Environmental Management

, Volume 59, Issue 3, pp 490–504

Factors Limiting Formation of Community Forestry Enterprises in the Southern Mixteca Region of Oaxaca, Mexico

  • José Antonio Hernández-Aguilar
  • Héctor Sergio Cortina-Villar
  • Luis Enrique García-Barrios
  • Miguel Ángel Castillo-Santiago
Article
  • 170 Downloads

Abstract

Many studies have considered community-based forestry enterprises to be the best option for development of rural Mexican communities with forests. While some of Mexico’s rural communities with forests receive significant economic and social benefits from having a community forestry enterprise, the majority have not formed such enterprises. The purpose of this article is to identify and describe factors limiting the formation of community forestry enterprise in rural communities with temperate forests in the Southern Mixteca region of Oaxaca, Mexico. The study involved fieldwork, surveys applied to Community Board members, and maps developed from satellite images in order to calculate the forested surface area. It was found that the majority of Southern Mixteca communities lack the natural and social conditions necessary for developing community forestry enterprise; in this region, commercial forestry is limited due to insufficient precipitation, scarcity of land or timber species, community members’ wariness of commercial timber extraction projects, ineffective local governance, lack of capital, and certain cultural beliefs. Only three of the 25 communities surveyed have a community forestry enterprise; however, several communities have developed other ways of profiting from their forests, including pine resin extraction, payment for environmental services (PES), sale of spring water, and ecotourism. We conclude that community forestry enterprise are not the only option for rural communities to generate income from their forests; in recent years a variety of forest-related economic opportunities have arisen which are less demanding of communities’ physical and social resources.

Keywords

Community forestry management Local governance Non-timber forest use Typology Conservation 

