains for buriti fruits, mature leaves, and young leaves. Market chains for fruit and mature leaves shared a focus on household use and sale within the community. Fishermen and homeowners used mature leaves for

PAGE 137

137 construction when they needed to build temporary structure s, could not affor d or access cerami c roof tiles, or built on federally protected land in which laws prevented the use of industrial construction material. The newly emergent market for young leaves used for making handicrafts (top level in the figure) contrasted in important ways from the o ther two chains. First, access to the resource was more difficult because most owners were reluctant to allow harvesting of young leaves on their property; they perceived harvesting of young leaves to be unsustainable. Secondly, artisans and intermediaries were two new actors present in the young fiber value chain. Artisans added value to buriti fiber by making handicrafts that could be sold for higher prices than raw buriti leaf derivative. Intermediaries provided a way for artisans in areas without buriti forests (Atins area communities) to gain access to young leaf fiber, which were processed from the leaves by artisans in Laranjeiras area communities, where buriti forests were located. Vendors, which were a type of intermediary, provided market access fo r artisans by regularly buying and re selling their handicrafts to consumers. Thirdly, and most importantly, the market for handicrafts was oriented solely to outside, not local, markets. Consumers were visiting tourists and national and international inte rmediaries P roduction system Almost all buriti forests were found in low lying inland (>18 km from the coast) areas with abundant fresh water. Most buriti derivatives were extracted from native populations where regeneration was a natural process ; trees were rarely cultivated in plantations. Local cultivation usually consisted of discarding seeds in wet areas conducive to germination, and transplanting healthy seedlings. Buriti trees were considered to thrive naturally, so management was often minimal. L andowners, for

PAGE 138

138 example, removed mature leaves and cleared areas around trees to facilitate fruit collection, access the tree trunk, and Fruit and mature leaf collection was low impact and non intense. Community members collecte d mostly fallen fruit for consumption or sale from August to December, although the tree population only produced large quantities of fruit every other year Both mature and young leaves were collected by extractors who climbed trees to cut leaves during f avorable weather (no rain or wind; July October ) and according to demand. Mature leaves were in highest demand for building temporary fishing huts before the fishing season began in February. Collection of mature leaves was considered by interviewees to be low impact because the most valued leaves for construction were leaves that had passed their most biologically productive stage Overall demand for mature leaves was decreasing due to increased use of industrial substitutes, such as roof tiles. Y oung lea ves were in demand throughout most of the year and particularly for the tourist season that was highest during June July. Young leaves most valued by artisans wer e collected as leaf spikes > 2 m long and from mature trees with trunk height over 3 m. Accordi ng to interviewees, one young leaf per tree was produced each month, and leaf harvesting was sustainable if at least 2 3 leaves remained on the tree and two subsequent young leaves were never harvested from the same tree. Overharvested trees along riverban ks, however, provided evidence that extractors did not always follow harvesting rules. In comparison to fruit and mature leaf value chains i ncreasing demand, production, and value of fiber handicrafts could have negative impacts on buriti resources.

PAGE 139

139 Prin cipal actors D ata were analyzed from 97 individuals of the sample group, who were owners ex tractors, artisans, and vendors Most individuals participated directly in the buriti market (n=81) I ndiv iduals who did not participate in the buriti market or s ell buriti derivatives, were buriti tree owners (n=16). I ndividuals could fill multiple r ole s in the value chain (24% of sample group), although they usually specialized in one role over others. Individuals took on additional roles as livelihood opportunit ies changed. O wning buriti resources was often a secondary role because land was inherited or purchased for other uses Artisans and vendors commonly overlapped (13% of sample group), because some a rtisans transitioned to vendors as markets became more accessible; 32% of vendors were artisans prior to becoming vendors. Buriti tree o wners and extractors lived in Laranjeiras area communities where b uriti forests were located because of ecological characteristics. About 27% of artisans and 42% of vendors were from coastal Atins area communities. Most owners valued buriti trees for their current or potential economic value, so they rarely cut or removed trees. Although 59% of buriti tree owners did not pa rticipate in the buriti market, they wer e considered part of the value chain because they man aged buriti resources that they gave away upon request or that were taken by extractors without permission. Most owners in the sample group actively managed their land, but others became absent ee manager s (18 % of owners) because they inherited land or became too elderly. Ow ners participating in the buriti market often optimized for fruit production, which could be dried and sold for R$ 5 /kg ( US $ 3 ) in the Barreirinhas market. Mature leaves were harvested once every 2 3 years for R$80/100 leaves ( US $ 46 ). Hiring a leaf extractor cost R$ 25 /100 leaves ( US $ 14 ) No owners sold young

PAGE 140

140 leaves mostly because they believed that intense ly harvesting young lea ves harms trees. In fact, about half the owners who regular ly needed young leaves collected them from unmanaged buriti forests (private land with absent ee owners) in order to conserve their own trees. There were also potential use conflicts between actors. For example, owners often managed for buriti fruit by cons erving leaves on productive female trees. In contrast, artisans favored young leaf fiber collected from female trees, which could reduce fruit production. Extractors were young men, athletically fit to climb even the tall >3m buriti trees. Leaf collection was considered a risky activity that did not pay well; extractors often discouraged their sons from climbing trees Upon request by a buyer, extractors collected mature leaves from privately owned land, by paying the owner R$25/100 leaves ( US $ 14 ), or from unmanaged open access land at no cost. Although collecting from unmanaged land ensured greater profit, these forests were considered physically challenging to enter and there was more potential for causing land rights conflicts. Regardless, most y oung leav es were collected from these unmanaged land s Extractors earned R$95/ 100 mature leaves ( US $ 54 ) and R$0.5 2/young leaf ( US $ 0.29 1) Artisans were usually young women with good eyesight and the dexterity needed to make handicrafts. Almost all handicrafts wer e made for sale rather than household use. Women prepared young leaf fiber by stripping off the epidermal layer of the leaf blade (the fiber) and then boiling, dyeing, and drying the fiber in the sun and painstakingly knot ting fibers together into a single fiber Women made complex products such as hats, bags and tablecloths via crochet, macram, and weaving techniques. Most male artisans made simple fiber handicrafts, such as cordage or assisted their

PAGE 141

141 artisan wives. Women without skills (15% of art isans) or time to process young leaves into fiber depended on the help of other women or purchased fiber for R$25 30/kg ( US $ 14 17). Artisans in the Atins area depended on intermediaries to transport fiber from the Laranjeiras area; unprocessed young leaves could not be transported between regions because of their delicate nature and regional laws that prohibit exportation (Barreirin has municipal law no. 161/1975). These i ntermediaries were local men who traditionally carried resources, such as fish and mani oc flour, between regions. A rtisans considered their earned income for their handicrafts to be low, when compared to the higher prices that vendors obtained by selling the same product to consumers. A tablecloth requiring 20 hours to make w as sold by artis ans to vendors for R$25 30 ( US $ 14 17). For comparison of earnings a governmental salary of R$540/month (US$260) was considered a good income source in the communities. Although most artisans produce d no more than one major handicraft a week, handcrafts pr ovided one of the few income sources available for women. Some artisans sold handicrafts to different vendors in order to maintain availability of different market outlets. Artisans who made higher quality handicrafts could also demand better prices from vendors who competed to purchase their wares. I t was relatively easy for a vendor to be an artisan. In contrast, it was more difficult for an artisan to trans ition into a role as a vendor because they needed to have good market skills and access to cash to invest in stock Many vendors o wned businesses or shops, where they sold handicrafts to consumers, but few artisans owned shops. Not all artisans were willin g to move closer to the consumer end of the chain, however. Some artisans enjoyed the process of making

