44th Annual Latin American Studies Conference
Innovations and Partnerships:
Working with Natural Resource Management,
Gender and Local
Communities in the Tropics
March 31 April 1, 1995 Edited by Marianne Schmink and Sandra L. Russo
UNIVERSITY OF WFLORIDA
44th Annual Latin American Studies Conference
Working with NaturaResource Management, Gender and Local
Communities in the Tropics ..... ......
March 31 April 1, 1995 Edited by Marianne Schmink and Sandra L. Russo
Women in Agricultural Development Program Women's Studies Department Tropical Conservation and Development Program Center for Latin American Studies
Table of Contents
L Conference Report
II. Conference Description
March 30.................................................. 3
Welcome and Introduction
Voices from the Field. Brazil Global Climate Change Partners
Voices From the Field: Peru Pacaya-Samiria Partners
Discussion Groups: Sharing Experiences and Innovations
March 31................................................. 10
Plenary presentation .on
Country Roundtable: Peru Country Roundtable: Brazil
Country Roundtable: Ecuador
Thematic Roundtable: He.7lth, Gender and Environmental Linkages
Thematic Roundtable: Parks and People
Thematic Roundtable: Working with Stake holders
Thematic Roundtable: The Donor and Policy Perspectives Strategies For Innovating Effectively: Discussion Groups
Plenary: Strategies, Networking and Summary
Lessons Learned.............................................. 28
In English In Spanish
Lists of Participants............................................... 36
L. Conference Report
Innovation and Partnership: Working with Natural Resource Management, Gender and Local Communities in the Tropics
The 44th Annual Latin American conference was held in Gainesville March 30-April 1, 1995, sponsored by the MERGE (Managing the Environment and Resources with Gender Emphasis) project of the Tropical Conservation and Development (TCD) program. Financial support for the conference was provided by the U.S. Office of Education, the University of Florida (UF), the MacArthur Foundation, and USAIID-Brazil, as well as other organizations that sponsored travel to the conference by participants. There were 117 registered participants, including 44 from Latin- America. Participants represented conservation organizations, government agencies, universities, donors, and field projects from twelve countries: Brazil, Burkia Faso, Peru, Ecuador, Guatemala, Mexico, Dominican Republic, Belize, Bolivia, Chile, Tanzania, the United Kingdom, and the United States.
The objectives of the conference were to: (1) bring together field practitioners, adminis'uators, and academic researchers working with natural resource management (NRM), community participation and gender, (2) bring together partners of the MERGE project, (3) maximize discussion and interaction, (4) maximize voices from the field, (5) exchange innovative presentations, and (6) share methodologies for working with gender, CP and NRM. To reach these objectives, the conference design format included a variety of sessions that provided opportunities for hearing the many different voices present at the two-day conference, followed by a day-long series of methodological workshops. As part of the MERGE program, the conferz.iice was preceded and followed by a planning retreat for TJF faculty, staff, and students as well as representatives from partner organizations in Ecuador, Peru and Brazil. With support from the MacArthur Foundation and USAID, MERGE is collaborating in several sites in these countries to strengthen the understanding of gender issues in natural resource management projects, and to develop and test gender analysis research and training materials.
The themes of integration, innovation, and collaboration were addressed from many ditferent perspectives during the three days of the conference and workshops. Although not new concepts, their implementation in field level projects addressing gender, local community needs, and natural resource management strategies are still relatively rare. Participants spoke about their attempts to integrate gender, community participation, and natural resource management. A second focus was on experiences with partnerships or coalitions of organizations of different types working together in the same field site. The conference provided an excellent opportunity for people from different countries to learn from one another's experiences.
The three-day conference format included the following sessions:
Plenary presentations: Each day of the conference began with a provocative presentation that addressed some of the challenges faced in integrating gender, local communities, and natural resource management. "Gendered Environments, Gendered Methods: Landscapes, Lifescapes, Livelihoods and Life Histories" was the title of the keynote address presented on March 30 by Dianne Rocheleau (Clark University) and Julio Morrobel (Instituto Superior de Agricultura, Dominican Republic). Kent Redford and Paquita Bath (The Nature Conservancy) presented "Natural Partners" on March 31.
Voices from the Field: Two presentations were made by organizations working in partnerships through the USAID-funded Global Climate Change program in Brazil and in the Pacaya-Samiria reserve in Peru. This was an opportunity for those working on the ground with communities to share their experiences and methodologies for doing applied work.
Roundtable discussions: Seven roundtable discussions included presentations by individuals working in specific countries (Peru, Brazil, and Ecuador) and on cross-cutting themes (Health, Gender and En.ironment Linkages; Parks and People; Working with Stakeholders; and Donor and Policy Perspectives).
Discussion groups: Each afternoon, small discussion groups were formed to discuss innovations related to environment, gender, and partnerships, and issues and strategies to overcome problems in innovating.
Workshops: April 1 was devoted to workshops for hands-on learning of innovative gender tools and methodologies. The workshops, some offered in English and some in Spanish, included:
* Environmental Dispute Resolution: Tools for Partnership
* Carteles y Dibujos Sencillos: Herramientas visuales para facilitar discusi6n
* La Fotograffa Social como una Herramienta para el Proceso de Planeaci6n
Participativa en Actividades de Conservaci6n y Desarrollo
* Herramientas para la Validaci6n de G6nero en Proyectos de Foresteria
* Introduction to Gender Analysis: Activity Profile and Seasonal Calendars
* G6nero y Consideraciones Socio-econ6micas em Monitoramiento y Evaluaci6n
* Participatory Rural Appraisal So what's all the fuss about?!?
* A Guide to the Process of Participatory Research
* Project Learning Tree (PLT)
* Taller de Sensibilizaci6n
Posters and displays Throughout the conference period, a room was set aside for participants to display posters, videos, slides, and training materials.
IL. Conference Description
Welcome and Introduction
The conference began with a welcome and introduction by Terry McCoy, Director of the Center for Latin American Studies: John Lombardi, President of the UF; and Marianne Schmink, Professor of Latin American Studies and Anthropology and Co-Director of the Tropical Conservation and Development program. Terry McCoy welcomed participants to the 44th Annual Latin American Studies conference and introduced President Lombardi. President Lombardi, a Latin American historian, commended participants on their commitment to important issues facing the region and the world. Referring to the conference title, he pointed out that words like "innovation", "partnership", "natural resources", "gender" and "community participation" represent both significant, positive goals as well as empty-catchwords that easily can be manipulated to further development and conservation agendas that do not benefit rural communities. He challenged the conference participants to move beyond facile slogans to confront the real challenges implied in the con, -rence title.
Marianne Schmink mentioned the more than fifty-year history at the UF in teaching, research, and collaborative work in Latin America. The University has a strong background in interdisciplinary programs in tropical agriculture, agroforestry, and biological conservation, as well as a focus on women in agriculture and conservation. The MERGE program builds on two programs that began ten years ago: Women in Agricultural Development "'WIAD) and Tropical Conservation and Development (TCD). The MERGE program seeks to integrate conservation and management of natural resources, community participation, and gender. It promotes collaboration between groups and organizations, fostering coalitions for joint projects. It seeks to learn from innovative experiences in the field. Integration, collaboration, and innovation were the three features of the MERGE approach underlying the conference program. The more than sixty persons listed on the conference program represented many voices that would be heard over the three days, through exchanges, discussions, and an attempt to begin synthesizing learning from field experiences in many different sites.
Dianne Rocheleau (Clark University) presented the opening Keynote Address entitled "Gendered Environments, Gendered Methods: Landscapes, Lifescapes, Livelihoods and Life Histories", followed by commentary by Julio Morrobel (ISA). She spoke of the need to cross frontiers of policy, culture, personality and discipline in order to construct a broader, more adequate science that could "reinvent" the ecosystems of the future for a common world, linking local and global concerns. She spoke of her personal voyage, illustrated by images from the countries where she has carried out field work. Beginning with an initially static focus on natural resources, her commitment to participatory approaches gradually taught her to see the previously "invisible" groups such as the poor, near landless peasants, and women. Her face-to-face encounters with them led her to
recognize the multiple dimensions of their activities, life stories, and environmental histories, and to focus on the relation between gender and natural resource management in different contexts.
Local knowledge is rich and complex, and is organized and practiced at different scales. There is no "average" person's perspective, but rather different knowledge types. The complex local landscape is made up of niches that are distinguished by the gender, age, and other characteristics of resource users. Talking to women and listening to their "dreams" caused her to change her vision of resource and land use strategies. She began to look both within and beyond the farm and household to understand gender issues in resource management. For example, after land reform programs in Kenya confined them to small private lots, women concentrated on protection of germplasm biodiversity in their home gardens. Poor households also adopted migration as part of their strategies to maintain access to land.
The insights from these encounters led to an attempt to invent a broader science that would integrate complex realities, and new approaches that would allow scientists to put their ideas on the table for local discussion, without imposing their perspectives. For example, in addition to convening meetings, researchers can participate in and learn from local peoples' own meetings. They can also learn from the life histories, drawings and dreams o' local peoples and can integrate insights from these into everyday practice and practical changes in landscapes and livelihood systems and in policy advocacy at national and international scales.
In his commentary, Julio Morrobel emphasized the importance of trying to generalize from specific experiences. He described his experience of working in partnership with Dianne Rocheleau in the Dominican R-.public. in a participatory approach to understanding the different perspectives on division of labor, resource use, and property rights. In their project methodology, they used interviews and questionnaires, informal group interviews, and family life histories, which proved to be the most useful tool to collect the most information regarding the perspectives of different family members. His perception is that the people themselves were allowed to reflect on and analyze their own reality. These techniques provided a solid basis to define the major issues for formal questionnaires. Their most important goal was to allow the community to see the research as a common project, in which the doors would be open for future collaboration.
The focus on gender differences permitted a better understanding of the division of labor throughout the seasonal calendar of resource use, and made women feel more comfortable in participating in the project. Women's knowledge and activities were validated through the research proce ss. Power relations do not disappear when women are interviewed separately; women continued to behave as if their husbands were still present. More reliable responses were sometimes given by women in household interviews with their spouse present, while in other cases, the group interview or individual interview worked best. Since each reality is different, these different approaches allowed the researchers to analyze gender differences and common interests, both of which are important.
Voices from the Field: Brazil Global Climate Change Partners
Eileen Muirragul (GENES YS -Brazil) introduced the session by describing the Global Climage
Change (GCC) program sponsored by USAID in Brazil since 1990, and the collaboration by GENESYS (based at The Futures Group) in working to integrate gender and socioeconomic concerns into the programmer since 1992. The GCC program was an example of the attempt to "think globally, act locally" in natural resource management projects in the Brazilian Amazon region. She emphasized the need to use other senses besides the "voice", including the need for a new vision, using the special "gender glasses" to see the "invisible" resource managers, and the special "gender ears" to hear their silences.
GENESYS-Brazil, along with the Rede Brasileira de Sistemas Agroflorestais (REBRAF) worked with local "gender specialists" in five Brazilian non-governmental organizations (NGOs) based in the Amazon, which work in partnership with the UF, Woods Hole Research Center (WHRC), and the World Wildlife Fund (WWF). Representatives from some of these organizations participated in the session. While the GENESYS program is ending, these activities will continue to be supported through collaboration between WWF, UF's MERGE program, and Brazilian NGOs.
Denise Garrafiel, Nazard Macedo, Francisco Cartaxo Nobre, and Abib Araujo of PESACRE
; ii::ili:.. ... ........
(Pesquisa e Extensdo em Sistemas Agroflorestais do Acre) presented a dramatic skit and puppet show to illustrate the use of "sondeios" (Rapid Rural Appraisal) and community discussions to bring
local people into the planning process. Their lively presentation demonstrated the kinds of communications strategies that are especially useful in field settings, as distinct from academic conferences. PESACRE is an NGO that works in collaboration with the University of Florida in the GCC program.
Marli Mattos and Katia Carvaiheiro of WHRC and IPAM. a newly-formed Brazilian NGO, spoke about their partnership with grass-roots organizations, the inclusion of gender in their activities, and their innovations in integrating gender, community participation and natural resource management. They clarified that their activities represented innovations for them, if not for all present at the conference. Their project involves a socioeconomic study of "caboclo" (riverine) communities in which the research team, from the beginning, trained a group of producers, both women and men, to participate actively in the research project including discussing and defining the content of the study. They learned to calculate the size of their lots using simple instruments, and participated in
interview teams with technical researchers. The results of the research were summarized on simple posters (displayed at the conference) that promoters used in community discussions. Research findings revealed the importance of desegregating data by gender to better understand who uses the natural resources and who does what within the production system. It also revealed some of the particular problems faced by women, such as high rates of miscarriage and a trend for out-migration.
