Abstract
This study is about land tenure and the use of natural resources in the Amazonian várzea. The main objectives of this research were to adjust and to formulate legal instruments to enable the conservation, sustainable use, and integrated management of the várzea. The possession and management of natural resources imply control. In other words, it is only possible to manage what is possessed, partially or totally. In the case of common property, this control occurs when a social group somehow retains some power over a determined area. The form of possession found in the Amazonian lowlands alongside watercourses is possession of lakes and pasture areas as common spaces, considering that each riparian inhabitant has a lot of land in the marsh where he develops his agriculture of subsistence and his habitation. Thus, the lot is the area appropriated individually, and the lake and the natural pasture play the role of common area. In the back of these lands, where there are fields and lakes, the use of these environments are collective. Although there is a notion of width based on the distance between properties and the limits with neighbors, the fields and lakes are considered an extension of the property’s limits, not as private spaces, but collective ones; generally, there are no fences in native fields and the natural pastures are used commonly by the cattle, which are identified by each riparian family. The rights of the Federal Constitution of 1988 established new grounds for the relationship between society and environment.
Lawyer, PhD in socioenvironmental development sciences; Professor of Law, Federal University of Pará (UFPA), Professor, Graduate Program UFPA, CNPq researcher, and President of Land Institute of the Pará (ITERPA). E-mail: jbenatti@ufpa.br
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
This research project was partially funded by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and by the Brazilian Cooperation Agency (Department of Project Administration) (UAP/ABC). I would like to thank Dr. Mauro Luis Ruffino, coordinator of the ProVárzea/IBAMA, and Dr. Clara Maria Forsber, manager of the Strategic Studies component of ProVárzea, who supported the research presented in this paper. Research for this project was completed in March, 2004.
- 2.
The following researchers contributed to this project: José Heder Benatti (coordinador), Ana Carolina Santos Surgik, Antônia Socorro Pena Da Gama, David G. McGrath, and Girolamo Domênico Treccani.
- 3.
Use must be understood in the broadest terms. Natural resources are used to sustain fishing activities, agriculture, and timber extraction. They can even be used for transportation
- 4.
Stream beds, river beds, and channels are conduits for waters, or areas where waters run between two banks or margins. Therefore, riverbanks, being the most elevated areas of the beds, represent the portion of the streambed that contains the waters (Mendoça 1909:7).
- 5.
Some lawyers affirm that CONAMA Resolution 004/85 was retracted with the implementation of Law no. 9985, June 18th, 2000 (Law of the System of Conservation Units - SNUC), which revoked Art. 18 of Law 6938/81. Defenders of this position argue that the revocation of Art. 18 would also make null Resolution 4/85. We defend the contrary thesis, in which CONAMA Resolution 4/85 did not follow the same faith of Art. 18 of Law no. 6938/81 and happily continues in force. Our understanding is that the CONAMA Resolution does not regulate Art. 18 of Law 6938/81; therefore it did not lose its effect. For more details see Mercadante et al. (2001).
- 6.
The expression “public domain” is used to assign assets for public use, for use by the general population, or for restricted special use. Di Pietro (2001:531) states that “although the classification adopted by Article 98 of the Civil Code includes three modalities of assets, in relation to the legal system, only two exist,” that is, State assets of public domain and State goods of private domain (bens dominicais), the latter being partially public and partially private.
- 7.
The Civil Code from 2002, in Article 1230, affirmed that “property of the ground does not include mineral deposits, mines, hydraulic energy potential, archaeological monuments, and other assets governed by special laws.” While not included in the list above, the Federal Constitution and special law (Law 9433/97) excluded water from private ownership.
- 8.
To alienate means to transfer ownership of an asset to another person, or to transfer use and enjoyment of an asset to another person.
- 9.
In a similar work, we find Article 102 of the Civil Code affirming that “the public goods are not subject to “usucaption”.
- 10.
Commutable is exchange or replacement used in onerous contracts or occurs when there is substitution of one form of payment for another.
- 11.
To grant is to give or confer something with or without compensation. A grant is an agreement that creates a right of any description other than the one held by the grantor. In Brazil a grant is the permission to use public property.
- 12.
In the case of land tenure legalization for an individual family property or community properties, the concession contract also serves to assure means of traditional organization of the favored social group.
- 13.