PAGE 142

142 handicrafts and identified culturally as artisans. Artisans also associated greater proximity to the market end of the value chain with more stress and responsibility. V endors bought handicrafts from artisans to re sell to other vendors or consumers for at least 25% profit Although 53 % of vendors were skilled artisans, they often preferred to purch ase products from other artisans because handicraft prod uction was too time consuming. To make unique products or save time and money, some vendors purchased uncompleted handicrafts and finished the product themselves or through a hired tailor Vendors took on risks by investing into handicrafts that could pote ntially not be sold and earning delayed returns from their investments. O verall, however, most vendors were financially successful; many of their shops had year round market access. The new young leaf market had high potential for leading to overharvestin g of resources. Although owners were resistan t to participating in the buriti handicraft market, extractors, artisans, and vendors had strong roles in the value chain. Socio economic Factors Affecting Value Chain Actors Socio economic characteristics of a ctors Means of socio economic factors among actors were compared to identify factors that could be used to distinguish actors (Table 4 2) The majority of socio economic factors demonstrated statistically significant differences between actors, according to ANOVA and Kruskal Wallis tests (significance measured at p<0.05). R esults of pair wise correlation analysis and mean comparisons of factors with statistically significa nt differences are reported. F actors that showed no statistically significant differences are noted. According to correlation analysis, owner s (r= 0.44) and extractor (r= 0.58) were usually men, and artisan s (r=0.48) were usually women. Actors most closely associated with buriti resources (owners and extractors) had les s education and wealth, and fewer

PAGE 143

143 livelihood opportunities in comparison to actors more closely associated with the emergent buriti handicraft market (artisans and vendors). Progressively higher education was apparent from owner to vendor in the value chai n, which suggested that education helped prepare or encourage people to work in markets. Age and education were significantly correlated (r= 0.66) Older people, such as owners, had low education partly because widespread secondary education was establishe d only within the previous decade. Wealth was measured using an index based on the presence of household goods ( tile roof, bathroom inside the house, well made floor and walls, water plumbing, and vehicle ownership) access to consistent sources of income, availability of household labor and earning income from Bolsa Familia which was a governmental subsidy awarded to women of poor households with school aged children The wealth index and having a consistent source of income were positively correlated (r=0.45) Extractors were the poorest actors, as they had a low wealth index, few consistent sources of income and lacked access to credit, which was often dependent o n formal property ownership. Among all actors, extractors also had the most diverse livelihood strategy because they participated in the highest number of household income sources and livelihood activities. In contrast, vendors were the wealthiest group, as they had a high wealth index, consistent income, and high integration in the market economy. O wners were also relatively wealthy beca u se they had high access to con sistent income and few income sources (average 2.96 income sources), and their households w ere most likely to receive retirement payments which were considered a lucrative income source within the communities. Vendors and owners both demonstrated high livelihood stability.

PAGE 144

144 Bolsa Familia was received mostly by extractor and artisan households an d considerably less by owner and vendor households. Household labor was calculated based on the number of household members earning income / number of household members. Although the number of household members was not significantly different among actors, household labor was highest among actors on the market end of the value chain, such as vendors, who had few dependents in their household. Buriti activities provided a main income source for e xtractors, artisans, and vendors. In comparison, owners earned little household income from handicraft production or other buriti related activities Although household use of buriti was not identified as statistically different between actors, h ousehold use of buriti was highest among actors closest to the forest. A ctors closest to the forest were associated with having home gardens and agricultural plots which were indicators of higher integration with subsistence level activities In contrast, few v endor s had home gardens and agricultural fields; few artisans had agricultural fields. Vendors were particularly reliant on purchased food Facing similar livelihood pressures, extractors and artisans often cooperated together to meet livelihood goals. Both extractors and artisans had high numbers of household income so urces and earned household income from similar sources, such as Bolsa Familia and fishing activities. In comparison to other actors, artisans and extractors had more household members who worked with buriti derivatives which helped increase efficiency for completing the labor intensive handicraft process. In comparison to artisan households, however, extractor households depended more on household income from selling palm leaves. Extractors used two different strategies to

PAGE 145

145 gain benefits from leaves: half o f extractors sold buriti leaves to other artisans for direct income and the other extractors collected leaves for a household based artisan to sell handicrafts for household income. Because handicrafts were sold for higher prices, extractors could indirect ly earn more household income by collecting leaves for a family artisan rather than selling leaves. E xtractors had the largest household sizes of all actors P alm leaf sale formed part of their diversified livelihood strategy to meet income demands of a la rge young family with low labor availability. were analyzed. Statistically, actors had s imilar rates of being born in their current community and having a parent with extensive exposure to buriti. All interviewees had more parental ties to buriti resources than to their current community of residence. In comparison to other actors, a ctors clo sest to the forest end of the value chain were more likely to have had extensive exposure to buriti trees. Owners, as expected, had the high rates of having planted a buriti tree in the past. Extractors, of all actors, had the strongest historical ties to their current community of residence, and exposure and history with buriti. They were also likely to be born in their current community; all extractors and at least one of their parents had s pent over ten years close to buriti. Although there was no statistical difference among actors in terms of their reporting that they had learned buriti skill s from their parents extractors had the lowest rate among all actors Instead, extractors reported being self taught ; they relied on their extensive exposure to buriti to learn to climb trees. R esponding to livelihood pressures extractors often harvested because they lacked other income earning options

PAGE 146

146 Perceptions about sustainability of buriti use perceptions that buriti trees were threatened and collection of young leaves was harmful. T here was little variability among actors in regards to their general perception that buriti forests were threatened (not statisti cally different) but actors closer to the forest end of the value chain were more likely to believe that the collection of young leaves was harmful to buriti trees. In contrast few artisans and, interestingly, no vendors believed that collecting young le aves was harm ful. Reflecting familiarity with the green market discourse vendors often defended the sustainability of their craft to tourists, or researchers, by assert ing their contribution to buriti sustainability (64% of vendors reported having planted a buriti tree in the past) and tradition of buriti use. Predicting actors Logistic regression was used to identify the probability that specific socio able 4 3). With as a dependent variable, socio economic rates were compared between individuals who were of a certain role (eg. owner) and individuals who did not participate in the role (eg. non owners). Socio economic factors identified in the previous section were used to build separate models for each actor which were designed to be maximum best fit models. Statistical significance of factors associated with that role was measured at a 10 % level or better. Logistic regression models fo r each actor were as follows: Predicted logit of (owner)= 2.479 + ( 1 .829 )*GENDER + ( 0.008 )*EDUCAT + ( 0.667 )*MFAMBA + ( 2.222 )* PLABUR + ( 0.503 )*WEALTH+ ( 0.091 )*BORCOM + ( 0.620 )*LEAPAR + ( 0.124 )*ATOTAL P redicted logit of (extractor)= 3.443 + ( 0.113 )*AGE + ( 0.647 )*EDUCAT + ( 1.663 )*HOMEGA + ( 0.475 )*MFAMBA + ( 0.966 )* PLABUR + ( 0.351 ) *WEALTH + ( 3.129 )*BORCOM + ( 1.017 )*LEAPAR + ( 0.571 )*ATOTAL + ( 0.627 )*MINCBU

PAGE 147

147 Predicted logit of (artisan)= 6 200 + ( 0.048 )*AGE + ( 0.628 )*MFAMBA + ( 0.594 )*WEALTH + ( 0.966 )*BORCOM + ( 0.896 )*LEAPAR + ( 0.873 )*ATOTAL + ( 0.420 )*MINCBU Predicted logit of (vendor)= 16.509 + ( 0.008 )*AGE + ( 0.675 )*GENDER + ( 0.457 )*EDUCAT + ( 0.254 )*HOMEGA + ( 0.607 )*MFAMBA + ( 1.684 )*WEALTH + ( 2.403 )*LEAPAR + ( 1.721 )*ATOTAL + ( 2.276 )*MINCBU For owners, three out of eight variables w ere significant. The p ositive coefficient indicated that individuals who were men, had plant ed buriti or wealthier were more likely to be owners than other actors For extractors, three out of ten variables were significant. Negative coefficients indicated that individuals who were younger or ha d less education were more likely to be extractors A positive coefficient indicated that individuals who were born in their community were more likely to b e extractors. For artisans, four out of eight variables were significant. A positive coefficient indicated that individuals with more family members working with buriti were more likely to be artisans. Negative coefficients indicated that individuals who w ere younger, poorer, or engage d in fewer livelihood activities were more likely to be artisans than other actors For vendors, five out of nine variables were significant. Positive coefficients indicated that individuals who had more education, were wealth ier, had learned buriti skills from their parents were involved with more livelihood activities or depended on buriti as a main source of household income were more likely to be vendors than other actors Discussion Although NTFP markets are often based on existing knowledge and use of forest resources, growing new markets can have different social and ecological impacts than traditionally used NTFPs. In comparison to traditional fruit and mature leaf markets, buriti fiber handicraft markets introduced n ew social and ecological challenges that can