John Butler (WWF) described activities carried out in three Amazonian sites in collaboration with GENESYS, the Instituto Sociedade, Populaqdo e Natureza (ISPN) and several other Brazilian
NGOs. Legally required socioeconomic surveys were carried out in three protected conservation units inhabited by a few scattered families. Each of the month-long surveys involved mixed gender teams of locals and outsiders, collected general socioeconomic information and, in one case, information specific to women. He emphasized the challenge of collecting data in areas of difficult access with few resources, and the importance of strengthening the capacity of local groups to understand the use of data rather than relying on outside experts. There is a need to reconcile participatory data collection techniques with the need to strengthen technical capacity for additional data collection.
Voices from the Field: Peru Pacaya-Samiria Partners
Eduardo Durand, Merlin VAsquez Garcia, and Betty Rios Nufiez of the Fundaci6n Peruana para la Conservaci6n de la Naturaleza (FPCN) presented some aspects of their three-year collaboration with The Nature Conservancy (TNC) in the Pacaya-Samiria site. FPCN has sought to coordinate efforts with USAID, TNC, WWF, state agencies, and universities.
The area of influence of the Pacaya-Samiria reserve encompasses some 400,000 inhabitants, including 21,000 lix ing inside the protected area. This includes both native gro ps (Cocaima and Cocamilla) and mestizos, descended from migrants and colonists. They rely strongly on natural resources for their livelihoods through hunting, fishing, collecting and extraction, varying with the flood seasons. The focus of FPCN work has been to increase monetary income and reduce pressure on natural resources, and to foster local resource management and reserve protection using participatory methods. Community Centers for Conservation and Development (CECODES) are established to reach communities through participatory evaluations, diagnoses, and planning.
FPCN has adapted its workshops, by shortening to six days, in order to stimulate more participation by women in these community activites. Because women tend not to talk when men arc. present, FPCN now includes separate sessions to discuss women's participation, income-generating ideas, particular problems, and their vision of the management of reserve areas.
Jose L6pez Parodi and David Freitas discussed their work in the Programa Integral de Desarrollo Pacaya-Samiria. The program is funded by WWF-Denmark, a consortium working in two zones distinct from those of TNC/FPCN. The objective of the program is to work with local communities, giving priority to improvement of their living conditions rather than strictly focusing on conservation priorities. Social conflict in the zones has stemmed from: the concept of the "marginalization" of indigenous and rural populations; the assumption of "empty" protected areas; and the presumption that local populations need to be taught to manage resources. WWF has sought to create methodologies to work with communities to support their autonomous political organization (recognizing that conservation is political) and to promote "social conservation" (resource conservation by local populations).
Of the 80% of the population that is indigenous, many seek to become "mestizo" (and therefore "invisible" natives). On the other hand, WWF is working with twenty communities that have become "indigenous" through legal procedures. Two local development and conservation
associations have been formed to give local communities a political voice. Communities face a conflict between subsistence needs and market linkages. For example, most of the $20-30 million in income from fisheries goes to four or five large intermediaries. Outsiders are the ones creating pressures on resources, not the locals. Moreover, agriculture provides so little income that communities must depend on forest resources. It takes four months to produce a field of corn worth $2(X), while the same amount can be earned in two weeks through forest extraction.
An evaluation conducted last year revealed that work which focused on women-only themes was not accepted by the community, but seen as a concern of outsiders. Courses are being planned for both men and women, using a different perspective based on gender and local perceptions.
Richard Bodmer and James Penn (UF) described a natural resource management project focused on subsistence uses of wildlife and palms, carried out in Pacaya-Saniiria by UF in collaboration with FPCN and WWE. The research seeks to measure the impact of human use on wildlife and to assist communities in developing management programs. Research on wildlife populations, hunting and wildlife consumption are linked to extension programs focused on wildlife management. Books with color plates showing local wildlife provide good "ice breakers" for communication with local community members. The project works with the w'iole community, including all ,mnily members, in its extension program.
Hunters participate in data collection, analysis, evaluation of impact, and elaboration of management plans. They have tearned to collect biological information on weight and sex of animals collected, and to record this information along with date and location of capture. Entrails that normally are discarded by hunters now are collected for study of stomach contents, and of reproductive tracts. Hunters also have learned to remove and label skulls, which provide important age-specific data useful for evaluating population trends. Women participate in cleaning skulls since they are in charge of preparing brain soup, a local favorite. The growing skull collection, a key resource for on-going biological analysis, is housed in a museum in Iquitos which local people are encouraged to visit.
Five extension workers are working with IJF to develop agroforestry systems and experimental planting of aguaje palm for sustainable use. The palm, which is an important food source for both people and game, is threatened by habitat destruction. Three communities (200 families) are participating in the experiments. Seeds of both native and exotic fruit species (which take from six weeks to six months to germinate) are distributed for agroforestry use. At the same time, the project is working gradually to change practices of those who cut the aguaje palm, which takes six to ten years to fruit.
The project also works with schools, mothers' clubs, and producer groups. Community members are already busy with their activities and have their own ideas about alternatives for the future. The participatory methodology requires living with the people, being a part of the community, being flexible, and not imposing ideas.
Discussion Groups; Sharing Experiences and Innoain
The discussions on the first day focused on innovations. The discussion group leaders were asked to elicit information from the discussion groups based on a series of questions:
0 What innovations did you find exciting:
- from today's presentation?
- from somewhere else?
* Why did you find the innovation exciting?
* What makes the innovation useful or potentially useful?
0 What elements make the innovation possible:
- charismatic individual
- several groups worked/working together
- community involvement
- government policy or support
- international support- other?
* List the constraints that may exist for the innovation.
Plenary: What Have We Learned from our Experiences and Innovations
At the end of the day, two discussion group leaders presented a summary of their group discussions.
Elba Fiallo (Fundaci6n Natura-) raised the question of different concepts of gender. There are no simple recipes for applying the concept; it must be adapted to each situation. The process requires time and work, in order to see the whole system and how men and women are integrated. Project personnel need to change their own attitudes and behavior; they need to usc the "gender glasses." Information must be returned to communities, trying to simplify language to make knowledge accessible to them. How many cases of conservation project failure were due to their not reflecting community needs? What is the real meaning of participation?
Susana Balarezo (FTPP-FAO) questioned what constitutes innovation in focus and methods. Participatory methods are important for work at the local level, and may also be innovative when used by biologists. Gender analysis is innovative when it is used in work with communities, and helps to question power relations in the society. Participatory methods are important at the micro level, but when adopted as macro-level strategies (such as the World Bank Participatory Rural Appraisal approach) the topics are defined in advance. The ideas and information from the community should be inputs into policy decisions. The risks of participatory methods include their potential use to manipulate or control power, and the creation of "false confidences." On the other hand, in disentangling internal relations within the community they can help to generate projects and provide better knowledge of how the community functions. What is the future sustainability of participatory work with communities? This depends on national policies, available resources, and other factors.
The second day of the conference began with an introduction by Marianne Schmink. She reminded participants of the remarks by President Lombardi regarding the concepts of "innovation", "collaboration", resource management", "community participation" and "gender": these are somewhat worn-out concepts with many different interpretations. The conference is an opportunity for multiple voices and perspectives to be heard, but not necessarily to reach consensus. What is innovative for some, may not be for others. The ideas being discussed are not new, but their implementation in practice still is not very common. If we respect the diversity of each situation, then each experiment represents an adaptation, an innovation. The objective is not to achieve agreement on appropriate options but to listen and think critically as a collective of persons with distinct visions and different voices.
UF-MERGE is like the host that invites everyone to a potluck dinner party. They set the table and invited each guest to bring their local dishes so that they all could savor them, and discuss the details of their preparation. The, did not expect to come up wi"- a "cookbook" but perhaps with a menu of options. So far in the conference, this menu included, among other items: brain soup; the definition of projects through dreams; ways to simplify the data collections process (which may not serve our academic ends); and critical reflection by communities regarding technical projects. The objective was not to achieve agreement on the appropriate options but to listen and think critically as a collective of persons with distinct visions.
The conference's first day featured "Voices from the Field" from Brazil and Peru (and others). On the second morning, it began with a presentation from two representatives of the Latin American division of a U.S.-based conservition agency. Kent Redford (formerly of UF) and Paquita Bath, both of TNC, gave a joint presentation entitled "Natural Partners." Their provocative statements elicited lively discussion.
Kent Redford reflected on how to conceptualize people-nature relationships. Is "nature" merely a human construct? Are people (especially indigenous folks) really a part of nature? Are women somehow closer to nature? The literature on gender issues demonstrates the need to disaggregate the "black box" of households, communities, and production systems, but it leaves the "nature" box untouched, viewed as a generic set of trees. Successful partnerships to address gender and natural resource management will require exploding the "green box" as well. This means disaggregating natural biodiversity by levels or components (genes, species, higher taxonomic levels, communities, ecosystems) and analyzing the impact of human activities in terms of composition, structure and function of different components.
Strategies for biodiversity protection also must be analyzed separately for different land use types. The principal argument made in this regard is that ten percent of the earth's surface needs to be protected in order to achieve sustainability of the remaining ninety percent. From this perspective, the people are outside the park looking in. An alternative approach is to protect the ten percent but
to look outward, seeing the remaining ninety percent as differentiated land uses, different models of successes and failures. Learning from these experiences can help improve the returns both to human needs and to biodiversity conservation. For example, the areas set aside in Brazil and Colombia for indigenous reserves are far greater than those in conservation units. It is imperative to work with organizations of native groups to find ways to meet cultural and economic needs, and still conserve some components of biodiversity in indigenous areas. In TNC's Parks in Peril program, much of the work takes place outside the parks, to help build "site constituencies" for protected areas.
Constructing effective "natural partnerships" means not blaming others but rather recognizing limits and setting aside wishful thinking in favor of mutual understanding. Each indigenous group has its own ideas, concepts and ways of thinking. Biodiversity conservation, as defined by TNC, may not even appear on their list of priorities. It is essential to understand the different agendas and to focus on areas of overlap, such as the sustainable economic management of important species.
Women play key roles in working with natural systems, perhaps more than with money and property. Their focus is on family survival. They are tied in particular ways to environmental degradation. Vet we all rely on biodiversit; in complex ways that link people, animals, trees, and germplasm. The special "glasses" and "ears" most needed are those that can help to see and hear the "voiceless" parts of the natural system.
Paquita Bath spoke about her trajectory from a women-and-development specialist to a conservationist. Working as part of the MERGE program with UF, TNC's programs with Fundaci6n Antis"na (FUNAN) and the Facultad Latinomericana de Ciencis Sociales (FLACSO-Ecuador) entail creation of a dialogue among different paradigms and values. TNC's position is that protection of natural areas is the most effective form of conservation, but is not sufficient. They also must work with sustainable development initiatives, incorporating a gender perspective, while maintaining the essential conservation focus.
Their approach follows four guidelines: (1) to assist people in sustainable development outside parks; (2) to engage only to reduce threats and to displace harmful activities; (3) to engage only to improve protection and to ensure perceived benefits for the local population; and (4) to engage in collaboration only with experienced and locally successful development organizations.
TNC has few social scientists; their local partners are experienced but often lack academic expertise. Sustainable development is a "slippery slope"; it is easy to lose the focus on conservation goals, for example, by creating women's income-generating projects that bear no relationship to protected areas. The argument that human needs should be met first, then conservation can be assured, is problematic. First, the "human magnet" problem means that more people will be drawn into an area where livelihood opportunities improve, thus increasing pressure on resources. Second, there are multiple needs that cannot always be addressed. She is leery of conservation organizations meeting human needs, which tends to lead to the notion that human needs require further biodiversity loss. In fact, ecosystems = meeting human needs the world over. The problem is the devastation of ecosystems.