An exception to this rule may occur if the concession contract explicitly indicates ribeirinhos will not be paid for improvements in the following situations: (a) when the grantee is given diverse use rights in the contract; (b) if a breach in contract occurs; (c) if the grantee rescinds the contract, or if the area is not adequate to provide the means to sustain his/her activities, (d) in the case of environmental damage, transfer of use rights (with the exception of inheritance) or violation of the management plan.
- 14.
The natural resource use and management plan is a written document developed by residents of the area in question, with the intention of defining social and economic activities elaborated in the várzea areas to be legalized under land tenure laws.
- 15.
At the present moment, to legalize land tenure of Union properties (see Memorandum 167/01 GEAES/GEAPN and Memorandum 10/02 GEAES/SPU), the interested party must direct his/her request for a concession contract to the Regional Federal Patrimony Service (GRPU) or the Secretary of Federal Patrimony (SPU) of the Federal Patrimony Service (SPU), along with other documents and information. The order must be followed with a preliminary proposal of the activities to be carried out in the area or a summary of proposed use. In our proposal, the plan of use will be substituted for the preliminary proposal, because it has the same function, that is, to inform the agency of how the interested party intends to use the public good.
- 16.
The advantage of developing a unique use and management plan for a concession area is that it facilitates the management of this area, as well as the resolution of possible disputes over natural resources.
- 17.
For a complete debate on land occupation by traditional communities and its repercussions on legislation, see Benatti (2003).
- 18.
In várzea areas the area of land occupied by individual families is limited in depth by lakes and other bodies of water; its lateral limits are well defined. This spatial division assures that all families have access to the four main environments of the várzea (running water courses, natural levees, natural savannas, and lakes). This arrangement must be recognized and upheld, since it assures the viability of household economies in the várzea (McGrath 2004).
- 19.
Fiscal Land Units (MF) are set by INCRA and are defined by the laws of each Brazilian município, according to Article 4 of Decree 8485, from May 6th, 1980.
- 20.
McGrath (2004) indicates that a large percentage of rural properties in the várzea measure less than one MF; that is, less than 3 ha. However, when land tenure legalization includes natural levees, communal pastures and lakes, the total area per family exceeds the MF. Therefore, these areas cannot be classified as insufficient for a family’s subsistence (also called minifúndio). Family properties and rural land units (MR) are synonymous. Thus, MR takes into account the minimum conditions for profitable resource use and extraction and social benefits of the property (Art. 4 of Law 4504/64 – Land Act).
References
Bastos, J. T. (1923). Terrenos de marinha. Rio de Janeiro: Jacintho Ribeiro dos Santos.
Batista, R. P. (2000). Água: perspectivas ambiental e agrária/Coord. Raymundo Laranjeira. In Direito agrário brasileiro: em homenagem à memória de Fernando Pereira Sodero. São Paulo: LTr.
Benatti, J. H. (2002a). Manejo florestal e o uso alternativo do solo na Amazônia. In S. Fabris (Ed.), O direito para o Brasil socioambiental/Coord. Porto Alegre: André Lima. Instituto Socioambiental.
Benatti, J. H. (2002b). A titularidade da propriedade coletiva e o manejo florestal comunitário. In Revista de Direito Ambiental. Revista dos Tribunais, nº 26, abril/junho, São Paul.
Benatti, J. H. (2003a). Direito de propriedade e proteção ambiental no brasil: apropriação e uso dos recursos naturais no imóvel rural. Belém: NAEA/UFPA, tese de doutorado.
Benatti, J. H. (2003b). Posse agroecológica e manejo florestal. Curitiba: Juruá.
Benatti, J. H. (2005). Aspectos jurídicos e fundiários da várzea: uma proposta de regularização e gestão dos recursos naturais. In A questão fundiária e o manejo dos recursos naturais da várzea: análise para elaboração de novos modelos jurídicos/Coord. José Heder Benatti. Edições Ibama/ProVárzea, 2005, Manaus.
Brasil. (1992). Código de água e legislação complementar. Bauru: Edipro.
Brasil. (1996). Código florestal, Código de proteção à fauna e Código de pesca e legislação complementar (3rd ed.). Bauru: Edipro.
Brasil. (1998). Legislação patrimonial e correlata: bens imóveis da União. Belém/PA: SPU-DPU/PA.
Di Pietro, M. S. Z. (2001). Direito administrativo (13th ed.). São Paulo: Atlas.
Freitas, V. P. (2003a). Matas ciliares. In V. P. Freitas (Ed.), Direito ambiental em evolução (Vol. 2). Curitiba: Juruá.
