1. Mexico: History of Forest Ownership and Government Regulation (news from the other West) Antonio Azuela Beijing September 2005

2. A well kept secret zIs Mexico “in the vanguard of community forest movements worldwide”? Klooster and Ambinakudige (2005, 305)

3. …or an oximoron? z80 % of Mexico’s forests are common property of peasant communities zHigh deforestation rates (500 000 hectares per year)

5. Mexico’s Biodiversity and the forest sector zMexico’s biodiversity y10% of terrestrial vertebrates in 1% of the earth’s land area y70 pine species; 130 species of oak zNot a forest world power (annual production under 1% of GDP)

6. The origins of forest common property in Mexico zXVIth Century: The Spanish conquest and its territorial settlement z1910-1980: The Mexican Revolution: land distribution [with a forest limbo]. zSince the 1980’s peasant communities take control of their forests

7. The two faces of the “Pueblos de indios” property system zIndigenous peoples were (brutally) subject to the Spanish Empire zAnd they were granted the right to own property “even if they were not Christians” (property as a human right)

8. The Great Hacienda: a major threat for the “Pueblos de indios” zIndividual landowners (and their cattle) z1521 – 1810: Indigenous communities lost part of their lands (but retained a large proportion of it)

9. 19th Century Mexican liberalism: one big mistake zThe suppression of all corporations (liberating the Church property and allowing peasants to become individual landowners) zA new opportunity for the great hacienda zA few families became owners of vast territories zZapata, Pancho Villa and the grievances that gave meaning to the Mexican Revolution.

10. Let the pueblos have their “ejidos” back zEjido: from the latin “exitus” (lands at the outskirts of a town) zA two tier agrarian reform yRestitution (or confirmation) of communal lands to the pueblos (now called comunidades) yGranting of ejidos to new peasant groups (ejidos) zThe outcome: 52% of the national territory, is owned by: y27 000 ejidos y 2 800 comunidades

11. Forests and the Program of the Mexican Revolution zLand distribution with two features: yAn agricultural bias (forests ignored) yPolitical clientelism (weak property rights) zRacial mixture (Mestizaje), a national goal zState control of strategic natural resources y1938: Nationalization of the oil industry zState centralism, a condition for social reform

12. The forestry regime (up to the 1980’s) zStrict and centralized beaurocratic control of forest activities yForest concessions, only to private companies (state owned companies, in the 70’s) yForest bans in many regions (an ‘open access’ situation) zFor peasant communities, only a stumpage fee zConservation policies on community lands (national parks as if they were public)

13. From the stumpage fee to the community control over forests zA gradual strengthening of community rights over land and its resources zGradual weakening of political dependence of communities vis-à-vis the state (transition to democracy) zFailure of state owned logging companies of the 70’s zGrowing demands of communities to obtain the full benefits of their forests

14. Other contributing factors zDecentralization policies (since 1982) zLawsuits against the renewal of forest concessions zNew forest policies, toward ‘economies of scale’ z1986, Forestry Law recognizes communities’ rights to obtain logging permits z1992 ‘neo-liberal’ reform of Agrarian Law

15. A gross balance z80 % of forests, owned by agrarian communities zCirca 8 000 forest communities in the country zHundreds (?) of communities with effective control of their forest zSince 1996, state programs supporting community forest enterprises

16. Five types of forest communities (Bray et al) zPotential producers (no forest activities) zStumpage communities zRoundwood communities zSawmill communities zFinished products communities

17. Some achievments zIn community forests, deforestation rates similar to those in natural protected areas zIn 2003, 25 certified projects (6 in average in Brazil, Guatemala, Honduras, Germany, Canada and the USA) zVertical integration: between 1986 and 1997 yIncome from stumpage decreased 50 % yIncome from sawnwood increased in 50 % (Antinori, 2000)

18. Main challenges zInternational competition zMigration zSocial conflicts yWithin communities (corruption / transparency) yBetween neighboring communities zOngoing tension between conservation and development policies zDoubts about the continuation of public policies supporting community forestry

19. Three Regulatory tensions zFederal vs state control yGrowing interest by state governments in forest regulation yThe temptation of forest bans. zCommunity control vs local government yDecentralization of two different kinds xPolitical representation vs property rights zDe/regulation vs old fashioned bureaucracies yCan we control the pendulum?

20. Out of the paradox zCommunity forestry in Mexico, a new experience (less than three decades) zBased on an age/old property system