Collaboration with local organizations in important. Conservation organizations also need to be involved (to wear the "nature" glasses). Among the other requirements for successful sustainable development initiatives are: (1) better tools for exploratory work, such as Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) and needs assessment; (2) focus on a few areas of comparative advantage; (3) include analysis of population and reproductive health: (4) an important intermediary role for local NGOs ("participation" is not common in the conservation vocabulary); (5) attention to policy issues, such as credit: (6) learn from and document experiences.
Country Roundtable: Peru
Avccita Chicch6n, Rosario Lanao and Zoila Arredondo, of Conservation International (CI), spoke about their work with the MERGE project to integrate gender into activities in the Tainbopata-Candamo zone of Peru. Victor Zambrano, of the Fundaci6n Agraria del Departamento de Madre de Dios (FADEMAD), contributed the perspective of a federation of local communities.
Avecita Chicch6n began by describing CI's program in Peru, which began in 1989, with a field office established in 1992. The mission of the program is to reconcile human needs with conservation, focusing on the Tambopatw'.Madre de Dios zone, an are. of low population density with several protected areas. The Tambopata-Candamo Reserve Zone (ZRTC) was created in 1990 at the initiative of conservation groups and caused a negative reaction from local communities represented by FADEMAD. With CI support, local groups began to participate in a dialogue in which different perspectives were heard. In April of 1991, a regional forum (facilitated by Eduardo Durand) provided an unprecedented experience of community consultation and a "democratization" of the conservation concept, freeing it from the dominion of specialists.
The proposals that emerged from the discussions included:
I. The concept of the ZRTC as transitory, a period when planning for the zone would
be pursued through participatory workshops in Puerto Maldonado and other locations. Workshop participants would discuss what the zone is, its benefits, and
how to manage it.
2. Studies of ecological, social, and economic potential.
3. Proposal of a National Park as part of the internal zoning of the ZRTC. This
proposal was the fruit of a series of local meetings to reach agreement on the
boundaries and purposes of the park.
4. Development of resource use plans outside the park area.
There were many challenges to the participatory planning process. Two social sectors did not participate: indigenous people and women. CI began to develop mechanisms to encourage their participation, including the use of social photography as a tool (the subject of a conference workshop). FADEMAD's leaders asked CI for assistance in stimulating greater participation by
women. CI began helping to organize meetings with women and to collect literature on women and gender issues, in which they found little on gender and conservation. The MERGE project provided linkages to others concerned with these issues.
Rosario Lanao discussed how CI was developing the MERGE project in Peru. In her view, innovation involves taking risks, as they are doing in this project. CI carried out a stakeholder analysis for the MERGE project and identified interest groups from the state, grass-roots federations, NGOs, church groups, and academic institutions. CI will work directly with FADEMAD, but since the institutional context is much broader, they need to maintain flexibility, seeking to strengthen inter-institutional connections.
The workplan includes: fostering inter-institutional connections; training in gender analysis (four courses thus far); documentation of workshops; creation of a database; dissemination of materials; and testing of gender analysis tools in the field. They intend to analyze interests in each key resource -- brazil nuts, turtles, palms -- by gender, and to explore different perceptions. Projects that have been identified for a gender focus include soil management with legumes, turtle management, agroforestry extension, credit, and forest management.
Zoila Arredondo described the situation in her home region of Tambopata, where isolation has led to creativity in problem- solving, an interest in sustainable resource use in small areas, and small-scale industry for regional consumption. Pushed by poverty, in recent years Andean migrants began to arrive in search of gold, brazil nuts, and timber. This increased the region's social and cultural heterogeneity. Locals became increasingly concerned with environmental destruction.
Forty years ago, women gradually began to be incorporated into work and political organizations and positions. In the 1970s and 1980s, women began to appear in more public roles. When she began her work with CI in early 1995, she was aware of women's rights issues btl;L confused about the gender concept. Recognizing the need to integrate both genders in the MERGE project, CI sponsored a workshop in Puerto Maldonado for a group of highly-motivated men and women. They learned that gender did not mean "women" but rather the relationship between men and women. This dissemination of ideas within local organizations opened the doors for future work. The dynamic, participatory methods used involved participants rather than boring them.
The MERGE project will help to create ways to work together to improve resource use, including working through the educational system to reach children. Tools and creativity are needed to adapt to each group or community. The goal is to change attitudes, if not of 100%, then perhaps in 40% of the trainees.
Victor Zanibrano, FADEMAD President, spoke as the representative of the men and women of rural Madre de Dios, including 5,000 family units organized in committees, associations, etc. FADEMAI) originally was oriented to political demands but has shifted its concerns to sustainable development and conservation goals since 1989-1991. During this crucial transition phase, the organization almost died.
Since that time, FADEMAD has taken on a truly participatory role, with a philosophy based on three principles.
1. Diversify production and productivity, not through adoption of "packages" or
"recipes" but by seeking alternatives.
2. Promote autonomous development, rather than paternalism. They must become their
own protagonists; no one else will be concerned about their poverty.
3. Promote adequate resource management, through work oriented to the grass-roots.
This is FADEMAD's own philosophy; the state role is minimal and its economic capacity limited. FADEMAD took up the challenge of defining its own future path, hiring its own technical team, carrying out research and managing its own projects, training its own people and developing marketing alternatives. The gender work sponsored by MERGE has filled a long-standing gap through the support of CI and UF professionals, as well as technical advisor Richard Piland (FADEMAD/CI). The technical work is based on the group's political work. They no longer need intermediaries: he -rsonally knows many people. in the conference auditorium who have supported FADEMAD.
Within the family, all roles are important. FADEMAD has secured funding from MacArthur Foundation, CI, USAID, and Inter-American Foundation (IAF) for a credit program. People must make a commitment to take responsibility for their own production; not just men but women must also be inolved. The loans, and their terms, are assumed by both. People's participation can mean real change.
Within the ZRTC, the organized population is protecting areas and proposing new protected areas
-- demanding the creation of a National Park by the state, in an area they previously wanted to invade. It is important not to lose sight of "personal histories", dreams that can crystallize in practical conducts that can multiply, to regional, national and international strategies -- such as the Association of Amazonian Extractive Workers (ATEA), which unites workers across national borders in Peru, Bolivia and Brazil.
Country Roundtable: Brazil
Suely Anderson (REBRAF) began the roundtable discussion with some reflections on her experience working with partnerships as part of the GENESYS program in Brazil. Based in Rio, she helped to construct a bridge between national government organizations, community and grass-roots organizations, universities in Brazil and abroad, and local, national and international NGOs.
The elements that favor partnerships include: common objectives; geographic location; history of joint work, affinity; opportunity, availability, financial resources; and existence of a supporting program such as the GCC. Factors that lead to success in partnerships include: mutual respect;
regular, reliable communications; time; commitment; vision, innovation; gratitude; and the possibility of strengthening organizations.
The second speaker was Andr6 Guimardes, who described the research model developed by IMAZON, an organization founded five or six years ago in Belrm to carry out work in an area of large scale environmental impact in eastern Amazonia. IMAZON has twelve young researchers (28-32 years old) from diverse technical areas. The organization's research priorities were defined through a systematic analysis of obstacles to sustainable use of extraction of timber and non-timber forest products, agriculture, ranching, artesanal gold mining, and industrial mining. Current priorities focus on timber, and on agriculture, cattle ranching and mining in "altered areas".
The main objective of IMAZON is to decrease or stop deforestation in Amazonia, and to plan future development and expansion. The focus is on natural resource use economics in eastern Amazon. The research model involves the following steps:
1. Research on resource use activities of great importance (agriculture, ranching,
2. focus on 1-niting factors (credit, techr ology, transportation);
3. consider various activities together (regional economics);
4. focus on policies that affect resource use; and
5. how to implement policy/legislation, such as requiring GIS monitoring to ensure
environmental regulation compliance.
IMAZON's history began with a focus on purely biological research, followed by a decision to invest in economic studies, then a focus on policies. Now they recognize the need to strengthen the social perspective, and for more participative research. Elements gleaned from this conference will enrich their discussions of these new directions.
Roberto and Noemi Torro spoke about their work with the Associaqdo em Areas de Assentamento no Estado do Maranho (ASSEMA) and the Associacion das Mulheres Trabalhadoras Rurais de Lajo do Junco (AMTR) two peasant organizations in the eastern state of Maranho. Similar organizations exist in other Brazilian states. These are both separate women's organizations, composed of women who work cracking babassu nuts, and mixed groups of men and women.
Babassu is an important resource for large numbers of people: some 400,000 families depend on babassu, and some 500,000 women and children work cracking the nuts in a large area of babassu secondary forests, approximately 40,000 acres. These are "second chance" (secondary growth) forests, less fragile than primary, where babassu are dominant. Women and children work individual or in groups collecting the nuts, but the product of the cracking is taken individually. Men are the decision-makers in agricultural production, but women work in agriculture also. The families plant rice underneath the babassu palms, then other crops.
The current population is a mixture of migrants, former slaves, and former indigenous groups who suffered from agrarian violence due to land conflicts in the 1970s and i980s. At the end of the
1980s when violence lessened, a strong resistance movement regained access to land and other resources. The inhabitants then faced the problem of how to manage a limited land base to support a fixed population. The need to explore new production systems led to the creation of ASSEMA. The organization is seeking alternatives to the model of individual plots of land, promoted by INCRA, the national colonization and land reform agency. They have formed sales cooperatives for babassu, bananas, rice, corn, and manioc flour, as well as experimenting with new technologies for extracting babassu oil. Inter-state meetings are held every two years to discuss strategies. ASSEMA and AMTR have received financial support and technical assistance from government and non-governmental agencies, and seek to represent grass-roots organizations in making demands for changes in public policy. The groups' local leaders and outside technical advisors are inexperienced, and the group has learned through trial-and-error.
Roberto Porro described ASSEMA as a coalition of organizations representing social movements that questioned the rules of access to babassu, and the destruction of babassu palms through deforestation. Women's roles have been decisive and more visible than among other groups such as the rubber tappers. Women carry out the empates, or non-violent protests, against forest clearing, and also participate in later stages of conflict. When men were forced into hiding, women kept the economy of their families and villages goir, for months at a time.
Land consolidation led to agricultural and economic programs that sometimes provoked conflicts internal to the family. Programs that favored agriculture caused men to cut down babassu forests for agricultural production, even though these enterprises were not economically viable given limited land. The current challenge is to find alternatives to forest clearing.
Sustainable development projects with an agroextractive focus are needed to give babassu a renewed importance in policies. But so far there is a-lack of proven technological models and no research. One current proposal is to improve four agroextractive cooperatives in existence for four years to market babassu oil and charcoal, as well as the soap made by the women. The goal is to reinforce production for both family use and market. Technical assistance is part of a strategy to strengthen grass-roots organizations.
Country Roundtable: Ecuador
The Ecuador roundtable represented eight different projects: Susana Balarezo, Wilma Roos and Ineke Van De Pol of the FAO; Norma Mena (CEPLAES); Blanca Arce (CONDESAN); Maria Helena Jervis and Paulina Arroyo (FUNAN); Jorge Recharte and Susan Poats (FLACSO), and Elba Fiallo (Fundaci6n Natura). The thematic focus of the group included protected area activities, institutional relations, strategic training focused on community participation and gender, and the development of methods and strategies. Elba Fiallo introduced the groups and explained their relationships.
Ecuador is a country of rich biodiversity and a high rate of deforestation. In protected areas, thinking has evolved from a focus on preservation to conservation strategies involving people living in and around protected areas, including indigenous people and migrants. The challenge is h3w to
incorporate these people into the process. Management plans must incorporate different social actors into the planning process, establishing different commitments by distinct groups. Support committees composed of governmental and NGO representatives take responsibility for specific areas. Productive projects focused on sustainable agriculture still need to incorporate gender considerations.
Paulina Arroyo described a participatory conservation project that FUNAN is beginning at the Antisana site. FUNAN was created in 1991 during the transition in thinking from preservation to conservation, and is committed to a vision of participatory management of the Antisana Ecological Reserve. How to do this? They will incorporate gender analysis into their project for local participation. The project planning stage began in early 1995 in two communities where they have identified key actors and begun pilot projects that they hope will multiply. Ultimately, the community should be capable of taking over the methods/tools/ways of thinking introduced by the project for their own planning purposes. Community participation and gender analysis are innovations for FUNAN, for conservation organizations, and for the communities where they are working. They hope to demonstrate positive results.
