HOUSEHOLD LIFECYCLE AND THE ENVIRONMENT OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES IN THE - - PDF document

1

HOUSEHOLD LIFECYCLE AND THE ENVIRONMENT OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES IN THE ECUADORIAN AMAZON Victoria Salinas Castro.a Doctor student in the University Federal of Minas Gerais, CEDEPLAR, Belo Horizonte, Brazil. victoriasalinas@yahoo.com Richard Bilsborrow. Carolina Population Center, University of North Carolina richard_bilsborrow@unc.edu Abstract Indigenous populations are among the least studied demographically, and even less their relationships with the environment, though their territories contain up to 80% of the planet's

• biodiversity. This study aims to understand the dynamics of the life cycle of indigenous

households and its relationships with the use of natural resources and environmental impacts, mediated by a number of variables including access to markets. The study will be longitudinal, utilizing data from two surveys conducted on the same indigenous households in 2001 and 2012 in the Ecuadorian Amazon. The exogenous factors that may have encouraged deforestation and increased land use for agricultural activities for sale increased significantly in this first decade. However, deforestation increased by 50% per household, from 4 ha per household this rose to 6 ha. The type of household that presents the significant changes are the households that have children over 18 (type 6), in 2001 this showed the lowest land use, and the lowest participation in agricultural activities, but for 2012, it is which shows the motivations of factors exogenous to these populations and specifically to those in the economically active age. The results also shed light on the extent to which these indigenous populations in the rainforest context are managing their production and reproduction dynamics consistent with conservation of resources.

a Scholarship holder of FAPEMIG

INTRODUCTION In the world, there are about 300 million people generally recognized as indigenous. Although they represent only about 4% of the world's population, they constitute about 10% of the poor, and inhabit lands that have almost 80% of the planet's biodiversity. However, they own less than 11% of this land. Indigenous peoples are one of the least demographically studied populations, and, although a small part of the world population,

2

their social, political and economic characteristics as well as their unique, diverse and rich cultures make it important to better understand their demographic behavior, relationships with the use of natural resources, and impacts on the special environments in which they live. For this we examine the life cycles of indigenous households (HH) in the Ecuadorian Amazon and how they affect the use of land and therefore the natural environment. This is especially important in the case of the Ecuadorian Amazon study area, first, because of its extraordinary biological diversity, described as a "hot spot" (Bass et al., 2012: Finer et al., 2009); and second, because the region is threatened by exploitation of oil companies and the invasion of migrant settlers, mostly from the Sierra or Ecuadorian highlands (Bilsborrow et al., 2004). In addition, in recent decades, as mortality has declined significantly while fertility has declined little and remained very high (total fertility rate of 7 births per woman in 2012: see Davis et al., 2016), rapid population growth is also adding to pressure on natural resources. The different stages of the household life cycle are characterized by different sizes and composition of the household by age and sex (manifested in different dependency ratios), which have consequences for both consumption needs and the availability of labor. As these populations live in rural areas, they are economically dependent on the natural

• environment. Thus, the demographic dynamics of households may affect the local

environment via changing dependence on natural resources. However, this is not to mention that indigenous populations have limited capacity to influence the exogenous forces acting

• n them and their territories.

This paper aims to analyze the life cycle of indigenous households and its relationship with access to and use of land and the changes that have occurred over time in the first decade of the twenty-first century. Another objective is to develop a methodology for categorizing the stages of the life cycle in relation to the size and composition of the indigenous household, especially by age as manifested in varying dependency rates.

Theoretical approach

This document was intended to emancipate within a more complete and dynamic view of the study subjects in order to really understand population and environment. As some authors have pointed out, this is not a static concept, it depends on the scale, interests and even the political and ideological approach that can make invisible structuring elements and determinants of the phenomenon that is intended to study. Therefore the concept of environment will not have a definition, look or unique elements of analysis. Lutz et al. (2002) allows us to understand this assertion with what he calls a static picture can not do justice to the dynamic interactions between population and environment. To understand the real dimension that Lutz et al. (2002) places with its article and proposal for analysis, it is

3

necessary to refer to a conceptual chart developed by Barbieri (2016), where the environment can not be seen as a separate quadrant of the population, but these are in continuous relationships, and which are mediated by factors that have to be analyzed to understand the phenomenon of study, therefore these elements give rise to conforming an environment, and this is the one that must be analyzed, see chart 1.

