Skip to main content
Log in

Harvesting impact and economic value ofGeonoma deversa, arecaceae, an understory palm used for roof Thatching in the Peruvian Amazon

Evaluación del impacto de la cosecha y valor económico de geonoma deversa (Poiteau) kunth, una palmera del sotobosque usada para fabricar techos en la amazonia peruana

  • Research
  • Published:
Economic Botany Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We evaluated the impact of two leaf harvesting methods on the clonal understory palm Geonoma deversa. In the first method only the leaves are cut, in the second the complete crown is severed. Stands representative for each method are compared with unharvested stands. Both methods of harvesting reduce clone size and reproductive output (inflorescence and infructescence per clone), and lower the number of ramets available for the next harvest. Cutting only the leaves represents a better method of harvest because of a lower impact on the residual stock. Economic analysis reveals that the value of this resource (standing leaf value) is low (2 to 26 U.S. $/ha) compared with labor costs that can be between 55 to 86% of palm thatch revenues. Harvesting Geonoma leaves generates a net present value (NPV) that ranges from 3 to 191 U.S. $/ha depending on the stand location, the wage, and the interest rate employed for the calculation.

Resumen

Se evaluó el impacto de dos metodos para cosechar hojas de Geonoma deversa. El primer método consiste en la corta de las hojas mientras que en el segundo, se corta la copa antes de la remoción de las hojas. Se compara rodales representativos de coda metodo de corta con rodales no cosechados. Los resultados muestran que la cosecha reduce el tamaño de los clones, la producción de inflorecencias e infructecencias pero afecta sobre todo las ramas aptas para la cosecha. El método de cortar sólo las hojas es más ventajoso porque afecta menos las ramas cosechables por clon. La evaluatión económica muestra que el valor del recurso en el bosque (valor de ho ja en pie) es relativamente bajo (2 a 26 U.S.$/ha), comparado con el costo de la mano de obra necesaria para esta actividad. La mano de obra representa entre 55 y 86 por ciento de los ingresos brutos por la venta de paños tejidos. La cosecha de hojas genera un valor presente neto (VPN) que varia entre 3 y 191 U.S. $/ha, lo cual depende de la localizatión del rodai, el valor del jornal y la tasa de interés empleada.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Literature Cited

  • Allegretti, M. H. 1990. Extractives reserves: an alternative for reconciling development and environmental conservation in Amazonia. Pages 252–264in A.B. Anderson, ed., Alternatives to deforestation: steps toward sustainable use of the Amazonian rain forest. Columbia University Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brokaw, N. V. L. 1992. Treefalls: frequency, timing and consequences. Pages 101–108in E.G. Leigh Jr., A.S. Rand, and D.M. Windsor, eds., The ecology of a neotropical forest: seasonal rhythms and longer-term changes. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Browder, J. 1992. The limits of extractivism. BioScience 42:174–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chazdon, R. L. 1986. Light variation and carbon gain in rain forest understory palms. Journal of Ecology 74:995–1012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • —. 1991. Effects of leaf and ramet removal on growth and reproduction ofGeonoma congesta, a clonal understorey palm. Journal of Ecology 79:1137–1146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • —. 1992. Patterns of growth and reproduction ofGeonoma congesta, a clustered understory palm. Biotropica 24:43–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • —, and N. Fetcher. 1984. Photosynthetic light environments in a lowland tropical rainf orest in Costa Rica. Journal of Ecology 72:553–554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • FADEMAD (Federacion Agraria Departamental de Madre de Dios). 1995. Proyecto de clasificación participatoria de uso mayor de la tierra y desarrollo sostenible en áreas de influencia humana de la ZRTC. Informe final a USAID. Fademad, Puerto Maldonado.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fearnside, P. 1989. Extractive reserves in Brazilian Amazonia. BioScience 39:387–393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foster, R. B. 1987. Checklist plantas del parque Manu (Unpublished). Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago. 28 p.

    Google Scholar 

  • Godoy, R., R. Lubowski, and A. Markandya. 1993. A method for the economic valuation of non-timber tropical products. Economic Botany 47:220–233.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartshorn, G. S. 1978. Treefalls and tropical forest dynamics. Pages 617–638in P. B. Tomlinson and H. M. Zimmermann, eds., Tropical trees as living systems. Cambridge Univ. Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henderson, A. 1995. The palms of the Amazon. Oxford University Press, New York, USA. 362 p.

    Google Scholar 

  • INEI (Peru, Instituto Nacional de Estadistica e Informatica). 1994. Perfil sociodemografico departamento de Madre de Dios. Coleccion analisis censal No. 17. INEI, Lima.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanh, F., and J. J. De Granville. 1992. Palms in forest ecosystems of amazonia. Springer-Verlag, New York, USA. 226 p.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lopez Parodi, J. 1986. The use of palms and other natives plants in non-conventional low cost rural housing in the Peruvian Amazon. Pages 119–129in M.J. Balick, ed., The palm: tree of life, biology, utilization and conservation Advances in Economic Botany 6.

  • Malleux, J. 1975. Mapa forestal del Peru (memoria explicativa). Universidad Nacional Agraria La Molina. Lima. 161 p.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nepstad, D., I. Brown, L. Leda, A. Alechandre, and V. Viana. 1992. Biotic impoverishment of Amazonian forest by rubber tappers, loggers, and cattle ranchers. Advances in Economic Botany 9:1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • ONERN (Oficina Nacional de Evaluacion de Recursos Naturales, Peru). 1972. Inventario, evaluación e integratión de los recursos naturales de la zona de los ríos Inambari y Madre de Dios. ONERN, Lima. 296 p.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pendelton, L. H. 1992. Trouble in paradise: practical obstacles to nontimber forestry in Latin America. Pages 252–262in M. Plotkin and L. Famolare, eds., Sustainable harvest and marketing of rain forest products. Island Press, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rioja, G. 1992. The jatata project the pilot experience of chimane empowerment. Pages 192–196in M. Plotkin and L. Famolare, eds., Sustainable harvest and marketing of rain forest products. Island Press, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salafsky, N., B. Dugelby, and J. Terborgh. 1993. Can extractive reserves save the rain forest?: an ecological and socioeconomic comparison of non timber forest product extraction systems in Peten, Guatemala, and West Kalimantan, Indonesia. Conservation Biology 7:39–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartzman, S. 1989. Extractives reserves: the rubber tappers’ strategy for sustainable use of the Amazon rain forest. Pages 150–165in J. O. Browder, ed., Fragile lands of Latin America: strategies for sustainable development. Westview Press, CO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wessels, B. J. G. 1968. The geonomoid palms. Verhandelingen der Koninklijke nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen. Afd. Natuurkunde. Tweede Reeks 58:1–202.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Flores, C.F., Ashton, P.M.S. Harvesting impact and economic value ofGeonoma deversa, arecaceae, an understory palm used for roof Thatching in the Peruvian Amazon. Econ Bot 54, 267–277 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02864781

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02864781

Key Words

Navigation