V."an Poats described the steps involved in building a collaborative coalition in Ecuador, as part of the MERGE initiative. The conference was the first collective event that stimulated the group coalition to plan a collective presentation. The geographic area covered by the various organizations is large, but all are based in Quito, so their collaboration begins there. They carried out a stakeholder analysis to clarify existing institutional connections in order to define common objectives. There were connections between ecological NGOs and projects, national and local government agencies, universities, and international donors. The ties between them consisted of collaboration in activities, flows of funds, and participation in conservation movements. The organizations were grouped around four foci: forestry, conservation, agriculture, and social sciences. The stakeholder analyses permitted the group to analyze the linkages among organizations, and explore areas of rich, dense connections as well as those where they needed to be strengthened. For example, CEPLAES' work, which had a urban focus, had relatively few collaborative linkages.
The common interests defined by the groups began with a focus on gender and forestry. FLACSO and FUNAN invited other Ecuadorean organizations to sit at the MERGE "table", bringing in CEPLAES through participation in the conference. Although from different paths, the groups have come together with a focus on gender and now call themselves "Ranti-Ranti" ("to receive by giving" in Quechua). Examples of collaboration include: CONDESAN and FLACSO will work together to incorporate gender analysis within studies of family labor use; in the Vermejo community at Antisana, FUNAN will use community mapping techniques learned by FLACSO, with technical assistance from the UF and TNC. Susan Poats is documenting these interactions as part of the MERGE project.
Wilma Roos (FTPP-FAO) described the training strategy adopted in their training program, which focused on community participation and gender analysis in natural resource management. "Mapping" of forest resources by gender led to the analysis of gender differences in interests in both
exotic and native tree species that have multiple uses. Technical workers need to have an open vision to recognize women's high level of participation in production and management of seedlings and plants. The project focuses on different levels of training audiences, including peasants, technical extension workers, and academics. The gender focus is not as simple as women's role in tree planting; there is still a need to develop and adapt adequate tools and methods.
Susana Balarezo (FTPP-FAO) described the need for multiple training methods in gender analysis for different needs, audiences, and timing. Methods can come from different sources and find new future Uses. Their project tries to practice a dynamic approach drawing from both bottom-up and top-down experiences to create of constellation of options useful for all kinds of organizations. The bottomn-up approach comes from the need for participatory methods oriented to community needs. To address academic concerns, another level of training is appropriate.
In preliminary meetings they reviewed the range of diagnostic and planning methods, such as PRA and strategic planning, which generally did- not include a focus on gender. The challenge is to incorporate gender analysis into these abstract methods in order to reach other organizations. Innovation in gender analysis tools requires an orientation to community participation that uses different tools for .i4ferent actors, and finding ways to complement training e-nertise and expand coverage to more communities. FAO has produced a variety of tools including a Methodological Guide for participatory forestry projects, a tool box, videos, case studies, tools for "gender validation" and others. The national committee that coordinates FAG projects and discusses policy issues defined gender as the number one theme in forestry projects.
Thematic Roundtable: Health. Gender and Environmental Linkages
Irma Silva-Barbeau (SANREM-CRSP) discussed her work as a nutritionist in several countries. Democracy, empowerment, and sustainability are the words that summarize her approach: full and equitable participation in government and managment decisions, and the right to access information. Globally, there is now recognition of the interdependence of environment and economics, and of the pros and cons of modem agriculture. To date, approaches to agricultural development frequently have left women out of the process; the linkages between agriculture, health, nutrition, and the environment are not adequately studied.
Beginning in the late 1970s, farming systems research focused on the micro-conditions on-farm, studying each element in isolation but analyzing some linkages between agriculture and health through the consumption needs of farm households. The sustainable development model goes beyond farming systems to focus on the ecological scale, such as watersheds, and the linkages between components, such as cropping systems with biotic and abiotic factors and the human system. Still, more attention is needed to the connections with health, and gender issues. Water systems provide one of the key connections (such as in the Philippines). A newer model must be constructed that focuses on the interrelations among these spheres. For example, in Africa, cycles of environmental change influence the availability of water and food and can lead to specific health problems such as those that stem from eating unripe fruit.
Gender should be a cornerstone of such research, people-centered research that looks not only at women's roles but at gender issues more broadly in ethnic groups and age classes. The implicit objective is to have food all year, but the stated objective is nutritional well-being. This is linked to water, to biodiversity and to food availability, as well as to land tenure and to traditional health systems. The PLLA (Participatory Landscape Lifescape Appraisal) approach is like PRA but at a different scale, with a focus on nutrition and health. The objective is to see how to link sustainable health and nutrition, because sustainable agriculture or development cannot occur without sustainable health.
Norma Mena (CEPLAES) and Maria Nieves Rico (Casa de la Mujer La Morada) discussed their participation in a project financed by the MacArthur Foundation with the International Center for Research on Women (ICRW), in four countries. The Casa de la Mujer la Morada was the first feminist organization in Chile. They initially used quantitative techniques but recognized the need to use qualitative tools as well. Through the ICRW project they are developing a common methodology with other organizations (such as CEPLAES) to study environment, gender and population.
"hey use an integral, holistic concept of environment as natural system, and as a constructed system (the effect of human activity), with attention to social, political and gender factors. They seek to understand how gender subordination is related to environmental issues. In Chile, the study focuses on a poor urban neighborhood and the relationships between labor, environment, gender and population. Women's principal environmental links stem from their reproductive role and from their control over environmental risks. Their population links stem from biological reproduction and female migration patterns. Gender analysis focuses on daily routines, such as management and control of environmental risks, domestic tasks, care for family health, water control, etc. These activities link productive and reproductive functions and impact on health and environment. Women often pay a high price in tei ms of work, time, and mental health.
The project also seeks to influence policy through the use of environmental indicators. They have carried out technical environmental diagnoses in the communities as well as surveys and focus group discussions involving women and leaders. Both technical and participatory studies reached similar .enclusions regarding problems of garbage, dust, and housing quality. Standard health indicators generally do not permit discrimination of environmental risks among family members. Most effects are due to poverty, which leads to environmental vulnerability and risks such as dust and garbage that women manage relatively well. Their policy-oriented study of these environmental risks involved an interdisciplinary team in order to see whether quantitative and qualitative results were similar. They sought to measure economic costs but especially the mental health costs for women.
Norma Mena (CEPLAES) described her organization's work in the semi-urban community of La Ang6lica in Quito, Ecuador, as part of the same MacArthur-funded project. The major environmental risks faced by this poor community of rural-urban migrants include water management, garbage, and drainage. Lacking basic services, the population used water from streams, tanks, rain, and trucks. The more urbanized zone had more services. These risks were complicated by poor management by the families.
The study sought to measure environmentally-related family health problems, such as skin problems due to poor water management. They collected survey information on diseases and socioeconomic characteristics of women and their families, as well as samples of water from different sources to test their quality for human use. They found that water sold from trucks often was contaminated during transport and water from streams contained bacteria. They sponsored a workshop to discuss recommendations for water treatment.
The health survey focused on malnutrition, gastrointestinal diseases, vaginal and respiratory infections, and family planning practices, all of which are women's responsibilities. The study found that women were in charge of garbage when their children were small, but children took over later. There was a low correlation between poor risk management and health conditions. To the extent that environmental risks affected families, they led to greater consciouness and better management. It also appeared that women with more environmental diseases had greater stress and less autonomy.
Donald Sawyer (ISPN) discussed his experience in research on health in the Amazon region. Health has not received the attention needed in areas of sustainable development, gender, and environment. Cc -"nunities are universally concerned with health, which is P' hasic need. Women have placed themselves as managers of natural resources but there are few studies of gender, health and environment linkages.
What is a "healthy environment"? It involves women's own health, their attention to the environment, their treatment of others' health and their reproductive health conditions, among others. For example, access to good water, reproductive and sexual rights, access to contraception, and migratory health conditions are all factors. Women are actively involved with health posts and as midwives and medicinal plant experts who can treat diseases without the need to purchase medicines. Women's grass-roots participation is a key aspect of environmental health.
Thematic Roundtable: Parks and People
Deborah Lima Ayres (Estaqdo Biol6gica de Mamiraud) spoke of the great responsibility borne by those who live rear parks, who may or may not derive benefits from the parks. The Mamiraud project covers an area of 1.2 million hectares in the Brazilian Amazon Basin that was declared a protected area in 1990. In 1991 a group of researchers and extensionists began to work there. The major challenge is to prepare a Management Plan to present to the state government.
The objectives of the Mamiraud project include biodiversity preservation, research, and improvement of living conditions of local peoples. They work with people who live inside the park and around its borders. The management plan will include zoning (including an area of total preservation) and rules for resource use across the mosaic of areas. The Plan is being designed with the community's participation, and for this reason is a mosaic design. Annual meetings are held of all people involved in the reserve.
The components of the project include terrestrial and aquatic systems, community participation and
socio-economic research, GIS database management, core operations, and the Sociedade Civil Mamiraud. Supporting and partner institutions include CNPq-MCT; SEMACT-AM; MPEG (Museu Paraense Emilio Goeldi); UFPa; INPA-MA; IBAMA; ABC (Academia Brasileira de Ci~ncias). The main sources of outside financial support include: ODA-UK; WWF; WCS; and EEC. The project adopted a strategy of multiple donors.
The Mamiraud program seeks to address the following general questions related to the Management Plan:
I. What is the size of the area to be allocated for sustainable economic exploitation that
will allow the population to survive in adequate health conditions?
2. How can the local population participate in the management of the reserve? How
can conflicts between local residents be mediated?
3. How can the project contribute to improve the existing public health services?
4. How should resourc-, be managed by the populafan? How can population growth
be conrolled in the reserve?
5. What are the socioeconomic alternatives (such as ecotourism) to be presented to the
population to help reduce the impact on biodiversity?
6. How can -he economic program contribute to biodiversity protection and
management of the area?
Marise Reis described her work with the Mamiraui project since 1991. She participated in a general survey of the population, covering religion as well as social, political, and economic characteristics. The survey sought to identify who would be the reserve's users. At the same time, they were concerned to give the local population a voice in the management of the ecological reserve, a decision which the population increasingly supports, despite the existence of conflicts. Factors which contributed to this support were: 1) the provision of fiscal and legal support to the reserve, and 2) the establishment of a communications system through a floating radio station.
The Catholic church assisted in this initial phase. The project also brought together all the government agencies working in the region. The idea was to strengthen the communities by linking them to these agencies. The project has sought to involve the communities and to respond to their needs. All project research and extension activities were explained clearly to the sixty communities. For example, after the socioeconomic survey, the project provided up-dated maps and extension brochures that addressed problems with subsistence cropping. In addition, a representative community body was created, which has held three large general assemblies. The results included selection of forms of representation and formation of sectors to be represented by sectoral coordinators. The assembly has focused on the functioning of the region's lake system: reproduction and maintenance of fish species and habitat, as well as commercial fisheries.
Large-scale fishing has been prohibited. Today the project enjoys greater trust by the communities. These steps have fostered a good relationship.
Brenda Mayol spoke of her work in the Petdn peninsula of Guatemala. Spanish is not her first language. She spoke of the concept of "center": the nucleus of the center of the snake, or the woman. Her organization, IXSHEL, is the first civil society managed by women. They have started to sensitize children using the lunar calendar to orient the establishment of an agroecological system, based on women's knowledge.
ISXHEL has four components in its work with women: agroecological, cultural, revolving fund, and ecotourism. The agroecological program includes agroforestry systems and captive breeding of fauna, around the kitchen yard. Working with TNC, they receive funding to increase the value of these activities in accordance with cultural values. The park and the people are complementary. Yet conservation organizations often are paternalistic and patriarchal. There are disputes over land rights. IXSHEL proposes the need to assure the subsistence of the families and develop ecotourism. The latter is a key to responding to market opportunities given the diversity of Mayan cultural resources.
David Barkin of the Universidad Aut6noma Metropolitana, Unidad Xochimilco, (Mexico) discussed the project to transform the region of the monarch butterly, located at 150 kilometers from Mexico City, which is visited annually by 100,000 persons. This is a well-studied region, but in 1976 it was "discovered" by conservationists. The WWF provided $250,000 to found an NGO called "Monarca" whose goal was to protect the butterfly through an exclusive and exclusionary strategy.