References

  1. Alatorre G (2000) La construcción de una cultura gerencial democrática en las empresas forestales comunitarias. Procuraduría Agraria, MexicoGoogle Scholar
  2. Anta S, Carabias J (2008) Consecuencias de las políticas públicas en el uso de los ecosistemas y la biodiversidad. In: Sarukhán J (ed) Capital natural de México III: Políticas públicas y perspectivas de sustentabilidad. CONABIO, Mexico, pp 87–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Antinori C, Bray D (2005) Community forest enterprises as entrepreneurial firms: economic and institutional perspectives from Mexico. World Dev 33(9):1529–1543CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Antinori C, Magaña O, Torres-Rojo J, Segura G, Bray D (2005) New interdisciplinary research on Mexico’s common property forests: a national survey. The commons in an age of global transition: challenges, risks and opportunities, the tenth conference of the international association for the study of common property, Oaxaca, Mexico, August 9–12Google Scholar
  5. Berumen M (2007) Migración y Grados de Marginación: El Caso del Estado de Oaxaca. Observatorio de la Economía Latinoamericana, 84. http://www.eumed.net/cursecon/ecolat/mx/2007/mebb-marg.htm. Accessed 12 Sept 2015
  6. Bray D (2005) Community forestry in Mexico: twenty lessons learned and four future pathways. In: Bray D, Merino L, Barry D (eds) The community forests of Mexico. managing for sustainable landscapes. The University of Texas Press, Austin, pp 335–349Google Scholar
  7. Bray D (2010) Toward ‘post-REDD+ landscapes’ Mexico’s community forest enterprises provide a proven pathway to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation. CIFOR, info brief, No. 30, November: 1–8Google Scholar
  8. Bray D, Merino-Pérez L, Barry D (2005) The community forests of Mexico. Managing for sustainable landscapes. The University of Texas Press, AustinGoogle Scholar
  9. CCMSS (Consejo Civil Mexicano para la Silvicultura Sostenible) (2015) Presupuesto forestal 2016 ¿Nuevos riesgos para los bosques? Monitoreo de políticas públicas, Informative note 43. http://www.ccmss.org.mx/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/NOTA-43-Presupuesto-y-cambios-en-Conafor-2016-1.pdf. Accessed 20 Nov 2015
  10. CONABIO (Comisión Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad) (2001) Mapa de la precipitación en México. Based on R, Vidal-Zepada (1990). Scale 1:4,000,000. http://www.conabio.gob.mx/informacion/gis/?vns=gis_root/clima/precip/preci4mgw. Accessed 10 Feb 2015
  11. CONAFOR (Comisión Nacional Forestal) (2012) Informe de Resultados 2004–2009. Inventario Nacional Forestal y de Suelos. [pdf] Available at: http://www.ccmss.org.mx/descargas/Inventario_nacional_forestal_y_de_suelos_informe_2004_-_2009_.pdf. Accessed 11 May 14
  12. Cruz L, López A (2009) Estadísticas de la población migrante oaxaqueña. Instituto Oaxaqueño de Atención al Migrante. http://www.cednna.oaxaca.gob.mx/pdf/biblioteca/migracion/mig5.pdf. Accessed 6 Sept 2015
  13. Grupo Mesófilo (2013) Oaxaca: diagnóstico del sector forestal. http://www.grupomesofilo.org/pdf/proyectos/DE/DE_diagnosticoforestal.pdf. Accessed 2 Mar 2014
  14. Hodgdon B (2009) A future with forestry: community forest enterprises offer hope for Rural Mexico. Earth Isl J 23(4):44–48Google Scholar
  15. Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía (INEGI) (2010a) Carta climática. Scale 1:1 000 000. http://www.inegi.org.mx/geo/contenidos/recnat/clima/default.aspx. Accessed 20 Aug 2014
  16. INEGI (Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía) (2010b) Carta geológica. Scale 1:1 000 000. http://www.inegi.org.mx/geo/contenidos/recnat/geologia/infoescala.aspx. Accessed 5 May 2015
  17. INEGI (Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía) (2010c) Censo de población y vivienda 2010. http://www.inegi.org.mx/est/contenidos/proyectos/ccpv/cpv2010/Default.aspx. Accessed 20 May 2015
  18. INEGI (Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía) (2015) Catastro de la propiedad social. http://www.inegi.org.mx/geo/contenidos/catastro/presentacionpropiedadsocial.aspx. Accessed 3 May 2015
  19. Jensen J (1996) Introductory digital image processing: a remote sensing perspective. Prentice Hall, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  20. Klooster D (1999) Community-based forestry in Mexico: Can it reverse processes of degradation? Land Degrad Dev 10(4):363–379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Klooster D (2000) Institutional choice, community, and struggle: a case study of forest co-management in Mexico. World Dev 28(1):1–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Klooster D, Masera O (2000) Community forest management in Mexico: carbon mitigation and biodiversity conservation through rural development. Glob Environ Chang 10:259–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Koli A (2013) Community forest management addressing social vulnerability of forest communities in Bangladesh. Int Forest Rev 15(3):336–347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Macqueen D (2008) Forest Connect: reducing poverty and deforestation through support to community forest enterprises. Int Forest Rev 10(4):670–675CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Madrid L, Núñez J, Quiroz G, Rodríguez J (2009) La propiedad social forestal en México. Investigación Ambiental 1(2):179–196Google Scholar
  26. Merino L (2004) Conservación o deterioro: El impacto de las políticas públicas en las instituciones comunitarias y en las prácticas de uso de los recursos forestales. INE-SEMARNAT, MéxicoGoogle Scholar
  27. Merino L, Ortiz G, Rodríguez J (2013) La política forestal. In: Merino L, Ortiz G (eds) Encuentros y desencuentros. Las comunidades forestales y las políticas públicas en tiempos de transición. UNAM, México, pp 101–160Google Scholar
  28. Merino L, Segura G (2007) Las políticas forestales y de conservación y sus impactos en las comunidades forestales de México. In: Bray D, Merino L, Barry D (eds) Los bosques comunitarios de México: manejo sustentable de paisajes forestales. SEMARNAT, Mexico, pp 77–95Google Scholar
  29. Navarrete F (2008) Los pueblos indígenas de México. Comisión Nacional para el Desarrollo de los Pueblos Indígenas (CDI)Google Scholar
  30. Nolberto V, Ponce M (2008) Estadística inferencial aplicada. Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos, Facultad de Educación, PerúGoogle Scholar
  31. Ostrom E (1998) Self-Governance of Common-Pool Resources. The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics and the Law, vol. III. Macmillan Press, London, pp 424–433Google Scholar
  32. Pagdee A, Kim Y, Daugherty P (2007) What makes community forest management successful : a meta-study from community forests throughout the world. Soc Nat Resour 19(1):33–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Robles H (2004) Tendencias del campo mexicano a la luz del Programa de Certificación de los Derechos Ejidales (PROCEDE). In: Léonard E, Quesnel A, Velázquez E (eds) Políticas y regulaciones agrarias: dinámicas de poder y juegos de actores en torno a la tenencia de la tierra. CIESAS-IRD, Mexico, pp 131–155Google Scholar
  34. Rogé P, Friedman AR, Astier M, Altieri MA (2014) Farmer strategies for dealing with climatic variability: a case study from the Mixteca Alta region of Oaxaca, Mexico. Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems 38(7):786–811CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rzedowsky J (1978) La vegetación de México. Comisión Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad, MexicoGoogle Scholar
  36. Schmitt J, Pokorny B, Ying L (2008) Certification of non-timber forest products in China: effects on food quality, forest conservation and rural development. Forests, Trees and Livelihoods 18(1):81–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. SEMARNAT (Secretaria de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales) (2014) Anuario estadístico de la producción nacional 2013. Dirección General de Gestión Forestal y Suelos, SEMARNAT. [pdf]. Available at: http://www.semarnat.gob.mx/sites/default/files/documentos/forestal/anuarios/anuario_2013.pdf. Accessed 11 May 2015
  38. Tomaselli MF, Hajjar R (2011) Promoting Community Forestry Enterprises in National REDD+ Strategies: A business approach. Forests 2(1):283–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Torres-Rojo JM, Moreno-Sánchez R, Mendoza-Briseño MA (2016) Sustainable forest management in Mexico. Curr For Rep 2:93–105. doi:10.1007/s40725-016-0033-0 Google Scholar
  40. UMAFOR Mixteca Sur (Unidad de Manejo Forestal Mixteca Sur) (2009) Estudio regional forestal. Comisión Nacional Forestal. http://www.cnf.gob.mx:8090/snif/seif_oaxaca/images/Estudios/ERFmixtecaSur.pdf. Accessed 15 Mar 2014
  41. Wright G, Andersson K (2012) Non-Governmental organizations, rural communities and forests: a comparative analysis of community NGO interactions. Small-scale For 12:33–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • José Antonio Hernández-Aguilar
    • 1
  • Héctor Sergio Cortina-Villar
    • 1
  • Luis Enrique García-Barrios
    • 1
  • Miguel Ángel Castillo-Santiago
    • 1
  1. 1.El Colegio de la Frontera Sur (ECOSUR)Carretera Panamericana y Periférico Sur s/n, San Cristóbal de Las CasasChiapasMexico

Personalised recommendations