• Fig. 1 Relationship between population and environment.

AMBIENTE Population

• Increase
• Mortality
• Fertility
• Migration

Mediators

• Culture
• Institutions
• Technology
• Etc.

Environment

• Water
• Air
• Forest
• Etc.

Source: Graph of the Concept of Environment and Population developed by Barbieri 2016.

Lambin et al. (2001), also allows us to understand this complexity, because these authors put elements that are understood when studying the situation of the environment and relations with populations, and not these as the causes of deforestation or negative impacts, for they come out of unique proposals and do not remain in the very simple eyes - cause and direct consequence between the investigated actor and the environmental theme -, but also it is necessary to go beyond the "popular myths" (eg, poverty leads to the degradation by the greater use of the soil and greater deforestation). And as the authors indicate, this can be assumed as unique real truths because of the validity that has been made with multiple studies. One of the elements that also analyze these authors, is the globalization, in order to make connections between the local, regional and global. Not only as demanding markets, but also as social, political, cultural, economic and demographic elements, where each of these influences changes land use and coverage. This allows, as noted above, to leave the simplicity and guilt of population growth to generate negative impacts. In the same way that the simple answers that make the studies in which the elements of the policies, the

• pportunities and the restrictions that are behind them are not analyzed.

Within this comprehensive theoretical postulate this document involved micro- demographic dynamics, seeking to understand the incentives for production and reproduction at the household level, recognizing that households are key players in the use

• f natural resources and environmental impacts, particularly in the Amazon jungle. More

specifically, a main theoretical approach that will be used is the Chayanovian framework (see Marquette, 1998) and what is intended with this framework is not necessarily validate its theory, in which both consumption (eg food) production (eg, land use, perhaps involving further deforestation) in household changes with household life cycles, and household formation, child growth, and ultimately parenting and migration of the children to form their own homes within the dwelling / parental grounds. But to properly investigate the

4

Chayanovian impacts, it must be recognized that both internal and external factors are affecting so that land use can change over time, requiring the use of the framework outlined by Barbieri (2017). Thus, it should be recognized that a number of other factors can change

• ver time and affect the various interrelated dependent variables (land use and other

livelihood behaviors), including improvements in access to cities and markets due to additional roads or road paving during 2001-2012, changes in the presence of oil companies

• r government development projects in or near the community, and the receipt by the

household of migrant remittances or of the government that is the development bond human. Definitions Household Life Cycle Understanding the dynamics between the environment and the population has generally been treated as a problem linked to the individual (per capita) and not to the home, before this several authors have been developing their work taking into account the home as a unit

• f analysis (Curran , 2004; O'Neill, MacKeller and Lutz, 2001). This is because

consumption, per capita resource use is a unit of analysis that does not allow to measure the real variations within the populations and that are influenced by the demographic characteristics that can be captured through the analysis of the home. Thus, demographic recognition is also the recognition that households are dynamic and have "life cycles", and act as an economic and social unit that will respond to different levels of consumption and, therefore, will give greater elements of analysis, than a generalization of the population through a single definition as a person. For this study to identify the home life cycle involves identifying the demographic characteristics that provide households to participate in different forms of land use and environmental resources, these will be called the micro level. The micro level provides the valuable service of differentiation between groups within populations in order to better understand the issues of how the type of use of environmental resources and their levels of impact is, but will also allow to identify the level responsibility for environmental degradation and why? Barbier (1997) makes an economic analysis to