The university, working with the community, sought to develop ways to balance conservation and sustainable regional development. Since research was prohibited by the NGO, local s dents became involved as a way of strengthening the community's role. David Barkin and Gonzalo Chapela have written a book about the project entitled Monarcas y Campesinos: Un proyecto de desarrollo sustenahle (Mexico: Centro de Ecologfa y Dessarrollo, 1995).
Ecotourism as the principal objective is a disaster, it must be a complementary activity to others seeking to diversify local production. Local products and services must be developed to respond to different market patterns, both local and worldwide. For example, half of the food consumed in the region is imported. Local participation (coordinated but decentralized) is essential in order to create political pressure in crisis situations. They have innovated with e-mail communications, which is easier than traditional means. The project has shown that "ecotourism" is not a magic word, but has both good and bad aspects. Local structures are necessary to ensure coordination, communication, and participation.
Several points were taken up in the general discussion following these presentations. One point was that many parks are an illusion. For example, when there are minerals underground, nothing can be done to keep governments from extracting them. However, it is possible to negotiate with concessionaries. Another point of discussion was the difference between outsider and local
perspectives on park management.
Problems with ecotourism were discussed. Tourism is an export product like any other, and must be managed with care. Ethical issues arise when cultures are changed in order to save them. On the other hand, groups should not be paid to stay as they are. Tourists must be willing to pay a fair price (not less, but more than a Hilton hotel) and to adopt a culturally sensitive perspective, or they are not welcome.
Thematic Roundtable: Working with Stakeholders
Ginny Seitz (Virginia Polytechnic Institute) and Anne Dix (University of Georgia) presented their work on the USAID-funded program in Integrated Pest Management Collaborative Research Support Program (IPM CRSP) in Guatemala. The primary goal of the 1PM CRSP is the reduction of pesticide residues on agricultural exports to the U.S. Broccoli, for example, has become a rapidly-expanding export crop in the Guatemalan highlands where the introduction of nontraditional crops has radically changed traditional technologies and production systems.
The presentation centered on the community of Chilasco, Baja Verapaz, where "broccoli fever" began about seven years ago. There is an analogy with "gold fever" because of the loss of control over production and knowledge. Broccoli fever has affected many members of the community because they see the opportunity to have cash incomes never before possible. This has encouraged farmers to push more crops per year in their fields and to increase the use of inputs recommended antd sold to them on credit. As market pressure intensifies, farxmers become less concerned about the long-term maintenance of their resources, or about what the loss of traditional production (e.g., basket-weaving) is going to mean to future generations, particularly if the broccoli market becomes saturated.
Anne and Ginny stressed the importance of understanding the interests of all potential stakeholders in the project, including farmers, women, children, export companies, government agencies, and NGOs. Pesticides are not controlled as intended by the manufacturers; knowledge about safe use and potentialJ harmful effects is not reaching those who use the chemicals. The biological research being done by the IPM CRSP is done within the context of socioeconomic research which focuses on community problems and issues. There are special problems associated with involving women in this research process: the local hierarchies of power effectively exclude women's interests from being heard in community-level groups. Women's situation is made more complicated in that the forces of modernization, brought by contact with the exporters and the loggers who come through the community, have also brought wage jobs for the women of Chilasco, in packing plants or as workers on plantations. Although women are increasingly involved in wage labor, they may be losing control over household resources and income strategies that are more ecologically sustainable.
Pablo Muench described a government program entitled Conservation and Development in the Lacandon Forest, which is financed by the World Bank and managed by the Secretariat for Social Development (SEDESOL). This is part of a decentralized program in four states of Mexico. In
Chiapas, there is special national and international interest due to the high level of biodiversity of the forest, as well as the extreme poverty and the diverse social groups involved, mostly indigenous and migrants. Land use change has led to environmental degradation and increased threats to biodiversity. The region also is geopolitically important because of its position on the border with Guatemala, where there is a cultural link with the Mayan peoples, as well as the existence of refugees, a strong church involvement, and militarization.
Since 1991, an inter-institutional committee has been working to stimulate producer participation, and a technical group was established to define the relationships between conservation and development goals. By 1995, over $10 million dollars had been spent on four programs: social development (education, health); production; conservation (focused on technical assistance in the Lacandon Biosphere Reserve); and infrastructure.
An evaluation currently is underway to assess the linkages between community associations, technical experts and government workers. Workshops and surveys have been carried out to evaluate the program, with a focus on five questions: 1) Is there broad social participation? 2) Is the program founded in local culture? 3) Is it sustainable? 4) Is training occurring? 5) Are local organizations in charge of tb- Drogram?
The results are rather discouraging. Only 35% of the projects (9 or 10 out of 30 evaluated) were found to be "relatively good" on these measures. Another 53% were found to have serious problems, and the remainder were "average". The evaluation results showed the need for greater social participation. Now funds are being channelled directly to local organizations. Unfortunately, due to the armed conflicts in the region these resources flows are biased by counterinsurgency efforts. The technical team must defend access to resources for the women's projects, which are now at a standstill.
In the discussion, he added that 43% of the official institutions in charge of planning and execution suffered from poor design and an inability to adjust to changing conditions. The instititions that performed better were those focused on social development. Those such as the Instituto Nacional Indigenista, which used more participatory approaches, were relatively successful. The worst projects were those focused on conservation.
Luz Maria Rodriguez S., a veterinarian who is pursuing a Master's degree in Rural Development, has worked with indigenous women under the Chiapas program. They have provided materials, technical assistance, and training of community promotors to support projects in baking, vegetable production, poultry raising, and sewing. Out of 600 communities in the region, all have access to the training programs and forty have received material support.
These small projects represent a beginning for women's active community participation, and can stimulate the formation of womens organizations. Due to the difficult conditions in the region, few women are working in the project. Community women themselves have been doing the work and learning from their own mistakes. The project has had an impact in raising women's expectations and interest in participating, and giving them a chance to express themselves. The focus of the
program has not been on gender issues. Many of the women do not speak Spanish, and either idealize or demonize outside experts. Through the project they have had an opportunity to learn about and defend their rights.
Angelica Flores described her work in family therapy and environment, with Heifer Project International (HPI), Peru. Entitled "Gender, family and ecodevelopment", the project uses general systems theory principles and seeks to harmonize relations within the family and with the ecosystem. The goals are to identify attitudes and limitations; to work with men and women in the family, community and ecosystem; to provide follow-up support; and to strengthen the gender focus in people-oriented work of national NGOs.
Heifer Project International is a livestock support program; her work with people is a parallel to the technical work. It seeks to stimulate changes in attitude related to human conduct. In base communities where HPI is involved, she works with students and teachers in animal programs, with veterinarians, and with community promotors. The program includes: a one-day sensitivity workshop; two one-day reflection workshops analyzing family and community relations; and monthly follow-up support visits for two years. Currently they are following fourteen professionals and ten couples during the support phase. It is >.'-nortant to note that the program takes into account the values and cultures of the people that they work with both during both the planning and the actual work.
During the discussion Ang~lica clarified that her approach is not to train or educate, but to facilitate reflection and analysis of the personal attitudes in the family, work, community and environment. There is no ideal imposed, but rather participants seek to "feel good" in their roles, especially gender ones. They may be well-defined but there still are problems in male-female relations. The concept of "equilibrium" may be positive or negative in confronting change and crisis.
The general discussion focused on gender: is the concept a way to manipulate attitudes, a lack of respect for local cultures? In some cases the gender focus may be rejected because it is different from the indigenous concept. Different strategies may be appropriate for different situations. Sometimes it is better to talk with the couple, because women may censor themselves more when alone. But these dynamics vary with the context, with forms of expression, personal styles, and the fora available for discussion.
An other point discussed was how to cross local-global levels of stakeholders? Meetings can be organized at local, regional, and micro-regional levels. "Peasant study trips" allow producers to visit other locations. These opportunities for exchange and discussion can allow communities to define common interests and to strengthen their bargaining relations with the government.
In Chiapas, relations between communities and the government have ranged from "blackmail" (demanding resources in exchange for compliance), to resistance (the Lacandon who say they have been conserving natural resources for 500 years and do not need to be taught), to rebellion by those who sabotage the program as revenge for the historical destruction of their resources by outsiders.
Thematic Roundtable: The Donor and Policy Perspectives
This roundtable presented the experiences of donors and reflections on conservation and development issues in the context of politics, as well as how politics affects the perspectives of donors.
Carlos Perez described CARE as a worldwide relief and development organization established in 1945. CARE has programs in agriculture and natural resources (ANR), food security, primary health care, population, small economic activity development, and emergency relief. CARE's ANR program started in the 1970s with soil conservation and agroforestry projects in Africa to prevent desertification. Since then, CARE has carried out development projects in Asia and Latin America as well. Currently it has 95 ANR projects whose goals are to contribute to increasing the food security and income levels of poor farmer households, while preserving or restoring the natural resources. Conservation of natural resources activities range from on-farm soil and water conservation (coupled with low-external input technology), to watershed management, to management of buffer zones around protected areas in tropical forests.
CARE has always worked "lnsely with community-based and governmental organizations. In the late 1980s, CARE's partnerships were increasingly broadened to include non-governmental organizations with which it currently implements projects. Today 55% of CARE's projects provide funds, technical assistance and/or management and strategic planning training to partner NGOs. CARE influences local policies through its work with partner organizations (local community efforts, discussion workshops, and paralegal support for land tenure disputes) but does not get directly involved i;i advocacy in developing countries.
Amy Shannon reported that the MacArthur 'Foundation has an annual budget of $180 million, of which $15 million goes to the World Environment and Rescarces program. In 1988, species diversity was defined as the focus of the program and eleven priority bio-regions were chosen for investment over approximately ten years. The strategy involves a three to four year funding cycle. In Latin America, the program focuses on the Maya Forest in Mexico, Guatemala, and Belize, the Tropical Andes, and the Atlantic Forest of Brazil.
The Foundation's Environmental Program supports biodiversity conservation and related issues, including local institutional development. Under a special funding program entitled "Gender and Natural Resource Management" the Foundation funded the MERGE project (UF, in collaboration with CI, FLACSO, and TNC), as well as several other projects represented at the conference.
Beth Miller spoke about her work with Heifer Project International (HPI), a small NGO with a fifty-year history and a budget of about $8 million, based in Little Rock, Arkansas. The focus is on livestock development to increase peoples' well-being, which originally began with exporting dairy heifer cattle from the U.S. to "hungry" places. The organization responds to requests from the field over a three-year funding cycle; currently it supports 300 projects focusing on such diverse livestock as goats, rabbits, fish, earthworms and bees. Donors and funds from American churches and individuals are in decline so new partnerships are important. Projects are carried out in
collaboration with local partners ranging from indigenous organizations, to regional producer organizations, single communities, the SANREM CRSP, and USAID recepients such as the Land O'Lakes cooperative.
HPI has always focused on assistance to families and communities, but the gender focus has helped bring women into the development process. Gender now constitutes one of twelve cornerstones of the organization's functioning (along with concerns for the humane treatment of animals, the environment, and others). They give preference to work with indigenous species (such as alpacas in the Andes) and disadvantaged or minority groups. The four-page planning form includes one item related to gender. The Women in Livestock Development (WILD) program is HPI's gender focus.
Jennett Myvett, of the Belize Enterprise for Sustainable Development (BEST), described her organization's goal as improving the quality of life for the people of Belize through enterprise development. The organization's tenth anniversary is next week. With funding from the MacArthur Foundation, USAID, Inter-American Foundation (IAF), and others they support projects involving credit and business management training. They currently support three Community Banking programs, ard three more are to be inaugurv-d. They work with groups, aot with individuals, and credit is available through a revolving fund. Their natural resource management project focuses on women.
The general discussion focused on the appropriate role for foreign assistance, its links with U.S. interests, and ways to measure impact. NGOs come to depend on external resources, which support middle class NGO employees. More coalitions are needed at the local level.
Strategies for Innovating Effectively: Discussion Groups
The discussions on the second day focused on partnerships. What is a partnership? How does one work? How can partnerships be used to innovate and overcome problems in integrating gender, natural resource management, and community participation? Questions which were posed were:
0 What types of partnerships did you find exciting?
- from today's presentation
- from somewhere else or from your own work
0 Why did you find the partnerships exciting?
* What elements made the partnerships possible?
