This document summarizes a study analyzing the economic viability of community-based forest management (CBFM) plans in the Brazilian Amazon. It finds that while CBFM has large potential areas, currently only a small number of families and area are involved in CBFM. Case studies of 4 CBFM plans show they face challenges generating sufficient income from timber to be economically viable long-term due to high costs, lack of skills, and competition from illegal logging. For economic viability, policies need to invest in infrastructure, markets for CBFM timber, and diversifying income beyond timber.

1. Community-based forest management
plans in the Brazilian Amazon:
current barriers and necessary reforms
Isabel Garcia Drigo, USP/Agroparitech
Marie Gabrielle Piketty, CIRAD UMR MOISA
Wagner Pena, Emater, Para (Brazil)
Plinio Sist, CIRAD UR 105
Taking stock of smallholders and community forestry, Montpellier 24-26 April 2010

2. The Brazilian Amazon
 9 States
 5 217 420 km²
 64% of forest
 61% of Brazilian State
 20 Million habitants

3. Potential Area of CFM
1000
THOUSANDS
901
900
800
Potential areas for CFM > 46 Mha
700 Indigenous areas = 110Mha
Potential areas for concession 43 Mha
600
500 465
400
300 263 253
200 161
118 126
101 95
79 81 80
100
6 4
0
FLONAS RDS RESEX APA QUIL COLONS TOTAL
Source: Amaral and Verissimo 2007 Area MFC Source SFB 2007

4. Community Forest Management Projects
in the Brazilian Amazon
1566 initiatives of CFM and smallholders
management plans
Total area of 851,000 ha
Only 5459 families

5. First Conclusions on CFM in the Brazilian
Amazon
 Large potential area more than 45 million ha
 Still very few CFM plans
 High diversity of situations (traditional populations,
small farmers, common or individual forest land)
 Large expectations
 Large support from several entities : governmental
bodies (Promanejo program), civil society (ONGs),
foreign support….
 Increase of CFM in the Amazon (17 plans in 1990
1566 initiatives in 2006*)
* source: Serviço Florestal Brasileiro 2007

6. The many problems and the focus
 Many regulatory frameworks impose slow and costly permit
granting processes.
 Internal challenges, limited technical and business skills,
quality and scale production, and potential internal conflicts
 Long term economic viability poorly documented whereas it
is expected that forest management of legal forest reserves
(80 % of each land holding) generate a significant
additional income
► Detailed analysis of economic results of 4 CFM (2 in
Acre State – 2 in Para State)

7. The four case-studies
APRUMA CANOR PORTO DIAS VIROLA-JATOBA
States Acre Para Acre Para
Land tenure Individual Individual Concession Concession
Participants 16 6 8 24/183
Area (ha) 640 364 2.400 23.000
Annual harvested 64 74 40 500-1000
area (ha)
Harvesting CFM CFM CFM Partnership
method mechanized mechanized mechanized logging company
Benefit sharing Individual Individual Among the 8 All families
members

8. Timber Production Performance
Production
(m3/family/year)
(m3/year)
Case Study Planned Real
Pedro Peixoto 11 6
* Not all sold
Canor 174 174 *
Porto Dias 400 170
Virola-Jatoba 8.000 4.000
Main Limiting factors:
1. Lack of skill in forest inventories
2. Bad road conditions
3. Lack of time dedication from farmers
to logging

9. Production Costs: the case of Canor
High transport costs (58%)
Cost of Management Plan almost equal to all logging costs
Agregated cost value similar with others case studies in the Amazon
(50-100 US$/m3)

10. Economic results of CBFM
FAMILY NET INCOME N Comments
(US$/family/year) years
Expected Real
Pedro Peixoto 869 800 10 Only 3 families
Canor 1100-2000 < 0? 8 Only 500 m3 sold
Porto Dias 2500 2125 30 Large public
subsidies
Virola-Jatoba 1300 550 25
Main Limiting Factors
1. No market for all harvested species
2. Competition with illegal logging and authorized
deforestation
3. In the best case scenario income is only 70% of brazilian
minimum wage

11. Conclusions -Discussion
 The community-based forest management faces
huge challenges to secure long term economic
viability yet.
 The current timber prices barely manage to
secure long term economic viability
 Bad road infrastructures have a significant impact
on costs
 Administrative costs are important

12. Conclusions -Discussion
 Even if timber becomes scarce, if control is
increasing, the illegal timber market still exists.
The demand for « legal timber » is not that high
 Timber demand for specific valorized species
often requires to be able to produce high quality
round or sawn wood
 Not all the forest in the settlement are really that
rich….(economically speaking)
 CBFM economic returns from timber are not
currently sufficient to sustain alone a family

13. Discussion for future policies and research
 Invest in new forms of local governance of forest
resources
 Realize a full assessment of timber potential of
legal reserves in the Amazon
 Improve secondary road infrastructures
 Invest in R&D to support the implementation of
sustainable cattle ranching and agricultural
activities in the limited area allowed to be
deforested
 Secure public markets (minimum prices ?) for
timber from CBFM
 Decrease administrative costs