• btain the determinants of land degradation that is made by poor populations, especially in

developing countries, because of the increase in their degradation and the expansion of agricultural activity in primary forests, because they have limited access to capital as well as alternative economic opportunities. One of the most important elements that ends up analyzing Barbier (1997) is the role of politics and how these give rise to the land being "open", that is to say of easier access (and also cheap) and, therefore, for deforestation and degradation that is generally connected to monetary resources for rural households. Another author who works with land degradation

5

and the household life cycle is Pertz (2002), who to justify their approach indicates that they allow to make the differences of who is responsible for the environmental degradation, but in a more important yet, the why? As he himself indicates his proposal part of a central postulate, which is the "location" of the domicile in its life cycle, and this is a determining factor of land use and change of coverage. This localization refers to a set of demographic characteristics of a domestic group that includes the age of the members individually, their composition by collective age and the time spent in their current residence (Pertz, 2001: 160). It is well established that Pertz is part of the Chayanovian theory, he argues that other elements are also highlighted to understand the dynamics between the life cycle of the home and the use and coverage of the land. These include migration, residence time of settlers, presence of agricultural markets and credits, opening of labor markets, diversification and specification of agricultural products, changes in land use, livestock rearing and reforestation. Pertz (2001) mentions these new elements, but we also consider that it is necessary to argue that these determinants are mediated by other realities and dynamics such as social, cultural, economic, and even population type, as in Ecuador, that are the colonists and the indigenous people and that their answers will be very varied in spite of sharing the same environments. Pertz adopts as the theoretical adaptations made by Walker and Homma (1996) to the Chayanovian approach to construct his model of analysis. The authors make distinctions between activities such as land use and how each requires capital and labor. Also as the distinctions between land uses that provide a means to link the demographic characteristics

• f households with the results of land cover. In this way, the demographic composition of

households - which is a micro level - and their changes in these variables lead to the use of land and environmental resources in different ways throughout the life cycle of the household. So the central argument here is that the "location" of a home in its life cycle is an important determinant of land use and change of cover (McCracken et al., 1999; Marquette 1998; Walker & Homma 1996) . By "location" of the life cycle of a household we refer to a set of demographic characteristics of a household group that includes the age of the individual members, their composition by age, and the levels of dependency. Households that differ in terms of these demographic characteristics occupy different locations along a similar domestic life cycle trajectory. Indigenous household. It is considered indigenous household based on the concepts developed in the survey, which are the members who are living in the domicile surveyed and that may be composed of one or more households and not relatives. The creation of each category responds to the composition of the age of the children of heads of household and their distinction with respect to the level of education that is determined by the age of

6

• fficial form and not by the information given by the survey. In cases where extended

households are found (11% in 2001 and 17% in total in 2012), these were included in each type of household that corresponded. It was not possible to create categories only for extended homes and to know their dynamics under this type of household type, because to proceed to carry out the categorization there were very few cases, for the year 2001 a single extended household case was presented that would be located in household type 4, so this would not be representative for analysis. The categories of the constructed type of household are mutually exclusive, i.e. if the household is in type 1 because it has children from zero to six years, it no longer enters the category of type 2 where children have zero to 17 years of age, nor this type of household 2 will be within the type 1 or another type of category and thus for the rest of categories.

Table 1. Household type Household type Classification of type as function of age of children in household Explanation* 1 0 to 6 years Household only has pre-school age children 2 0 to 17 years Household has both pre-school and school-age children 3 0 to 18 or more years Household has children in all three age groups 4 7 to 17 years Household has only school-age children 5 From 7 years and up Household has school-age children and adult children 6 From 18 years and up Household has only adult children 7 Newly formed family Household does not (yet) have children 8 Children have left household Household had children but all have left * Note that the categories are mutually exclusive

HYPOTHESIS Population growth and poverty linked indigenous populations do not lead to further