PAGE 148

148 have implications for developing policies regarding NTFP commercialization and sustainability. Fruit and mature leaves usually have higher harvest limits than young leaves (Ticktin, 2004) so young buriti leaf collection had greater potential for overharvesting. Because r esource owners resisted participating in the handicraft and young leaf market, buriti users relied on resources collected furtively or from unmanaged lands. Buriti users often treated unmanaged land, such as the large swaths of buriti forests in the region with absent ee owners, as open access land to be Another consequence of lack of resource access were extractors who were unwilling to discuss their extraction activities which could hinder collection of information on harvesting dynamics that is vital for formulating resource management strategies (Ticktin, 2004) Secure property rights for NTFP users are considered to be one of the first steps for achieving poverty reduction and sustainable resource management through commercialization of NTFPs (Ros Tonen and Kusters, 2011) As main decision vulnerability can have dire consequences for sustainability of buriti leaf resources. In comparison to other actors, extractors were at greater risk to be influenced by market pressure to engage in overharvesting practices. Extractors were also likely to leave the trade as their socio economic situation improve d The gaps they left in the value chain could be filled by l ess skilled extractors who often collected from more fragile smaller trees. Studies have suggested that experienced and knowledgeable extractors are more likely than inexperienced extractors to leave forest populations intact by more carefully selecting re sources for extraction (Jensen and Meilby, 2008; Schmidt and Ticktin, 2012)

PAGE 149

149 NTFP users are often erroneously considered as a homogeneous group, which can have imp lications for the effectiveness of conservation and development interventions. As shown in other case studies (McSweeney, 2004) social heterogeneity can lead ty of external initiatives and programs to be uneven within a community. A value chain perspective can help to reveal the roles of different, and often hidden, groups in the market (Shillington, 2002) Buriti actors at the market end of the value chain and particularly privileged groups, are the most common recipients of external assistance. Global export markets, of which buriti fiber handicraft markets can be classified, are often socially and geographically foreign to most NTFP users (Philip, 2002) Privileged groups tend to dominat e over other users in export NTFP markets, which can have implications for the equitable distribution of benefits from NTFP commercialization (Belcher and Schreckenberg, 2007; Shackleton et al., 2007) Actors at the forest end value chain such as owners and extractors of ten had extensive exposure and contact with natural resource s. Having more influence over harvesting practices and investment in protecting resources, tree owners and extractors would be good candidates as subjects for conservation efforts. Actors employed different strategies for overcoming challenges in the buriti market. Extractors that collected for artisans in the household, rather than selling the leaves for direct income, participated in value added dynamics, which can contribute to su stainable use of buriti resources. Long term capacity building programs in Barreirinhas by SEBRAE ( Brazilian micro and small businesses support service ) have helped women artisans gain new skills and better access to existing and new markets, and to organi ze handicraft cooperatives (SEBRAE, 2007) Although cooperative

PAGE 150

150 members represented a more privileged group, their expensive handicrafts f illed a niche market for exports and higher paying clients that other artisans were unprepared to reach. Higher quality products have been shown to reduce the destructive impact on the forest (Varghese and Ticktin, 2008) as well as (Belcher and Schreckenberg, 2007) Other skilled artisans had high enough market potential that they disregarded opportunities to join cooperatives or undergo extra tra ining. As markets grow to favor more high quality products, market differentiation can reconfigure value chains by excluding people who cannot meet product standards (Kanji et al., 2005; Velde et al., 2006) T hese people however, may have opportunities to establish different roles in the value chain. In the buriti case study, for example, more skilled artisans often purchased fiber or parts of handicrafts, such as straps and cor ds, from less skilled artisans. Through greater education, income, and skills, female artisans found an avenue of upward mobility by working as vendors of buriti handicrafts. Women played an important role in the buriti handicraft market, which was one of their most important sources of income. Indeed, NTFP trade tends to be one area where women are free to earn income with little interference or threat of take over from men (Schreckenberg et al., 2006) M ore men entering the market as vendors, however, could pose a problem in the future as men often dominate the most lucrative forest market opportunities (Ruiz Perez et al., 2002) Final Comments This study has analyzed the changing market for buriti in Maranho, Brazil and impacts of new buriti handicrafts markets on diverse actors in value chains. The market oriented to handicraft production and sale from young buriti leaves has introduced new

PAGE 151

151 actors, such as artisans and vendors, and resource demands that compete with pre existin g local and subsistence uses of buriti fruits and mature leaves. Buriti markets contribute to livelihood secu rity among users, who use buriti as part of diverse livelihood strategies and for market entry. T he handicraft market provided important income ear ning opportunities for women, who could also earn greater financial stability by moving closer to the market end of the chain. G reat care must be taken, however, when aiming to o ptimize or reduce participation of spec ific roles in the value chain because of New market demand poses a threat to sustainability of buriti harvesting as young leaf extraction takes place primarily on unmanag ed public or open access land and extraction intensity is growing. Greater understanding of buriti harvesting dynamics and careful management of resources can help to alleviate impacts of increased and changing use. An analysis of buriti fiber value chain s contributes to our understanding of the complex relations between growing markets and natural resources, which can be used to inform and guide policy and development interventions that seek to influence livelihoods and sustainable resource management in an equitable way, through participation in NTFP market s

PAGE 152

152 Figure 4 1 Schematic model of the buriti handicraft value chain showing different options and scenarios for property regimes, extractor and artisan relationships, intermediaries, and consumers

PAGE 153

153 Table 4 1. Definitions of explanatory variables Variable name Description Range DEMOGRAPHICS Region Region where interviewee lived; Laranjeiras (0) or Atins (1) 0,1 Age Age (years) 13 88 Gender Gender; male (0) or female (1) 0,1 Education Education (years) 1 13 Home garden Active home garden present 0,1 Agricultural field Active agricultural field present 0,1 Household size Number of members in the households 1,10 Household labor Household labor: number family members earning income/number of people in household 0 1 Household members buriti Household members participating in buriti activities 0 5 Buriti household use Buriti leaf derivative used for household subsistence 0,1 WEALTH Consistent income Receives consistent income each month 0,1 Wealth index I ndex based on presence of tile roof, inside bathroom, well made floo r and walls, water plumbing, vehicle ownership 0 6 HISTORY Born in community Born in current community of residence 0,1 Individual >10 yrs buriti Individual >10 years close to buriti 0,1 Parent born in community 0,1 Parent >10 yrs buriti At least one parent has lived >10 years close to buriti 0,1 Buriti learned from parent Learned current buriti trade from a parent 0,1 Planted buriti tree Has planted a buriti tree 0,1 PERCEPTIONS Buriti trees threatened Buriti trees threatened 0,1 Young leaf harmful Young leaf collection harmful 0,1 ACTIVITIES Handicrafts activity Handicrafts production is a main activity 0,1 Private business activity Business owner or cooperative member is a main activity 0,1 Number of activities Number of livelihood activities reported 0 5 HOUSEHOLD INCOME Main income buriti Buriti provides a main income source Handicrafts income Handicrafts provide household income 0,1 Bolsa famila income Bolsa famila provides household income source 0,1 Retirement income Retirement provides household income source 0,1 Fishing activities income Fishing activities provide household income source 0,1 Selling palm leaves Selling palm leaves provides household income 0,1 Number of income sources Number of household income sources reported 0 6