0 What are the challenges faced when forming partnerships?
Plenary: Strategies. Networking and Summa
Due to lack of time, each discussion leader (Jorge Recharte, Ginny Seitz, Pablo Muench, Eileen Muirragui) gave a brief summary of their group's discussion.
The conference was closed at 5:30. The next day, April 1, was devoted to workshops. A list of the workshops is found in Appendices.
The conference objectives were met as participants were able to engage in detailed discussions, present their experiences in a variety of ways, network, and learn new approaches and techniques for dealing with gender in natural resource management. Participants left the conference excited about their work and recognizing that there are many others engaged in similar activities. Among certain participant groups, like that of Ecuador, the conference also served to bring participants together and to give them common objectives. It thus not only permitted people to report on partnerships, it strengthened ties and helped everyone to realize the high level of innovation that already existed, of which they are a part. UF, CLAS, and MERGE were very pleased with the results of the conference.
People enjoy and app eciate having the opportunity ffnr discussion and interactior.
2. Despite explicit attempts to build in time for discussion, there was still not enough time
allocated as, evidenced by the need to cut short the plenary discussions sessions.
3. A less formal atmosphere encouraged more participation.
4. There were some important missed opportunities:
0 Poster session poor room, no scheduled time for viewing, which did not conflicted
with other events.
0 No time for formal closure on conference should have summarized what wa
shared and how it was shared.
0 Plenary discussions sessions were cut or cancelled due to overly tight schedule, thus
there was also no complete closure on each day.
5 Workshops were very popular.
* Not fully integrated into conference.
0 Participants were frustrated by being able to attend only one or two workshops due
to scheduling conflicts and having only a single day for all workshops.
* Since workshops were on the last day, there was no closure for them and therefore
little chance to discuss and compare what was learned.
WORKSHOPS (in English)
Innovations and Partnerships: Working with Natural Resource
Management, Gender and Local Communities in the Tropics
Saturday, April 1, 1995
Throughout the final day of the conference several exciting workshops were available. Each workshop provided a practical, hands-on learning environment in which participants were actively involved. A brief description, time and location of each workshop is provided below.
Environmental Dispute Resolution: Tools for Partnership Presented by Christine Pendzich, Center for Environmental Dispute Resolution
The workshop considered the basic premises and strategies for environmental dispute resolutions. A practical exercise was included on the strategies or options of whether to negotiate or not. Participants considered how environmental dispute resolution could help in innovation and partnerships in their own situations.
Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA): So What's All the Fuss About? Presented by Irene Guijt, International Institute for Environment and Development
"fIt's just old wine in new bottles." "Anyone can do it." "It's a quick approach to development." "tIt's just fancy methods." These are some of the myths about Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA), mryths that have arisen because too much is expected (and promised), too fast, and without thinking through the implications of participatory development. The workshop looked at some of the myths about and merits of PRA, reflecting on the practical applications and the key challenges for its future development. It focused on how PRA can help to understand the linkages between gender relations and environmental concerns and change. The workshop included practical exercises and case study materials (including video) from southern Brazil.
Project Learning Tree (PLT)
Presented by Nancy Amny, University of Florida
Project Learning Tree (PLT) is an internationally recognized program designed to raise. awareness a-rid promote critical thinking about trees, forests, and human interactions with the environment. Participants who attended the entire workshop experienced PLT first hand and received copies of the comprehensive PLT materials.
Gender Analysis: Activity Profiles and Seasonal Calendars Presented by Elena Bastidas and Cristina. Espinosa, University of Florida
The workshop introduced a gender analysis perspective in relation to natural resource management and conservation. After an overview of the main gender analysis tools, Activity fPkofile and Seasonal Calendars were presented in detail: definitions, data gathering and
limitations. A group exercise was used to reinforce the analysis of the main characteristics, uses and limitations of these tools, which can be adapted to various research and management settings and
N - ---
--/ --Guide to the Process of Participatory Research Presented by Mary Rojas, Rojas International Consultants
The workshop was based on a publication written in 1994 by Mary Hill Rojas, Social Scientis and Gender Specialist, with Anne-Marie Urban, Latin American Caribbean Advisor for USALD's Office of Women in Development, for DESFIL (Development Strategies for Fragile Lands), a centrallyfunded project of USAID. The workshop outlined some of the steps and lessons learned in participatory research in examining the role of gender in the sustainable management of fragile lands. The lessons learned are illustrated by examples from an ECOGEN (Ecology, Community Organization, and Gender) USALD-funded research project of Clark University that was conducted in southern Honduras. The workshop was interactive and included tools for gender analysis, for example, the use of sketch maps, activity calendars, community timelines, and content analysis. The workshop participants were guided through a research project from the conceptual framework to working in the field, ending with data analysis and suggestions for returning the research to the communities. The participants had the opportunity to practice each step in a participatory manner.
Innovaciones y Cooperacidn: Trabajando con el Manejo de Recursos Naturales, Ginero y Comunidades Locales en los Trdpicos TALLERES (en Espafiol)
SABADO, I de ABRIL
Durante el dltimo dfa de la Conferencia. tuvimos algunos talleres muy interesantes. En cada taller los participants tuvieron la, oportunidad de intervenor e involucrarse activamente y aprender a travds de experiences prdcticas. A continuaci6n hemos preparado una pequefia descripci6n de cada uno de los tafleres.
Resoluci6n de Conflictos Relacionados con el Medio Ambiente: Herramientas de Cooperaci6n
Presentado por Christine Pendzich, Center for Environmental Dispute Resolution
Este taller consider las premises bAsicas y las strategies para la resoluc16n de conflicts sobre el medio ambie-,% Incluy6 un ejercicio prd(zico sobre la estrategia opcionqI de si se debe negociar o no. Los participants discutieron c6mo, la resoluci6n de conflicts del medio ambience puede ayudar en la innovacio'n y cooperation en sus propios contexts y situaciones.
Cartels y Dibujos Sencillos: Herramientas visuals para facilitar la discussion comunitaria Presentado por Karen Kainer, University of Florida
En la prdctica, lo fundamental de la, extension es tener comunicaci6n en los dos sentidos. En comunidades rurales donde la, gente no fiene la costumbre de compartir sus ideas y opinions con xtranjeros (gente que no vive en la. comunidad), las I.mdgenes visuals pueden ser usadas en varies forms para abrir un espacio-que no menace al didlogo abierto. Los cartels y dibujos son herran- entas de extension que tambidn entretienen y pueden ser fabricados para necesidades y situaciones especfficas. Este taller cubri6 una vaziedad de casos en cartels y dibujos sencillos que podfan server en la extension rural. Los participants tarnbidn tuvieron la oportunidad de aprender y practical a1gunas t6cnicas de diseflo muy sencillas.
La Fotografta Social como una Herramienta para el Proceso de Planeaci6n Participativa en Actividades de Conservaci6n y Desarrollo Presentado por Richard Piland, Conservation International
La fotograffa social puede ser una herramienta dtil para obtener informaci6n y fornentar discussion en una arnplia gama, de t6picos relacionados con la conservaci6n y desarrollo entre residents rurales. En este taller se present un proyecto, de f6tograffa, social que se Hev6 a cabo por CI-Perd y la Federaci6n de Nativos Madre de Dios (FENAMAD) en 1993. En este proyecto, se distribuy6 un cierto n6mero de cdmaras simples con instructions para, que los miembros de esta comunidad tomaran fotos relacionadas con el uso de recursos naturals y problems actuales en sus respectivas comunidades. Los resultados se presentaron en talleres comunitarios y
sirvieron para obtener information que se utilize en el process de planearniento de conservaci6n. La nietodologfa promovi6 un alto grado de participaci6n de los miembros de la comunidad. Asimismo las imdgenes producidas de esta mantra proveyeron un material rico para andlisis posteriors y para otros proyectos. Este taller explore las posibilidades para el uso de esta metodologfa en contexts different.
Herramientas para la Validaci6n de G6nero en Proyectos de Foresteria. Comunitaria Presentado por Wilma Roos y Susana Balarezo, Programa Bosques, Arboles y Comunidades Rurales
En el Ecuador hay cuatro proyectos sobre el manejo de Bosques en la Comunidad (FAO). Estos se encuentras involucrados en la elaboraci6n y prueba de una herrarnienta participative de revalidaci6n de gdnero que proveerd a proyectos y organizations la posibilidad. de medir el punto hasta el cual las perspectives de g6nero esOn incluidas en las actividades del proyecto. Como resultados del proyecto se elaborardn- recommendations sobre c6mo mejorar la situaci6n existence. Despu6s de haber sido discutida en el campo, con organizations locales y en el Seminario en Florida, esta herramienta serd puesta. a prueba en cuatro proyectos de mosques, dos
-Ae los cuales se encuentran en el Ecuador y los otros dos -- otros passes latinoamerica:,os. La version final (ya puesta a prueba) con los cuatro studios de caso serd presented en un seminario que se llevard a cabo en septiernbre de 1995 en Quito, Ecuador.
Taller de Sensibilizaci6n
Presentado por Ang6lica Flores, Heifer Project International
Que los participants logren percibir las aspects positives y negatives que tienen en su vida personal, familiar, communal y/6 professional. Se trat6 de reforzar los aspects positives e iniciar cambios en los, negatives para lograr un equilibrio en el. manejo personal, familiar, communal. y/o professional y sus interrelaciones con el ecosistema. Metodologia:
El recurso metodol6gico es el "Enfoque de Sistemas". Este recurso metodol6gico, como un intent innovator, nos permit complementary los aspects del comportarniento human (con el cual. el ser human se relaciona dentro de su familiar, comunidad. y con el. ecosistema), con los aspects tdcnicos, en la perspective de lograr una mejor calidad. de vida.
Gknero y Consideraciones Socio-econ6micas en Monitoreo y Evaluaci6n: C6mo desarrollar pianos de M & E para proyectos de recursos naturals y de conservaci6n Presentado por Eileen Muirragui, GENESYS
Existed una demand cada vez mayor, por parte de los proyectos que financial programs de recursos naturals y conservaci6n, de hacer un andlisis del impact que tienen dichos programs sobre la gente que vive y trabaJa en las comunidades involucradas. Este taller present una herramienta de monitored y evaluaci6n desarrollada por el proyecto GENESYS (Gender in Economic and Social Systems/G6nero en Sistemas Econ6micos y Sociales) para: 1) analizar el
effect del proyecto en hornbres y mujeres; 2) establecer un cisterna para la recolecci6n de informaci6n y distribuci6n de 6sta; y 3) organizer el contenido y la fluidez de la information que se necesite para decisions sobre actividades futures. Especfficamente, los participants en este taller consideration lo siguiente:
1) iQu6 es lo qUe yo quiero? (Objetivo) 2) iQu6 es lo que analizo? (Indicativo) 3) iA d6nde quiero Ilegar? (Metas) 4) iCudl es mi PLInto de partida? (Base) 5) iUnio anal izo? (Fuentes de informaci6n y datos) 6) jCUindo analizo? (TIernpo) 7) jQ16611 lo hard? (Responsabilidad) 8) iCudnto custard? (Costo) 9) iQu6 i-nds necesito consider? (Comentarios)
Esta herrarnienta se constrUye con una metodologfa M & E tfpica, introduciendo el uso de indicadores que, analizan la involucraci6n de los participants y la torna de decisions; g6nero y otras dirnetislones socials, y el impact econ6mico y sobre los recursos naturals de los proyectos.