• deforestation. There is a simplified approach to deforestation, which is that it is associated

with population and poverty, and that the cause of land use change is due to population growth and, above all, to those linked to the sectors poorer. This hypothesis starts with what Lambin (2001) evidences with respect to popular myths, which these are presented as simplifications of cause and consequence. Although it is not intended to deny that there is a relationship between population growth and poverty, these are not necessarily the main causes of deforestation (Anderson, 1996, Barraclough and Ghimire, 1996). So, population growth is not necessarily the only and not the main cause of changes in land use and deforestation (Geist and Lambin, 2001). Given this, it is necessary to recognize that

7

deforestation can be driven by other social, political and infrastructure changes (Hecht, 1985). Exogenous factors are what can be the determinants for the modification of their use and deforestation of their lands. The changes that are going to be presented will be linked to exogenous factors that can not be controlled by indigenous populations, but that will have an impact on the use of environmental resources. These exogenous factors such as immigration triggered by government decisions through the Agrarian Reform of 1964 that

• pened the Amazon border by means of land possession and deforestation for legal

possession by this population colonized; implementation of oil and logging extractive industries (although these latter non-formal) and new forms of extensive land use through the African palm. These elements that have been presented in synergistic ways have given rise to the development of infrastructure and other services, i.e. roads, electricity, health services but basically have consolidated the new forms of occupation and therefore the new creation of forms of settlement, such as urbanization and the creation of markets. Under these two hypotheses was intended to understand the situation of indigenous populations but linked to an element that seeks to be even more clarifying to understand this situation, which was the life cycle of the home of these populations. DATA AND RESEARCH METHODS The data to be used in this research will be from two household surveys conducted by the University of North Carolina in collaboration with two prestigious research centers in Quito, Ecuador, the EcoCiencia Foundation and the Center for Population and Social Development Studies (CEPAR) ). These data are longitudinal, covering the same households and communities in 2001 and 2012, including new homes derived in 2012 from the original households and individuals of 2001 (less than 10% of those who emigrated from communities or died in 2001). These surveys covered the five main indigenous ethnic groups in the northern Amazonian provinces of Sucumbíos and Orellana: the ethnic groups are Kichwa, Shuar, Waorani, Cofán and Secoya, in order of population size (see the map 1). Communities were selected to represent not only the five ethnic groups, but also a diversity of population sizes and locations with respect to roads, rivers and access to cities and markets. Within each sample community, households were selected using random sampling. In total, there are 476 households with complete data for 2001 and 599 for 2012, including new derived households that were formed after 2001. The household survey included two questionnaires, one for the head of the household and one for the household. spouse of the

• boss. Male interviewers administered the questionnaire to the head of household (usually

male) and the female interviewer to the head of household spouse, each interview lasting approximately one hour.

8

Map 1. Amazonian indigenous populations of this study.

Source: Surveys UNC –CEPAR, 2001 and 2012

RESULTS Description of study population. The construction of household categories as argued above attempts to make the recognition of the demographic composition of the indigenous study

• population. As can be seen in figure 2. From 2001 to 2012 there is a shift to the right of the

curve with respect to the level of household composition, this may be due in part to the fact that fertility is decreasing in this population (Salinas and Bilsborrow, 2016), also an aging population and such inconsistencies that occur in household type codes 4 and 5 may be by the type of sample, because it is very small, but could also be considered to be by migration processes, because as can be seen in their description, these types of domicile correspond to the ages of adolescents and young adults.

9

Source: Surveys UNC –CEPAR, 2001 and 2012.

Following with the description of this population according to the categories created another element to take into account is the level of schooling of the head home. The creation of levels of education responds to a standardization to be able to look more clearly the educational dynamics. The none level also includes those who have not completed primary education; the full primary level contains those who completed primary education and those who did not finish high school.

Source: Surveys UNC –CEPAR, 2001 and 2012.