PAGE 154

154 Table 4 2 Means of socio economic variables for different value chain actors (n=97). Owner n= 28 Extractor n= 12 Artisan n= 52 Vendor n= 19 DEMOGRAPHICS Region 0.04 0 0.27 0.42 Age 57.70 ( 1 7.0) 36.25 (12.5) 39.90 (10.9) 38.37 (14.4) Gender 0.36 0 0.90 0.89 Education 2.60 ( 2.71 ) 3.67 ( 3.42 ) 4.71 ( 2.98 ) 5.88 ( 4.01 ) Home garden 0.86 0.58 0.75 0.44 Agricultural field 0.96 0.67 0.44 0.50 Household labor 0.38 ( 0.26 ) 0.42 ( 0.25 ) 0.42 ( 0.19 ) 0.57 (0.26) Household size 4.68 (1.44) 5.67 (1.82) 4.98 (1.78) 4.32 (2.00) Household members buriti 0.46 ( 0.93 ) 1.75 ( 1.54 ) 1.50 ( 1.50 ) 1.05 ( 1.13 ) Buriti household use 0.86 0.91 0.77 0.60 WEALTH Consistent income 0.79 0.17 0.52 0.79 Wealth index 3.82 ( 1.54 ) 2.42 ( 1.83 ) 2.42 ( 1.56 ) 4.42 ( 1.43 ) HISTORY Born in community 0.61 0.75 0.45 0.56 Individual >10 yrs buriti 0.96 1.00 0.88 0.65 Parent born in community 0.54 0.91 0.44 0.47 Parent >10 yrs buriti 0.81 1.00 0.79 0.71 Buriti learned from parent 0.50 0.25 0.45 0.58 Planted buriti tree 0.77 0.60 0.38 0.64 PERCEPTIONS Buriti trees threatened 0.68 0.75 0.68 0.67 Young leaf harmful 0.57 0.20 0.05 0.00 ACTIVITIES Handicrafts activity 0.25 0.17 0.94 0.89 Private business activity 0.14 0.08 0.08 0.79 Total activities 2.11 ( 1.04 ) 2.75 ( 0.75 ) 2.33 ( 0.71 ) 2.53 ( 0.77 ) HOUSEHOLD INCOME Main income b uriti 0.18 0.67 0.69 0.68 Handicrafts income 0.29 0.83 0.92 0.84 Bolsa Famila income 0.48 0.70 0.78 0.29 Retirement income 0.43 0 0.15 0.21 Fishing activities income 0.15 0.33 0.37 0.16 Selling palm leaves 0.04 0.50 0.02 0 Total income sources 2.96 ( 1.37 ) 3.83 ( 0.67 ) 3.67 ( 0.97 ) 3.26 ( 1.27 ) Standard deviation listed in parentheses for continuous variables

PAGE 155

155 Table 4 3 Results from logistic regression models for different value chain actors reporting coefficients odds ratio, and p value in parentheses. Variables Owner Extractor Artisan Vendor Model statistics Observations Model Evaluation: Likelihood ratio Percent concordant 54 16 62(0.0343 ) 8 5.1 54 21. 93 (0.0 155 ) 89. 5 65 23 20(0.0031 ) 82.8 75 43. 24 (<0.0001) 93. 0 Age AGE 0.113 0.893 ( 0.048 )* 0.048 0.95 3 ( 0.094 ) ** 0.008 1.01 ( 0.880 ) Gender GENDER 1.829 0.161 ( 0. 066 ) ** 0.675 1.97 (0.583) Education EDUCAT 0.008 1.00 ( 0.957 ) 0.647 0.524 ( 0.033 ) 0.457 1.58 ( 0.065 ) ** Home garden HOMEGA 1.663 0.189 (0.186) 0.254 0.776 ( 0.812 ) Household members buriti MFAMBA 0.667 0.513 ( 0.117 ) 0.475 1.61 ( 0.254 ) 0.628 1.88 ( 0.021 )* 0.607 0.545 ( 0.158 ) Planted buriti tree PLABUR 2.222 9.22 ( 0.029 )* 0.966 2.63 ( 0.401 ) Buriti trees threatened THREAT 0.285 0.75 2 ( 0.681 ) Wealth index WEALTH 0.503 1.65 ( 0.040 ) 0.351 0.704 ( 0.320 ) 0.594 0.55 2 ( 0.007 )* 1.684 5.39 ( 0.001 )* Born in community BORCOM 0.091 1.10 ( 0.923 ) 3.129 22.84 ( 0.027 )* 0.966 0.38 1 ( 0.164 ) Buriti learned from parent LEAPAR 0.620 1.86 ( 0.468 ) 1.017 0.362 (0.406) 0.896 2.45 ( 0.186 ) 2.403 11.05 ( 0.052 )* Total activities ATOTAL 0.124 0.88 4 ( 0.798 ) 0.571 1.77 (0.419) 0.873 0.418 ( 0.019 )* 1.721 5.59 ( 0.031 )* Main income buriti MINCBU 0.627 0.534 ( 0.604 ) 0.420 0.657 ( 0.534 ) 2.276 9.73 ( 0.089 ) ** *p<0.05 **p<0.10 ; Dash signifies that the factor was not included in the specific model

PAGE 156

156 CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION S Since the 1990 s, NTFPs have been explored as an avenue for reaching conservation and development goals to prevent poverty and maintain sustainability of resources. For local users, fo rest product commercialization offer s a realistic entryway into the marke t because NTFP exploitation is often based on existent local knowledge and an accessible resource. Forest product markets can expand quickly although the dynamic nature of NTFP markets means that it can be difficult to predict how market benefits are distributed and its impacts on sustainable harvesting of the resource. This study on an emerging buriti leaf handicraft market in Barreirinhas, Maranho offered insight into the impacts of a growing new market on local livelihoods and resource sustai nabili ty, while considering social heterogeneity present among users by addressing three research questions: perception of sustainable harvesting of forest resources? What is the impact of resource access and value chains on participation in the market and perception of sustainable harvesting? Does commercialization of buriti derivatives contribute towards increased livelihood security and sustainable use of forest resources among forest ba sed people in Barreirinhas? The new fiber handicraft market presented a shift from subsistence use of NTFPs to market exploitation, which had consequences for sustainable harvesting of forest resources. Although mature le aves were historically more valued than young leaves, the young leaf market has overtaken the mature leaf market and continues to expand. Fitting well into diversified livelihood strategies, young buriti leaf activities had many of the preferred characteri stics for livelihood activities,

PAGE 157

157 such as being low stress and low risk, allowing people to work from or close to home and have flexibility, provided fast cash, and required low responsibility Among women, in particular, buriti leaf handicrafts was one of the only income earning activities that could complement their housekeeping activities. Contrary to expectations, poverty, direct access to buriti resources, tradition and affinity to buriti did not ensure that people participated in the market. Instead, p ersonal preference, skills, time commitments, and historical exposure to buriti had greater influence. Position in the h ousehold cycle, which determined household needs and opportunities, was one of the most important factors that shaped market participati on Although buriti use was changing quickly, subsistence use of buriti still persisted due to cultural identity, perception of potential value, current utility and politics, and role of buriti within a traditional livelihood system. Buriti provided a secu rity net of subsistence and income resources that could be used when needed. Residents of the study area had a diverse range of livelihood options at their disposal, and their social heterogeneity affected whether or not they participated in the buriti market. Resource access was measured by physical distance and legal rights to the resource. As the buriti handicraft market has grown, people located close to buriti resources and with le gal rights to directly access buriti forests had incr easingly restricted access to resources by enforced laws and property regimes. In contrast, people located far from buriti resources who relied on intermediaries for access to buriti resources had increasingly restricted access due to higher competition fo r resources. For these people, s ocial netwo rks helped to smooth the way for access to buriti fiber and to overcome skill limitations such as learning new techniques for making

PAGE 158

158 handicrafts Interestingly, people located far from the resource shared similar tradition and dependence on buriti resource s with people located close to buriti trees People located far from the resources had greater interest to join the new handicraft market in comparison to people located close to buriti trees P eople located far from buriti trees participated only in the market end of the buriti value chain, because they did not have direct access to the forests In contrast, people located close to buriti trees were involved in all parts of the handicraft value chain, including extracting and preparing the fiber, which was the most difficult, strenuous, and laborious part of the handicraft process. People close to the trees were also in close proximity to the urban center so they had more income earning options. For these reasons, people located near buriti trees were more likely to view buriti handicraft production negatively and choose other income earning activities The new market oriented to handicraft production and sale from young buriti leave s introduced new actors (eg. intermediaries, artisans, and vendors ) and resource demands that compete d with pre existing local and subsistence uses of buriti fruits and mature leaves. Examining the buriti market through the lens of the value chain demonstrated that different actors engaged in different livelihood strategies. Users closer to the resource end of the value chain, such as extractors and artisans, were often involved in dive rsified livelihood strategies, which was typical among NTFP users who use forest products as a supplement to other household livelihood activities (Arnold and Townson 1998) and as a safety net (Shackleton and Shackleton 2004). In contrast, vendors were mor e likely to use a specialized strategy by optimizing for sale of buriti handicrafts. Actors closer to the for est end of the value chain suffered more social