Freitas, V. P. (2003b). Água: considerações gerais. In V. P. Freitas (Ed.), Águas: aspectos jurídicos e ambientais (2nd ed.). Curitiba: Juruá.
Paulo, G. (1958). Terras devolutas. Belo Horizonte: Livraria Oscar Nicolai.
IPAM. (2003). Proposta para o Plano de Manejo de Uso Múltiplo da Reserva Extrativista Tapajós/Arapiuns. Santarém: IPAM, (Mimeo).
Junk, W. J., Bayler, P., & Sparks, R. E. (1989). The flood pulse concept in river-floodplain systems. Canadian special publication of fisheries and aquatic science, 106, 110–127.
McGrath, D. G. (2004). Estudo de áreas comunitárias na Várzea Amazônica nos municípios de Santarém-PA, Parintins-AM e Tefé-AM. ProVázea: MMA. Manaus: Ibama, (Mimeo).
Meirelles, H. L. (1993). Direito administrativo brasileiro. 18ª ed. Atualizada por Azevedo EA, Aleixo DB, Filho JEB. Malheiros Editores, São Paulo.
Mendoça, M. I. C. (1909). Rios e águas correntes em suas relações jurídicas. Curitiba: Annibal Rocha.
Mercadante, M., Benatti, J. H., & Lima, A. (2001). Da controvérsia sobre a vigência da Resolução CONAMA N.º 4/85: implicações para a proteção das áreas de preservação permanente. In A. H. Vasconcelos, B. Meloni Sicoli, & J. C. Meloni Sicoli (Eds.), Anais do 5º Congresso Internacional de Direito Ambiental, de 4 a 7 de junho de 2001: o futuro do controle da poluição e da implementação ambiental. São Paulo: IMESP.
Moreira, A. A. N. (1977). Relevo. In Geografia do Brasil: região Norte (Vol. 1). Rio de Janeiro: IBGE.
Musetti, R. A. (2000). Bacias hidrográficas no Brasil: aspectos jurídico-ambientais. In Revista CEJ/Conselho da Justiça Federal. Centro de Estudos Judiciários nº 12, Brasília.
Octavio, R. (1924). Do domínio da União e dos Estados: segundo a Constituição Federal (2ªth ed.). São Paulo: Livraria Acadêmica: Saraiva.
Pompeu, C. T. Regime jurídico da concessão de uso das águas públicas. Revista de Direito Público 21: 160–173.
Ribeiro, J. (2003). Propriedade das águas e o registro de imóveis. In V. P. Freitas (Ed.), Águas: aspectos jurídicos e ambientais (2nd ed.). Curitiba: Juruá.
Santos, R. S. (1985). Terras de marinha. Rio de Janeiro: Forense.
Silva, F. Q. (1998). A gestão dos recursos hídricos após a Lei 9.433, de janeiro de 1997. In V. P. Freitas (Ed.), Direito ambiental em evolução. Curitiba: Juruá.
Silva, J. A. (1994). Direito ambiental constitucional. São Paulo: Malheiros.
Soares, L. C. (1977). A bacia amazônica no quadro geotectônico e hideográfico do Continente Sul-Americano. In Geografia do Brasil: região Norte (Vol. 1). Rio de Janeiro: IBGE.
Surgik, A. C. S. (2003). Estudos jurídicos para a várzea amazônica. ProVázea: MMA. Manaus: Ibama, (Mimeo).
Treccani, G. C. (2003). Identificação e análise dos diferentes tipos de apropriação da terra e suas implicações sobre o uso dos recursos naturais renováveis da várzea amazônica no imóvel rural, na área de Gurupá. Manaus: ProVázea: MMA: Ibama, (Mimeo).
Vieira, R. S. (1992). Várzeas amazônicas e a legislação brasileira. Manaus: IBAMA: INPA: Instituto Max-Planck de Limnologia: Universidade do Amazonas.
Vieira, R. S. (1999). Terras inundáveis da Amazônia interior e a legislação Ambiental. In Revista de Direito da Associação dos Procuradores do Novo Estado do Rio de Janeiro.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Benatti, J.H. (2011). Proposals, Experiences, and Advances in the Legalization of Land Tenure in the Várzea . In: Pinedo-Vasquez, M., Ruffino, M., Padoch, C., Brondízio, E. (eds) The Amazon Várzea . Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0146-5_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0146-5_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-0145-8
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-0146-5
eBook Packages: Biomedical and Life SciencesBiomedical and Life Sciences (R0)