- -Puerto Maldonado, Peri FAO-Ecuador-DFC Quito, Ecuador FAO-FTPP / Quito, Ecuador FAO-FTP
Cochabamba, Bolivia Fundaci6n Antisana F Quito, Ecuador
Fundaci6n Peruana para la
1 ~Conservaci6n de la Naturaleza
Belize Enterprise of Sustained
Technology-Best Belmopan, Belize
Casa de la Mujer La Morada
CONDESAN Quito, Ecuador
Conservaci6n Internacional Puerto Maldonado, Peru
Facultad Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales-FLASCO Quito, Ecuador
Genesys-The Futures Group Montclair, Virginia
Heifer Project International Little Rock, Arkansas
PESACRE Acre, Brazil
Proyecto Heifer-Peri Lima, Peril
Richard Bodmer Pacaya Samiria
The Nature Conservancy Arlington, Virginia
Women in Development (WID) USAID
World Hole Research Center (WHRC/IAPM) Belem, Brazil
World Wildlife Foundation-Brazil Brasilia, Brazil
WWF-AIF/DK Programa Pacaya-Samiaria Iquitos, Perii
List of Participants
Christina Allen Zoila Arredondo
University of Florida Conservaci6n Internacional
1616 SW 1st. Ave. Dos de Marzo 144
Gainesville. FL 32601 Puerto Maldonado
Tel (904) 372-7773 Perd
Tel (511) 440-8967
152 Dauer Hall Paulina Arroyo
University of Florida Fundaci6n Antisana
Gainesville, FL 32611 Mariana de Jesdis y Carvajal
Tel (904) 392-2423 Casilla Postal 17-03-1486
Fax Quito, Ecuador
Email email@example.com Tel (593) 243-3849/51
Fax (593) 243-3851
David Freitas Alvarado Email firstname.lastname@example.org
WWF-AIF/DK Loukas Arvanitis
Drasil 362 School oi 7Forest Resources
lquitos, Perd and Conservation
Tel (519) 423-3355 University of Florida
Fax (519) 423-3355 PO Box 110410
Gainesville, FL 32611-0420
Suely Anderson Tel (904) 846-0887
REBRAF Fax (904) 846-1277
Rua Sambaiba 699-1-701 Leblon Email email@example.com
22450-140 Rio de Janeiro-RJ
Brazil Susanna Noemi Balarezo
Tel. (55-21) 294-1538 FTPP-FAO
Fax (55-21) 521-1593 Ave. 12 de Octubre 1470 y Wilson
Blanca Arce Quito, Ecuador
CONDESAN Tel (59-3) 250-6267
Casilla 17-16-219 Fax (59-3) 250-6267
Quito, Ecuador Email firstname.lastname@example.org
Tel (593) 222-0533/34
Fax (593) 250-7422 Revathi Balakrishna
Email email@example.com Program Director
Women in International Development Heliodoro Arguello Virginia Polytechnic Institute
University of Florida 1060 Litton Reaves Hall
297-13 Diamond Village Blacksburg, VA 24061-0334
Gainesville, FL 32693 Tel. (703) 231-6338
Tel (904) 846-56996 Fax (703) 231-6741
Email firstname.lastname@example.org Email email@example.com
David Barkin Richard Bodmer
Universidad Aut6noma Metropolitana University of Florida
Apdo. 23-181 CLAS/TCD
16(XX) Xochimilco DF PO Box 115531, Grinter 304
M6xico Gainesville, FL 32611-5531
Tel 724-5100 Tel (904) 392-6548
Fax 724-5235 Fax (904) 392-0085
Email firstname.lastname@example.org Email email@example.com
Elena Bastidas Charlene Brewster
2901-304 SW 13th Street Food and Resource Economics Dept.
Gainesville, FL 32608 PO Box 110242
Tel (904) 846-5099 University of Florida
Fax (904) 392-8634 Gainesville, FL 32611
Emil firstname.lastname@example.org Tel (904) 392-1870
Paquita Bath Shari Bush
The Nature Conservancy Anthropology Dept.
Latin AmericdCaribbean Region PO Box 117305
1815 N. Lynn Street University of Florida
Arlington, VA 22209 Gainesville, FL 32611
Tel (703) 841-4186 Tel (904) 392-2031
Fax (703) 841-4188 Fax (904) 392-9272
Alfredo Begazo John Butler
University of Florida World Wildlife Fund-Brazil
PO Box 141932 SHIS EQ QL. 6/8
Gainesville, FL 32614 Conjunto E. 2o. Andar
Tel (904) 392-902 71620-430
Brasilia, DF Brazil
Eliana Binelli Tel (55-61) 248-2899
University of Florida Fax (55-61) 248-7176
4613 SW 44th Lane Email email@example.com
Gainesville, FL 32608
Tel (904) 392-7242 Connie Campbell
University of Florida
Sue Blythe MERGE/TCD
Peace Education Now PO Box 115531
PO Box 4157 Grinter 304
Gainesville, FL 32613 Gainesville, FL 32611
Tel (904) 376-0642 Tel (904) 371-8151
Fax Fax (904) 392-0085
Email firstname.lastname@example.org Email email@example.com
Katia Carvalheiro Martha Ellis Davis
WHRC/IPAM Center for Latin American Studies
Cond. Resid. Embrapa University of Florida
Rua Jari #1 Gainesville, FL 32611
Tray. Eneas Pinheiro s/n Tel (904) 392-0375
Bel6m, Para Frederick Davis
Brazil University of Florida
Tel (55-91) 226-9368 3020 SW Archer Road #33
Fax (55-91) 249-1534 Gainesville, FL 32608
Email firstname.lastname@example.org Tel (904) 377-1654
Avecita Chicch6n Barbara Decker
Conservaci6n Internacional Box 4351
Programa Periu Dar-es-Salaam
Chich6n 858-A, Lima 27 Tanzania
San Isidro, Perti Fax (255) 514-6525
Tel (511) 449-8967
Fax (511) 440-8967 Nancy Diamond
Office of Women in Development (WID) Peter Cronkleton SA-38 Room 900
Dept. of Anthropology Washington, DC 20523-3802
University of Florida Tel. (703) 816-0257
Gainesville, FL 32611 Fax (703) 816-0266
Tel (904) 395-6420 Email email@example.com
Email firstname.lastname@example.org Anne Dix
Maria D'Araujo Institute of Ecology
University of Florida University of Georgia
Gainesville, FL 32611 Athens, GA 30602
Tel (706) 208-9931
Jon Dain Email email@example.com
PO Box 225531 Eduardo Durand
304 Grinter Hall Fundaci6n Peruana para la
University of Florida Conservaci6n de la Naturaleza
Gainesville, FL 32611-5531 Pacaya Samiria Project
Tel (904) 392-6548 Napo 449
Fax (904) 392-0085 Iquitos, Peri
Email firstname.lastname@example.org Tel. (51-9) 423 8754
Fax (51-9) 423-3949
Valencia Elide Ang6lica Vega de Flores
University of Florida Proyecto Heifer/Perti
13526 Broad St. Solitario de Sayan No.437
Bronksville, FL 34601 Urbanizaci6n Maranga
Tel (904) 799-1264 Lima 32, Peri
Fax (904) 796-3385 Tel. (51-1) 451-9710
Fax (51-1) 451-5745
Jos6 R. Espaillat
Agronomy Department Merlin Vdsquez Garcia
PO Box 110500 Fundaci6n Peruana para la
Gainesville. FL 32611 Conservaci6n de la Naturaleza
Tel (904) 392-2849 Napo 449
Fax (904) 392-1840 Iquitos, Peni
Email email@example.com Tel. (51-9) 423 8754
Fax (51-9) 423-3939
Soil and Water Science Dept. Denise Garrafiel
283-3 Corr, Village PESACRE
Gainesville, FL 32603 Caixa Postal 277
Tel (904) 846-5987 69908-970 Rio Branco
Fax (904) 846-5987 Acre, Brazil
Email firstname.lastname@example.org Tel (55-68) 224-1599
Fax (55-68) 223-1724
Hilary Sims Feldstein Email email@example.com
CGIAR Gender Program
C/o IFPRI Christina Gladwin
1200 17th St. NW Food and Resource Economics Dept.
Washington, DC 20036-3006 PO Box 110240
Tel (202) 862-8180 University of Florida
Fax (202) 467-4439 Gainesville, FL 32611-0240
Email H.firstname.lastname@example.org Tel (904) 392-5071
Fax (904) 392-3646
Elba Fiallo Email email@example.com
Amdrica #5653 y Ugandes, Andr6 Loubet Guimaries
Quito, Ecuador Amazonian Institute of
Tel (593) 244-7341 Man and Environment
Email firstname.lastname@example.org. IMAZON
Caixa Postal 1015
CEP 66.017-000 Belem/Para
Tel (55-91) 235-4214
Fax (55-91) 235-0122
Irene Guijt Dept. of Soil and Water Science
International Institute for 2169 McCarty Hall
Environment and Development University of Florida
lIED Gainesville, FL 32611
3 Endsleigh St. Tel (904) 392-1951
London, WC IH ODD Fax (904) 392-3902
Tel. (44-171) 388-2117 Denise Humphreys
Fax (44-171) 388-2826 Inter-American Foundation
Email email@example.com 901 N. Stuart St. 10th Floor
Arlington, VA 22209
Dorota Haman USA
104 Rogers Hall Tel (703) 841-3842
University of Florida Fax (703) 841-0973
Gainesville, FL 32611 Email firstname.lastname@example.org
Tel (904) 392-8432
Fax (904) 392-4092
Email email@example.com, Maria Felena Jarvis
Peter E. Hildebrand Mariana de Jesds y Carvajal
Food and Resource Economics Dept. Casilla Postal 17-03-1486
PO Box 110240 Quito, Ecuador
Gainesville, FL 32611-0240 Tel (593) 243-3849/51
Tel (904) 392-5830 Fax (593) 243-3851
Fax (904) 392-8634 Email firstname.lastname@example.org
Irene M. Hohn Soil and Water Science Dept.
STR/Paragominas University of Florida
Av. Tavares Bastos 933 Gainesville, FL 32611
Bloco F, Ap. 201 Tel (904) 392-1804
Marambaia 66999 Fax (904) 392-3902
Bel6m, Para Email email@example.com
Tel. (55-91) 231-4830 Deborah J. Kane
Fax (55-91) 246-2629 Institute of Ecology
University of Georgia
Tomas Huanca Athens, GA 30602
University of Florida Tel (706) 542-2968
1605 NW 7th Ave. Fax (706) 542-6040
Gainesville, FL 32603 Email firstname.lastname@example.org
Tel (904) 375-7067
Rosario Lanao Tel 224-1599
Conservaci6n Internacional Fax 223-5724
Programa Perd Email: email@example.com
Chich6n 858-A, Lima 27
San Isidro, Per6 Marli Mattos
Tel (511) 440-8967 Woods Hole Research Center/Instituto
E-Mail: firstname.lastname@example.org de Pesquisa Ambiental da Amazonia
Patricia Larson Tray. Padre Eutiquio, 1940/1302
World Wildlife Fund CEP: 66.033.000
1250 24th St. NW Bel6m, Para
Washington, D.C. Brazil
Tel. (202) 861-8315 Tel (55-91) 226-9368
Fax (202) 861-8377 Fax (55-91) 249-1534
UFPA/Sociedade Civil Mamiraudi Brenda Mayol
Dept. de Antrr,pologfa Ixchel S.C.
CP 351, Bel6m, Para Caserfo Nueva San Jos6 Pettin
Brazil Municipio de San Jos6
Tel (55-91) 229-0069 Guatemala
Fax (55-91) 229-0069 Tel (502) 950-0546
Jos6 L6pez-Parodi Deborah McGrath
Programa Pacaya-Samiria University of Florida
WWF-AIF/DK 118 N-Z Hall
Brasil 362 Gainesville, FL 32611
Iquitos, Perd Tel (904) 846-5083
Tel (519) 423-3355 Fax (904) 392-1707
Fax (519) 423-3355
Kathryn Lynch Tropical Research and Development
University of Florida 7011 SW 24th Ave.