PAGE 159

159 stigma because of their association with subsistence use of resources. In contrast, vendors earned a higher social status as business owners. Through the value chain, f emale artisans also had an important avenue of upward mobility by working as vendors of buriti handicrafts. Livelihood strategies could change, however, as circumstances and household com position changed over time. Based on perceptions by interviewees, n ew mark et demand for young leaves posed a threat to sustainability of buriti harvesting, as young leaf extraction took place primarily on unmanaged public or open access land and extractio n intensity was growing. Most buriti market participants did not own buriti resources, and land owners were reluctant to grant people the rights to collect young leaves. E xtractors who were the most socio economically vulnerable of all the actors, could al so be easily pressured to overharvest buriti resources People on the forest end of the value chain were particularly reliant on their history and prolonged interactions with buriti as important factors for participating in the buriti market. They were also most involved with subsistence activities and more likely to believe that young leaf collection was harmful. In contrast, actors on the market end of the chain were more dependent on the cash economy. It was no surprise that they were also more likely to defend their craft as ecologically sustainable. There are a few potential scenarios for what the future of buriti may hold First, higher frequency of entrants into the market can lead to more heterogeneity among buriti users, in w hich more privileged groups would have the advantage. Social cooperation, such as co ops, can help pre existing market participants to compete with new entrants into the market by filling specific niche market. As markets grow to favor

PAGE 160

160 more high quality products, product and market differentiation can reconfigure supply chains by excluding less skilled participant s who cannot meet particular standards (Kanji et al., 2005; Velde et al., 2006) economic status may improve so that other income earning activities become more accessible. In this case, the buriti market would be left to those people who identify culturally to the buriti or enjoy the craft. If extractors become more reluctant to climb trees, people will have to develop new ways to collect the young leaves in a safer manner. With the lack of extractors, leaves may be inc reasingly collected from shorter and younger trees, which could have negative impacts on the trees and quality of handicrafts. Third, people may begin to intensify cultivation of buriti trees in order to increase their access to resources which could affe ct land use and management in the region S ecure property rights and enforcement of environmental laws are important for encouraging responsible management of natural resources The buriti case study demonstrated, however, that limiting resource access to immediate residents impacted users differently, depending on their distance to the resource. Although p movement s have become restricted due to rapidly growing human popul ations, they may still be reliant on natural resources located outside of their immediate area. Value chains help people overcome challenges of distance and restrictions on a way for people to negotiate for better social positions. A shift from buriti based subsistence to income earning activities within the Barreirinhas region demonstrate d how people adapt their livelihood strategies to reflect an increasingly globalized eco nomy.

PAGE 161

161 LIST OF REFERENCES Amacher, G.S., 2002. Forest policies and many governments. Forest Science 48, 146 158. An, L., Linderman, M., Qi, J., Shortridge, A., Liu, J., 2005. Exploring complexity in a human environment system: An age nt based spatial model for multidisciplinary and multiscale integration. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 95, 54 79. Anderson, A.B., Ioris, E.M., 1992. Valuing the rain forest economic strategies by small scale forest extractivists in t he amazon estuary. Human Ecology 20, 337 369. Angelsen, A., Kaimowitz, D., 1999. Rethinking the causes of deforestation: lessons from economic models. The World Bank Research Observer 14, 73. Angelsen, A., Wunder, S., 2003. Exploring the Forest Poverty L ink: Key concepts, issues, and research implications, CIFOR Occasional Paper. CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia. Arnold, J., Liedholm, C., Mead, D., Townson, I., 1994. Structure and growth of small enterprises using forest products in southern and eastern Africa, O FI Occasional Papers. Arnold, J.E.M., Perez, M.R., 2001. Can non timber forest products match tropical forest conservation and development objectives? Ecological Economics 39, 437 447. Arnold, M., Townson, I., 1998. Assessing the potential of forest product activities to contribute to rural incomes in Africa. Natural Resource Perspectives 37. Bale, W., Erickson, C.L., 2006. Time, complexity, and historical ecology, in: Balee, W., Erickson, C.L. (Eds.), Time and complexity in historical ecology: stud ies in the Neotropical lowlands. Columbia University Press, New York, pp. 1 12. Balick, M., Mendelsohn, R., 1992. Assessing the economic value of traditional medicines from tropical rain forests. Conservation Biology 6, 128 130. Bebbington, A., 1999. Cap itals and capabilities: A framework for analyzing peasant viability, rural livelihoods and poverty. World Development 27, 2021 2044. Beer, J.H., McDermott, M.J., 1989. The economic value of non timber forest products in Southeast Asia; with emphasis on In donesia, Malaysia and Thailand. Netherlands Committee for IUCN, Amsterdam.

PAGE 162

162 Belcher, B., Kusters, K., 2004. Non timber forest product commercialisation: development and conservation lessons, in: Kusters, K., Belcher, B. (Eds.), Forest Products, Livelihoods and Conservation. CIFOR, Jakarta, Indonesia, pp. 1 22. Belcher, B., Ruz Prez, M., Achdiawan, R., 2005. Global patterns and trends in the use and management of commercial NTFPs: implications for livelihoods and conservation. World Development 33, 1435 1 452. Belcher, B., Schreckenberg, K., 2007. Commercialisation of non timber forest products: A reality check. Development Policy Review 25, 355 377. Berkes, F., Folke, C., 1994. Investing in cultural capital for a sustainable use of natural capital, in: J anssen, M. (Ed.), Investing in natural capital: the ecological economics approach to sustainability. Island Press, pp. 128 149. Berkes, F., Folke, C., Colding, J., 1998. Linking social and ecological systems: management practices and social mechanisms for building resilience. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New York. Bishop, J., Scoones, I., 1994. Beer and Baskets: The Economics of Womens Livelihoods in Ngamiland. Botswana, IIED Research Series 3. Brondizio, E.S., Safar, C.A.M., Siqueira, A.D., 2 002. The urban market of acai fruit (Euterpe oleracea Mart.) and rural land use change: Ethnographic insights into the role of price and land tenure constraining agricultural choices in the Amazon estuary. Urban ecosystems 6, 67 97. Browder, J., 1992. Social and economic constraints on the development of market oriented extractive reserves in Amazon rain forests. Advances in economic botany 9, 33 41. Buchmann, C., 2009. Cuban Home Gardens and Their Role in Social Ecological Resilience. Human Ecology, 1 17. Carney, D., 1998. Implementing the Sustainable Rural Livelihoods Approach, in: Carney, D. (Ed.), Sustainable rural livelihoods: what contribution can we make? Dept. for International Development, London, p. 3. Cavendish, W., 2000. Empirical regulari ties in the povery environment relationship of rurla households: evidence from Zimbabwe. World Development 28, 1979 2000. Chambers, R., Conway, G., 1992. Sustainable rural livelihoods: practical concepts for the 21st century. Institute of Development Stud ies, Brighton, UK. Chopra, K., 1993. The value of non timber forest products: an estimation for tropical deciduous forests in India. Economic botany 47, 251 257.

PAGE 163

163 Clark, D.B., 1996. Abolishing virginity. Journal of Tropical Ecology, 735 739. Cocks, M.L., Bangay, L., Shackleton, C.M., Wiersum, F.K., 2008. 'Rich man poor man' inter household and community factors influencing the use of wild plant resources amongst rural households in South Africa. The International Journal of Sustainable Development & Worl d Ecology 15, 198 210. Collinson, M., 2000. A history of farming systems research. FAO/CABI, UK. Coomes, O., 1995. A century of rain forest use in western Amazonia: lessons for extraction based conservation of tropical forest resources. Forest & Conserva tion History 39, 108 120. Coomes, O., 1996. Income formation among Amazonian peasant households in northeastern Peru: empirical observations and implications for market oriented conservation. Yearbook, Conference of Latin American Geographers 22, 51 64. Coomes, O., 2004. Rain forest conservation through use? Chambira palm fibre extraction and handicraft production in a land constrained community, Peruvian Amazon. Biodivers. Conserv. 13, 351 360. Coyne, I.T., 1997. Sampling in qualitative research. Purposeful and theoretical sampling; merging or clear boundaries? Journal of Advanced Nursing 26, 623 630. Crook, C., Clapp, R., 1998. Is market oriented forest conservation a contradiction in terms? Environmental Conservation 25, 131 145. Cunningham, A.B., 2001. Applied ethnobotany people, wild plant use and conservation Earthscan, London. De Haan, L., Zoomers, A., 2005. Exploring the frontier of livelihoods research. Dev. Change 36, 27 47. Department for International Development, D., 2006. Sustaina ble Live lihoods Framework. www.livelihoods.org/info/guidancesheets.html Duque, J., Pastrana, E., 1973. Las estrategias de supervivencia economica de las unidades familiares del sector popular urbano. FLASCO, Santiago. Edwards, P., Abivardi, C., 1998. The value of biodiversity: where ecology and economy blend. Biological Conservation 83, 239 246. Ehrenfeld, D., 1988. Why put a value on biodiversity?, in: Wilson, E.O. (Ed.), Biodiversi ty. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, p. 212.

PAGE 164

164 Ehringhaus, C., 2006. Post victory dilemmas: land use, development policies, and social movement in Amazonian extracti ve reserves. Yale University, Hartford, Connecticut, p. 415. Ellis, F., 1992. Peasant economies. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Ellis, F., 1998. Household strategies and rural livelihoo d diversification. The Journal of Development S tudies 35, 1 38. Ellis, F., 1999. Rural livelihood diversity in developing countries: evidence and policy implications. Natural Resource Perspectives 40. Enriquez, C., Arancibia, E., Marshall, E., 2006. Incense and Copal: Clusia cf. ramosa (Guttiferae) and Protium sp. (Burseraceae): Two Resins: Different Values, Different Uses, One Value Chain, in: Mar shall, E., Schreckenberg, K., Newton, A. (Eds.), Commercialization of non timber forest products: factors influencing success: lessons learned from Mexico and Bolivia and policy implications for decision makers. UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre, C ambridge. Evans, T., Manire, A., de Castro, F., Brondizio, E., McCracken, S., 2001. A dynamic model of household decision making and parcel level landcover change in the eastern Amazon. Ecological Modelling 143, 95 113. Falconer, J., Koppell, C., 1990. T he major significance of" minor" forest products. The local use and value of forests in the West African humid forest zone. Community Forestry Note (FAO). Friis Lund, J., Meilby, H., 2006. To plant or not to plant developing a model to analyse rural hou Economics, Uppsala, Sweden, pp. 115 120. Ganesan, B., 1993. Extraction of non timber forest products, including fodder and fuelwood, in Mudumalai, India. Economic botany 47, 268 274. Geist, H., Lambin, E., 2002. Proximate causes and underlying driving forces of tropical deforestation. BioScience 52, 143 150. Ghimire, S., McKey, D., Aumeeruddy Thomas, Y., 2004. Heterogeneity in ethnoecological knowledge and management of medicinal plants in the Himalayas of Nepal: implications for conservation. Ecology and Society 9, 6. Ghimire, S., McKey, D., Aumeeruddy Thomas, Y., 2005. Conservation of Himalayan medicinal plants: Harvesting patterns and ecology of two threatened species, Nardostachys grand iflora DC. and Neopicrorhiza scrophulariiflora (Pennell) Hong. Biological Conservation 124, 463 475.

PAGE 165

165 Gibson, C.C., McKean, M.A., Ostrom, E., 2000. People and forests: communities, institutions, and governance. MIT Press, Boston. Godoy, R., 1992. Some orga nizing principles in the valuation of tropical forests. Forest Ecology and Management 50, 171 180. Godoy, R., Lubowski, R., Markandya, A., 1993. A method for the economic valuation of non timber tropical forest products. Economic Botany 47, 220 233. Godo y, R.A., Bawa, K.S., 1993. The economic value and sustainable harvest of plants and animals from the tropical forest: assumptions, hypotheses, and methods. Economic Botany 47, 215 219. Green, D., Shapiro, I., 1994. Pathologies of rational choice. Yale Unviersity Press, New Haven, CT. Guest, G., 2002. Market integration and the distribution of ecological knowledge within an Ecuadorian fishing community. Journal of Ecological Anthropology 6, 38 49. Guyer, J., Peters, P., 1987. Conceptualizing the househ old: issues of theory and policy in Africa. Dev. Change 18, 197 214. Hall, P., Bawa, K., 1993. Methods to assess the impact of extraction of non timber tropical forest products on plant populations. Economic botany 47, 234 247. Hansis, R., 1998. A politi cal ecology of picking: non timber forest products in the Pacific Northwest. Human Ecology 26, 67 86. Hardin, G., 1968. The tragedy of the commons. Science 162, 1243 1248. Hecht, S., Anderson, A., May, P., 1988. The subsidy from nature: shifting cultivation, successional palm forests, and rural development. Human Organization 47, 25 35. Hodson, T., Englander, F., O'Keefe, H., 1995. Rain forest preservation, markets, and medicinal plants: issues of property rights and present value. Conservation B iology 9, 1319 1321. Homma, A.K.O., 1992. The dynamics of extraction in Amazonia: a historical perspective. Advances in Economic Botany, Nontimber products from tropical forests: evaluation of a conservation and development strategy 9, 23 31. IBGE, 2010. Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics, Barreirinhas MA, Summary of Information.

PAGE 166

166 IBGE, 2012. Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics, Production of vegetal extraction and silvaculture 2004 2011. IBGE. Iqbal, M., 1993. International tra de in non wood forest products: an overview. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome, Italy. Jensen, A., 2006. The Scramble for Cash: Access and access mechanisms to income from a commercial NTFP, Scandinavian Society of Forest Economics, Uppsala, Sweden, pp. 115 120. Jensen, A., 2009. Valuation of non timber forest products value chains. Forest Policy and Economics 11, 34 41. Jensen, A., Meilby, H., 2008. Does commercialization of a non timber forest product reduce ecological impact? A case study of the Critically Endangered Aquilaria crassna in Lao PDR. Oryx 42, 214 221. Kanji, N., MacGregor, J., Tacoli, C., 2005. Understanding market based livelihoods in a globalising world: combining approaches and methods. International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED), London, UK. Kaplinsky, R., 2004. Spreading the Gains from Globalization: What Can Be Learned from Value Chain Analysis? Problems of Economic Transition 47, 74 115. Kaplinsky, R., Morris, M., 2001. A handbook for value chain research. IDRC. Keys, E., 2005. Exploring market based development: market intermediaries and farmers in Calakmul, Mexico. Geographical Review New York 95, 24. Kline, J.D., Alig, R.J., Johnson, R.L., 2000. Fostering the production of non timber services among forest owners with heterogeneous objectives. Forest Science 46, 302 311. Kusters, K., Achdiawan, R., Belcher, B., Prez, M., 2006. Balancing development and conservation? An assessment of livelihood and environmental outcomes of nontimber forest product t rade in Asia, Africa, and Latin America. Ecology and Society 11, 20. Lacuna Richman, C., 2007. Improving Commercial Possibilities of Non wood Forest Products from Leyte, the Philippines. Annals of Tropical Research 29, 1 14. Lambin, E., Turner, B., Geist H., Agbola, S., Angelsen, A., Bruce, J., Coomes, O., Dirzo, R., Fischer, G., Folke, C., 2001. The causes of land use and land cover change: moving beyond the myths. Global Environmental Change 11, 261 269.

PAGE 167

167 Lobato, F.M., 2008. Diagnstico Turstico do Mu nicpio de Barreirinhas MA. Agncia Espanhola de Cooperao Internacional (AECI), So Lus, Maranho, Brazil. Long, N., 1984. Family and work in rural societies: perspectives on non wage labour. Tavistock Publications, London. Lybbert, T., Barrett, C., Narjisse, H., 2002. Market based conservation and local benefits: the case of argan oil in Morocco. E cological Economics 41, 125 144. Maranho, 2011. Governo revitaliza turismo com aes em Barreirinhas, Globo, Jan. 23, 2011 ed, So Lus. Marschke, M., Berkes, F., 2006. Exploring strategies that build livelihood resilience: a case from Cambodia. Ecology and Society 11, 42. Marshall, E., Schreckenberg, K., Newton, A., 2006. Commercialization of non timber forest products: factors influencing success: lessons learned from Mexico and Bolivia and policy implications for decision makers. UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre, Cambridge. Mathison, S., 1988. Why triangulate? Educational Researcher 17, 13. May, P.H., 1986. A modern tragedy of the non commons: agro industrial change and equity in Brazil's babassu palm zone. Cornell University. Mayers, J., Vermeulen, S., 2002. Company community forestry partnerships: From raw deals to mutual gains. International Institute for Environ ment and Development, London. McKean, M., 2000. Common property: What is it, what is it good for, and what makes it work, in: Gibson, C.C., McKean, M.A., Ostrom, E. (Eds.), People and forests: Communities, institutions, and governance. Massachusetts Insti tute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, pp. 27 55. McSweeney, K., 2004. Forest product sale as natural insurance: the effects of household characteristics and the nature of shock in eastern Honduras. Society and Natural Resources 17, 39 56. Mead, D., Liedholm, C., 1998. The dynamics of micro and small enterprises in developing countries. World Development 26, 61 74. Mendelsohn, R., 1994. Property rights and tropical deforestation. Oxford Economic Papers 46, 750 756. Mendelsohn, R., Balick, M., 1995. Private property and rainforest conservation. Conservation Biology 9, 1322 1323.