TCD Program Gainesville, FL 32607
304 Grinter Tel (904) 331-1886
Gainesville, FL 32611 Fax (904) 331-3284
Tel (904)392-6548 Email email@example.com
Maria de Nazare Costa de Macedo CEPLAES
PESACRE Casilla 17.15.225-C
Rua Iracema Q. I I C.08 Quito, Ecuador
Bairro: Vila Ivonete CEP 69900 Tel 434-171
Acre, Brasil Fax 434-171
Beth Miller Tel (202) 473-6379
Heifer Project International Fax
1015 South Louisiana Email firstname.lastname@example.org
PO Box 808
Little Rock, Arkansas 72207 Jennett Myvett
Tel. (501) 376-6836 Belize Enterprise for
Fax (501) 376-8906 Sustained Technology (BEST)
Susan Moegenburg PO Box 35
Zoology Department Belmopan, Belize
University of Florida Tel. (501-8) 23150/23043
3800 D SW 17 Ave. Fax (501-8) 22563
Gainesville, FL 32607
Tel (904) 335-6838 P.K. Nair
Email moegen email@example.com University of Florida
PO Box 110420
John Moon Gainesville, FL. 32611-0420
CER-UF Tel (904) 846-0880
PO Box 12927 Fax (904) 846-1277
Gainesville, FL 32604 Email firstname.lastname@example.org
Tel (904) 336-8351
Fax (903) 392-1457 Lisa Naughtan-Torres
University of Florida
Julio Morrobel 303 Newins-Ziegler
Instituto Superior de Agricultura (ISA) Gainesville, FL 32611 Ave. Presidente Antonio Guzmin Km. 5 Tel (904) 373-4017
La Herradura, Santiago Fax (904) 392-0085
Dominican Republic Email Lnaughtan@maple.circa.ufl.edu
Tel. (809) 247-2000
Fax (809) 247-2626 Francisco Cartaxo Nobre
Pablo Muench 3105-Buchanan Hall
Secretarfa de Medio Ambiente, Ames, IA 50013
Recursos Naturales y Pesca Tel (515) 296-0687
Libramiento Suroeste No. 4355
Col. Castillo T. Tuxtla Gutidrrez Lisa Northrop
Chiapas 29070 Tropical Research and Development
M6xico 7011 SW 24th Ave.
Tel (961) 432-04 Gainesville, FL 32607
Fax (961) 844-63 Tel (904) 331-1886
Fax (904) 331-3284
Eileen Muirragui Email email@example.com
World Bank Economic Development Inst.
Susan Paulson Fax (5932) 566-139
FAO-FTP Email firstname.lastname@example.org
Cochabamba, Bolivia Ineke Van De Pol
Tel (591) 424-7871 FAO-Ecuador-DFC
Fax (591) 423-2906 Proyecto Desarrollo Forestal Campesino
Email email@example.com Casilla 17-21-0190
Holly Payne Tel (593) 232-4790
University of Florida Fax (593) 232-4935
416 NE 2nd. Ave. Email firstname.lastname@example.org
Tel (904) 374-6572 Peter Polshek
Email email@example.com University of Florida
Jim Penn PO Box 115531
University of Florida-ACF Grinter 304
10 Powers Lane Place. Gainesville, FL 32611-5531
Decatur, IL 62522 Tel (904) 392-6548
Tel (217) 429-3898 Fax (904) 392-0085
Fax (217) 875-7566 Email firstname.lastname@example.org
Carlos A. P6rez Noemmi Miyasaka Porro
151 Ellis Street University of Texas-Austin
Atlanta, GA 30303 3500 Greystone Dr. #260
Tel. (404) 681-2552 Austin, TX 78731
Fax (404) 577-1205 Tel. (512) 418-8255
Email email@example.com Fax (512) 471-1835
Email firstname.lastname@example.org Richard Piland
FADEMAD Robert Porro
Apartado 179, Av. 28 de Julio 459 ASSEMA
Puerto Maldonado, Peri University of Texas-Austin
Tel (518) 457-1658 3500 Greystone Dr. #260
Fax (518) 457-1882 Austin, TX 78731
Email: email@example.com Tel. (512) 418-8255
Fax (512) 471-1835
Susan V. Poats Email firstname.lastname@example.org
Facultad Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales FLACSO Janet Puhalla
Casilla 17-11-06362 321 SE 3rd St., F-16
Quito, Ecuador Gainesville, FL 32601
Tel (5932) 542-716 Tel (904) 373-6593
Email email@example.com FPCN
Andrea Puntual Iquitos, Perti
Projeto Genesys Tel (51) 423-8754
Praca Radial Sul 25 Ap. 804 Botafogo Fax (51) 423-3949
Rio de Janeiro CEP 22260
Brasil Dianne Rocheleau
Tel (5521) 567-1507 Clark University
Fax (5521) 537-4298 Graduate School of Geography
950 Main Street
Jorge Recharte Worcester, MA 01610-1477
Ulpiano Piez 118 y Ave. Patria Tel. (508) 793-7176
Casilla 17-11-06362 Fax (508) 793-8881
Quito, Ecuador Email firstname.lastname@example.org
Tel (593) 223-1806
Fax (593) 256-6139 Marcia Roeder
Email email@example.com Servicio Holanddt de Cooperaci6n
Kent H. Redford Choquehuanca 204
The Nature Conservancy San Isidro, Lima
1815 N. Lynn St. Perd
Arlington, VA 22209 Tel 429-368
Tel (703) 841-4110 Fax 424-586
Fax (703) 841-4880
Marise Batista Reis Mary Rojas
Projeto Mamiraud DESFIL
Estrada de Aeroporto, 100 Rojas International Consultants
Tefe, Amazonas Recluse, Wiyoming 82725
Brazil Tel. (307) 736-2055
Tel (92) 743-2774 Fax (903) 736-2055
Fax (92) 743-2774
Maria Nieves Rico FTPP-FAO
ICRW Ave. 12 de octubre 1430 y Wilson
Casa de la Mujer La Morada Apartado 17-12-833
Purfsima 251, Casilla 51510 Quito, Ecuador
Correo Central Fax (59-3) 250-6267
Santiago, Chile Fax (59-3) 250-6267
Tel. (562) 735-3465 Email firstname.lastname@example.org
Fax (562) 274-0180
Betty Rios University of Florida
2930 SE 23rd. Terr. Apt. 2501 Marianne Schmink
Gainesville, FL 32608 Center for Latin American Studies
Tel (904) 376-5441 PO Box 115530
319 Grinter Hall
John Russell University of Florida
University of Florida Gainesville, FL 32611-5530
PO Box 110240 Tel (904) 392-6548
Gainesville, FL 32611 Fax (904) 392-0085
Tel (904) 392-5830 Email email@example.com
Fax (904) 392-8634
Email firstname.lastname@example.org Andy Seidl
Food and Resource Economics Dept. Sandra Russo PO Box 110242
Office of International Studies University of Florida
and Programs Gainesville, FL 32611
PO Box 113225, 123 Tigert Hall Tel (904) 392-2396
University of Florida Fax (904) 392-3646
Gainesville, FL 32,11-3225 Email email@example.com
Tel (904) 392-5323
Fax (904) 392-8379 Irma Silva-Barbeau
Email firstname.lastname@example.org Silva Associates
1403 Locust Ave.
Luz Marfa Rodrfguez Sa6nz Blacksburg, VA 24060
Secretarfa de Desarrollo Social Tel (703) 552-4170
Prolongaci6n Insurgentes 155 Fax (703) 552-4977
Barrio Marfa Auxiliadora C.P. 29290 San Crist6bal Las Casas Virginia (Ginny) Seitz
Chiapas, M6xico Virginia Polytechnic Institute and
Tel (919) 678-6451 State University
Fax (919) 678-4463 654 McBryde Hall
Department of Sociology
Steve Sanderson Blazksburg, VA 24061-0137
University of Florida Tel. (703) 231-3171
3324 Turlington Hall Fax (703) 231-3860
Gainesville, FL 32611 Email email@example.com
Tel (904) 392-0262
Donald Sawyer Department of Anthropology
ISPN University of Florida
Caixa Postal 9944 8620-273 NW 13th. Street
Brasilia DF 70(X)1-970 Gainesville, FL 32641-7957
Brasil Tel. (904) 378-4328
Tel (55-61) 321-8085 Fax (904) 378-4328
Fax (55-61) 321-6333 Email firstname.lastname@example.org
Amy Shannon Anne Todd-Bockarie
MacArthur Foundation MERGE/TCD
140 S. Dearborn St. Suite 1100 PO Box 225531
Chicago, Illinois 60603 304 Grinter Hall
Tel. (312) 726-8000 University of Florida
Fax (312) 917-0334 Gainesville, FL 32611-5531
Email Ashannon@macfdn.org Tel (904) 392-6548
Fax (904) 392-0085
Lisette Staal Email email@example.com
PO Box 225531 Wendy Townsend
304 Grinter Hall TCD
University of Florida University of Florida
Gainesville, FL 32611-5531 Gainesville, FL 32611
Tel (904) 392-6548 Tel (904) 338-2961
Fax (904) 392-0085 Fax (904) 392-0085
Email firstname.lastname@example.org Email email@example.com
Amanda Stronza Denise Trunk
824 1/2 East University Avenue University of Florida
Apartment #3 Gainesville, FL 32611
Gainesville, FL 32601 Tel (904) 392-5140
Email firstname.lastname@example.org Kevin Veach
University of Florida
Mary Lou Surgi 1001 SW 16th Street Apt. 68
Center for PVO/University Gainesville, FL 32601
Collaboration in Development Tel (904) 372-0277
Cullowhee, NC 28723 Allan Wood
USA University of Florida
Tel. (704) 227-7492 305-21 Diamond Village
Fax (704) 227-7422 Gainesville, FL 32603
Email email@example.com Tel (904) 846-5844
Mary E. Taylor
Tropical Research and Development Victor Zambrano
7011 SW 24th Ave. Federacion Agraria de Madre de Dios
Gainesville, FL 32607 FADEMAD
Tel (904) 331-1886 Apartado 179
Fax (904) 331-3284 Av. 28 de Julio 459
Email firstname.lastname@example.org Puerto Maldonado, Peril
Tel (518) 457-1658
Fax (518) 457-1882
Carolina Zumarzin-Jones Tropical Research and Development 7011 SW 24th Ave. Gainesville, FL 32607 Tel (904) 331-1886
Fax (904) 331-3284
ABC Academia Brasileira de Ci~ncias
AMTR Associaiio das Mutheres Trabalhadoras Rurais de Lago do Junco
ASSEMA Associaqio em Areas de Assentamento no Estado do Maranhao
ATEA Associaqio dos Trabalhadores Extrativistas de Amazonia (Association of
Amazonian Extractive Workers)
BEST Belize Enterprise for Sustainable Technology
CECODES Centros Comunitirios para la Conservaci6n y Desarrollo
CEPLAES Centro de Planificaci6n y Estidios Sociales
Cl Conservation International
CNPq-MCT Conselho Nacional de Pesquisa
CONDESAN Consorcio para el Desarrolo Sustenable en los Andes
CRSP Collaborative Research Support Program (USAID-funded)
EEC European Economic Community
FADEMAD Fundaci6n Agraria del Departamento de Madre de Di6s
FAO Food and Agricultural Organization (of the United Nations)
FLACS'" Facultad Latinoamnericana de Ciencias Sociales
FPCN Fundaci6n Peruana para la Conservaci6n de la Naturaleza
FTP Forest, Trees, and People
FUNAN Fundaci6n Antisana
GENESYS Gender in Economic and Social Systems
GCC Global Climate Change
HPI Heifer Project International
IAF Inter-American Foundation
IBAMA Instituto Brasiliero de Meio Ambiente
ICRW International Center for Research on Women
IIED International Institute for Environment and Development
IMAZON Instituto de Homen e Meio Ambieule na Amazonia (Amazonian Institute of
Man and Environment)
INCRA Instituto Nacional de Colonizaqo e Reforma Agrdria
INPA-MA Instituto Nacional de Pesquisa na Amaz6nia Manaus
IPAM Instituto de Pesquisa Ambiental da Amazonia
IPM Integrated Pest Management
ISA Instituto Superior de Agricultura
ISPN Instituto Sociedade, Populaqgo e Natureza
MERGE Managing the Environment and Resources with Gender Emphasis
MPEG Museu Paranense Emilio Goeldi
NGO Non-governmental organization
ODA-UK Overseas Development Authority-United Kingdom
PESACRE Pesquisa e Extensdo em Sistemas Agroflorestais do Acre
PLLA Participatory Landscape Lifescape Appraisal
PLT Project Learning Tree
PRA Participatory Rural Appraisal
REBRAF Rede Brasileira de Sistemas Agroflorestais
SANREM Sustainable Agriculture and Natural Resource Management CRSP
SEDOSOL Secretariat for Social Development (World Bank)
SEMACT-AM Secretarie Estadaul do Meio
TCD Tropical Conservation and Development
TNC The Nature Conservancy
UF University of Florida
UFPa Universidade Federal do Pard
USAID United States Agency for International Development
WCS Wildlife Conservation Society
WHRC Woods Hole Research Center
WIAD Women in Agricultural Development
WWF World Wildlife Foundation
ZRTC Tambopata-Candamo Reserve Zone (Zona Reserva de Tampopata-Candamno)