PAGE 168

168 Mendola, M., 2007. Farm Household Production Theories: A Review of "Institutional" and "Behavioral" Responses. Asian Development Review 24, 49. Molnar, A., Scherr, S., Khare, A., 2004. Who conserves the world's forests? Community driven strategies to protec t forests and respect rights. Forest Tren ds and Ecoagriculture Partners, Washington D.C. Montgomery, J., 1991. Social networks and labor market outcomes: Toward an economi c analysis. The American economic review 81, 1408 1418. Moran, E.F., 2008. Human adaptability: an introduction to ecological anthropology. Westview Press, Boulder, CO. Muiz Miret, N., Vamos, R., Hiraoka, M., Montagnini, F., Mendelsohn, R., 1996. The eco nomic value of managing the acai palm (Euterpe oleracea Mart.) in the floodplains of the Amazon estuary, Para, Brazil. Forest Ecology and Management 87, 163 173. Murali, K., Shankar, U., Shaanker, R., Ganeshaiah, K., Bawa, K., 1996. Extraction of non timb er forest products in the forests of Biligiri Rangan Hills, India. 2. Impact of NTFP extraction on regeneration, population structure, and species composition. Economic botany 50, 252 269. Neumann, R.P., Hirsch, E., 2000. Commercialisation of non timber f orest products: review and analysis of research. Cen ter for International Forestry Neyman, J., 1934. On the two different aspects of the representative method: the method of stratified sampling and the method of purposive selection. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 97, 558 625. Ostrom, E., Burger, J., Field, C., Norgaard, R., Policansky, D., 1999. Revisiting the commons: local lessons, global challenges. Science 284, 278. Padoch, C., 1992. Marketing of non timber forest products in Western Amazo nia: general observations and research priorities, in: Nepstad, D., Schwartzman, S. (Eds.), Advances in Economic Botany New York Botanical Gardens, New York, New York. Padoch, C., de Jong, W., 1989. Production and profit in agroforestry: an example from the Peruvian Amazon, in: Browder, O. (Ed.), Fragile Lands of Latin America: Strategies for Sustainable Development. Westview Press, Boulder, CO, pp. 102 113.

PAGE 169

169 Padoch, C., De Jong, W., 1992. Diversity, variation, and change in Ribereo agriculture, in: Re dford, K.H., Padoch, C. (Eds.), Conservation of neotropical forests: Working from traditional resource use. Columbia University Press. New York, NY, USA. Panayotou, T., Ashton, P., 1992. Not by timber alone: sustaining tropical forests through multiple use management. Island Press, Covelo, CA. Parks, P., Barbier, E., Burgess, J., 1998. The economics of forest land use in temperate and tropical areas. Environmental & Resource Economics 11, 473 487. Paumgarten, F., Shackleton, C., 2009. Wealth differenti ation in household use and trade in non timber forest products in South Africa. Ecological Economics 68, 2950 2959. Pearce, D., Barbier, E., Markandya, A., 1989. Blueprint for a green economy. Earthscan Publications, London. Pearce, D., Moran, D., 1994. The economic value of biodiversity. Earthscan, London. Perz, S.G., 2001. Household demographic factors as life cycle determinants of land use in the Amazon. Population Research and Policy Review 20, 159 186. Peters, C., Gentry, A., Mendelsohn, R., 1989. Valuation of an Amazonian rainforest. Nature 339, 655 656. Peters, C.M., 1994. Sustainable harvest of non timber plant resources in tropical moist forest: an ecological primer. Biodiversity Support Program. Philip, K., 2002. The quest for rural enterpris e support strategies that workthe case of Mineworkers' Development Agency. Small Enterprise Development 13, 13 25. Pieroni, A., 2001. Evaluation of the cultural significance of wild food botanicals traditionally consumed in northwestern Tuscany, Italy. Jo urnal of Ethnobiology 21, 89 104. Pinheiro, C., Frazao, J., 1995. Integral processing of babassu palm (orbignya phalerata, arecaceae) fruits: Village level production in maranh o, Brazil. Economic botany 49, 31 39. Plotkin, M., Famolare, L., 1992. Sustainable harvest and marketing of rain forest products. Island Pr. Prefeitura Barreirinhas, 2005. Cdigo Municipal do Meio Ambiente de Barreirinhas, Barreirinhas, MA, Brazil.

PAGE 170

170 Punch, S., 2002. Household division of labo ur: generation, gender, age, birth order and sibling composition. Work, Employment and Society 15, 803 823. Pyhala, A., Brown, K., Neil Adger, W., 2006. Implications of livelihood dependence on non timber products in Peruvian Amazonia. Ecosystems 9, 1328 1341. Rakodi, C., 2002. A livelihoods approach: conceptual issues and definitions, in: Rakodi, C., Lloyd Jones, T. (Eds.), Urban Livelihoods: A People centred Approach to Reducing Poverty, Earthscan Publications, London. Earthscan Publications, London, pp 3 22. Reyes Garca, V., Huanca, T., Vadez, V., Leonard, W., Wilkie, D., 2006. Cultural, practical, and economic value of wild plants: A quantitative study in the Bolivian Amazon. Economic botany 60, 62 74. Reyes Garca, V., Vadez, V., Huanca, T., Leona rd, W., McDade, T., 2007. Economic development and local ecological knowledge: a deadlock? Quantitative research from a native Amazonian society. Human Ecology 35, 371 377. Richards, M., 1997. Tragedy of the commons for community based forest management i n Latin America. Natural Resource Perspectives 22, 1 8. Ros Tonen, M.A.F., Kusters, K., 2011. Pro poor governance of non timber forest products: the need for secure tenure, the rule of law, market access and partnerships, in: Shackleton, S., Shackleton, C ., Shanley, P. (Eds.), Non Timber Forest Products in the Global Context. Springer, Berlin, Germany, pp. 189 207. Ruiz Perez, M., NDoye, O., Eyebe, A., Ngono, D.L., 2002. A gender analysis of forest product markets in Cameroon. Africa today 49, 97 126. Ruiz Perez, M., Belcher, B., Achdiawan, R., Alexiades, M., Aubertin, C., Caballero, J., Campbell, B., Clement, C., Cunningham, T., Fantini, A., 2004a. Markets drive the specialization strategies of forest peoples. Ecology and Society 9, 4. Ruiz Perez, M., Byron, N., 1999. A methodology to analyze divergent case studies of non timber forest products and their development potential. Forest Science 45, 1 14. Ruiz Perez, M.R., Belcher, B., Fu, M., Yang, X., 2004b. Looking through the bamboo curtain: an analys is of the changing role of forest and farm income in rural livelihoods in China. International Forestry Review 6, 306 316. Runk, J., Mepaquito, P., Pena, F., 2004. Artisanal Non Timber Forest Products in Darien Province, Panama: The Importance of Context. Conservation and Society 2, 217.

PAGE 171

171 Saaty, T., 1987. Risk Its priority and probability: the analytic hierarchy process. Risk Analysis 7, 159 172. Salganik, M.J., Heckathorn, D.D., 2004. Sampling and Estimation in Hidden Populations Using Respondent Drive n Sampling. Sociological methodology 34, 193 240. Sampaio, M., Schmidt, I., Figueiredo, I., 2008. Harvesting Effects and Population Ecology of the Buriti Palm (Mauritia flexuosa L. f., Arecaceae) in the Jalapao Region, Central Brazil. Economic Botany 62, 171 181. Sayer, J., 1995. Science and international nature conservation. CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia. Scherr, S., White, A., Kaimowitz, D., Trends, F., 2004. A new agenda for forest conservation and poverty reduction: making forest markets work for low incom e producers. Forest Trends, Washington DC. Schmidt, I.B., Ticktin, T., 2012. When lessons from population models and local ecological knowledge coincide: Effects of flower stalk harvesting in the Brazilian savanna. Biological Conservation 152, 187 195. S chmink, M., 1984. Household economic strategies: review and research agenda. Latin American Research Review 19, 87 101. Schmink, M., 2004. Communities, forests, markets, and conservation, Working Forests in the Tropics: Conservation through Sustainable Ma nagement? Columbia University Press, New York, pp. 119 129. Schreckenberg, K., Rushton, J., Newton, A., Marshall, E., Velde, D.W.t., 2006. Research methodology, in: Marshall, E., Schreckenberg, K., Newton, A. (Eds.), Commercialization of non timber forest products: factors influencing success: lessons learned from Mexico and Bolivia and policy implications for decision makers. UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre, Cambridge. Schwartzman, S., 1992. Social movements and natural resource conservation in the Brazilian Amazon. Friends of the Earth, The Rainforest Harvest. Sustainable Strategies for Saving the Tropical Forests, 207 212. Schwartzman, S., Moreira, A., Nepstad, D., 2000. Rethinking tropical forest conservation: perils in parks. Conservation B iology 14, 1351 1357. Scoones, I., 1998. Sustainable rural livelihoods: a framework for analysis, IDS Working Paper. Institute of Development Studies Brighton, England. SEBRAE, 2007. Projeto: Artesanato nos Lenis, Maranho, Brazil.

PAGE 172

172 Shackleton, C., 2001. Re examining local and market orientated use of wild species for the conservation of biodiversity. Environmental Conservation 28, 270 278. Shackleton, C., Shackleton, S., 2004. The importance of non timber forest products in rural livelihood securit y and as safety nets: a review of evidence from South Africa. South African Journal of Science 100, 11. Shackleton, C.M., Shackleton, S.E., 2006. Household wealth status and natural resource use in the Kat River valley, South Africa. Ecological Economics 57, 306 317. Shackleton, S., Paumgarten, F., Kassa, H., Husselman, M., Zida, M., 2011. Opportunities for enhancing poor women's socioeconomic empowerment in the value chains of three African non timber forest products (NTFPs). International Forestry Revie w 13, 136 151. Shackleton, S., Shanley, P., Ndoye, O., 2007. Invisible but viable: recognising local markets for non timber forest products. International Forestry Review 9, 697 712. Shackleton, S.E., Shackleton, C.M., Wynberg, R., Sullivan, C.A., Leakey R.R.B., Mander, M., McHardy, T., Den Adel, S., Botelle, A., Du Plesis, P., Lombard, C., offs in the commercialization of multiple use NTFP: lessons from marula (Sclerocarya birrea subsp. caffra) in Southern Africa, in: Shaanker, R.U., Hiremath, A., Joseph, G., Rai, N.D. (Eds.), Non Timber Forest Products: Conservation, Management and Policy in the Tropics. Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment (ATREE), Bangalore, India, pp. 139 173. Shanley, P., Luz, L., Swingland, I.R., 2002. The faint promise of a distant market: a survey of Belem's trade in non timber forest products. Biodivers. Conserv. 11, 615 636. Shanley, P., Pierce, A., Laird, S., 2005. Beyond timber: certificat ion of non timber forest products. Forest Trends, Washington, DC. Shillington, L.J., 2002. Non timber Forest Products, Gender, and Households in Nicaragua: A Commodity Chain Analysis. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. Shindler, B., Cramer, L.A., 1999. Shifting public values for forest management: Making sense of wicked problems. Western Journal of Applied Forestry 14, 28 34. Shone, B., Caviglia Harris, J., 2006. Quantifying and comparing the value of non timber forest products in th e Amazon. Ecological Economics 58, 249 267.

PAGE 173

173 Sigel, K., Klauer, B., Pahl Wostl, C. 2009. Conceptualising uncertainty in environmental decision making: the example of the EU Water Framework Directive. Ecological Economics, 502 510. Smith, C., Kornblum, W. 1996. In the field: Readings on the field research experience. Praeger, New York. Southgate, D., Clark, H., 1993. Can conservation projects save biodiversity in South America? Ambio 22, 163 166. Stoian, D., 2003. Making the best of two worlds: rural and peri urban livelihood options sustained by nontimber forest products from the Bolivian Amazon. World Development 33, 1473 1490. Sutton, M.Q., Anderson, E.N., 2004. Introduction to Cultural Ecology. Altamira press, Walnut Creek, CA. Swanson, T., Barbi er, E., 1992. Economics for the Wilds: Wildlife, Wildlands, Diversity and Development. Earthscan Publications, London. Ticktin, T., 2004. The ecological implications of harvesting non timber forest products. Ecology 41, 11 21. Ticktin, T., Johns, T., 20 02. Chinanteco management of Aechmea magdalenae: implications for the use of TEK and TRM in management plans. Economic Botany 56, 177 191. Uma Shaanker, R., Ganeshaiah, K., Rao, M., Aravind, N., 2004. Ecological consequences of forest use: From genes to e cosystem A case study in the Biligiri Rangaswamy temple wildlife Sanctuary, South India. Conservation and Society 2, 347. Vadjunec, J.M., Schmink, M., Gomes, C.V.A., 2011. Rubber tapper citizens: emerging places, policies, and shifting rural urban identit ies in Acre, Brazil. Journal of Cultural Geography 28, 73 98. Varghese, A., Ticktin, T., 2008. Regional Variation in Non Timber Forest Product Harvest Strategies, Trade, and Ecological Impacts: the Case of Black Dammar (Canarium strictum Roxb.) Use and Co nservation in the Nilgiri Biosphere Reserve, India. Ecology and Society 13, 11. Velde, D.W.t., Rushton, J., Schreckenberg, K., Marshall, E., Edouard, F., Newton, A., Arancibia, E., 2006. Entrepreneurship in value chains of non timber forest products. Fore st Policy and Economics 8, 725 741. Warner, K., 2000. Forestry and sustainable livelihoods. Unasylva 51, 3 12.

PAGE 174

174 WCED, 1987. Our Common Future. Oxford University Press, Oxford. Williams, V., Balkwill, K., Witkowski, E., 2000. Unraveling the commercial mark et for medicinal plants and plant parts on the Witwatersrand, South Africa. Economic botany 54, 310 327. Wilsey, D., 2008. Integrating conservation and development objectives through non timber forest product certification: The case of Chamaedorea palms., School of Natural Resources and Environment. University of Florida, Gainesville, FL. Wunder, S., 1999. Promoting forest conservation through ecotourism income? CIFOR Center for International Forestry, Bogor, Indonesia. Wunder, S., 2001. Poverty Allevi ation and Tropical Forests: What Scope for Synergies? World Development 29, 1817 1833. Wynberg, R., Laird, S., Botha, J., Den Adel, S., McHardy, T., 2002. The management, use and commercialisation of marula: policy issues. DFID/FRP Winners and Losers in F orest Product Commercialisation Project Report. Zarger, R., 2002. Acquisition and transmission of subsistence knowledge by Q'eqchi' Maya in Belize. Ethnobiology and biocultural diversity, 592 603. Zimmerer, K., 1994. Human geography and the" new ecology" : The prospect and promise of integration. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 84, 108 125. Zoomers, A., 1999. Linking livelihood strategies to development: Experiences from the Bolivian Andes. Royal Tropical Institute, Amsterdam.

PAGE 175

175 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Arika Virapongse was born in New Haven, Connecticut. She is first generation Thai American, and maintains dual citizenship. In 2000, s he received Bachelor of Science degrees from University of Florida with majors in z oology and interdis ciplinary studies with a concentration in biological i llustration. In 200 6 Arika received a Master of Science in pharmaceutical chemistry and natural p roducts from Khon Kaen U niversity. Khon Kaen, Thailand for her research on T radit ional H ealers (Northeast Thailand) In 201 3 Arika received a doctoral degree from the School of Natural Resources and Environment, University of Florida.