Figure 3a shows that by 2001 almost all types of households contain a high percentage of heads of households with no education or only the primary has finished, only the household

• f code 7 that corresponds to newly formed households and who do not have children who

have the lowest percentage of heads of household without any education and the highest percentage in having completed secondary education. This type of household is followed by one, and it may be linked to that it also corresponds to a young cohort, reason why they can have acceded to the formal education, since a 70% has completed the primary. For 2012, figure 3b indicates a mixed trend with respect to the education of the head of

5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 %

• Fig. 2: Distribution of the Household type by code Amazonian

indigenous populations, 2001 and 2012. 2001 Relative participation by HH type 2012 Relative participation by HH type

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 %

• Fig. 3a: Level of education of head by household

type Amazonian indigenous populations year 2001.

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

%

• Fig. 3b: Level of education of head by household type

Amazonian indigenous populations year 2012 University Technological Full secundary Full primary None

10

household, but these variations are due to the greater access to the educational system, surpassing the complete primary phase that was presented for 2001. The type of household 1, which corresponds to those who have children between 0 and 6 years, has increased their percentage of having completed high school but also of being in college, which is presented for almost all types of household, except for type of household 8, which corresponds to people over 65 years. The type of household that presents the most significant changes are the 7, where although its percentage of any type of formal education decreased, increased its participation in university education. Table 2 shows the average age of the head of household and the spouse of the head of household, as well as the number of dependents, depending on the type of housing that has been constructed.

• Table2. Household (HH) composition of indigenous Amazonian study populations, 2001 and 2012.

HH Codes Year 2001 Year 2012 Head of HH age Age Wife Average HH People Dependents Head of HH age Age Wife Average HH People Dependents 1 27,9 23,3 4 2 27,7 22,7 4 2 2 37,0 32,9 7 5 35,4 31,0 7 4 3 45,7 40,9 9 3 48,7 45,2 11 4 4 45,3 44,7 4 2 42,8 38,5 6 2 5 49,9 48,0 7 3 56,7 50,2 9 2 6 54,3 48,8 4 1 57,5 57,5 4 1 7 27,8 19,5 2 25,9 21,5 2 8 63,2 62,0 2 72,3 63,0 2 Source: Surveys UNC-CEPAR, 2001 and 2012.

For the two years of study the type of household with the highest average number of people is the number 3, so this one also has the highest average number of dependents, which corresponds to households that have children that are found since 0 years of age. age up to 18 years and that under a logic of consumption would imply a greater demand for monetary and non-monetary resources. High dependency is a situation that is very common in this type of population, since they have high fertility rates, it was found that the overall rate of marital fertility was 10.6 in 2001 and fell to 9.3 in the 2012 (Salinas and Bilsborrow, 2016). This type of household is followed by type 2, which again corresponds to households are linked to high fertility rates. A third important group with high average household members and number of dependents is type 5, which again may be linked by a fertility issue, but that is diminished because the older children have already started to form their new homes. Use of land The Amazonian indigenous populations studied in this document almost all found land tenure through communal forms, only one of the 32 communities maintained their land as private property in 2001, but by 2012 they returned to the possession of communal lands. For the two years of study, the Kichwa ethnic group maintained communal land ownership, but already within the commune, there was a division of generally 50 ha for each household

11

in the commune, if a new home conformed, the community leaders proceeded to deliver land to this home (generally 50 ha or less if the commune did not have large territories). This same logic was maintained by the Shuar. The Cofanes, Secoyas and Waorani, who also owned the land in a communal way, and within them they proceeded to use according to their needs without a delivery of a specific number of hectares, but it was done under communal rules, in one of the communities of the Cofanes there were areas where no use could be made, neither for crops nor for activities such as hunting or gathering. It is also noted that for this study were considered the most important crops of these populations, such as coffee, cocoa and subsistence products, this last category contains cassava, sweet potato, Chinese potatoes as well as fruits. With this introduction we will proceed to analyze the land use for agriculture and the changes that have occurred in the two years of study, but above all to recognize if there is a greater deforestation in the area and the role of exogenous factors for these changes. The use of land for agricultural activities and the identification of exogenous factors for their greater use As mentioned in previous paragraphs, it was justified that the greater use of land for agriculture may be due to exogenous factors that give rise to greater possibilities of land use for access to monetary resources. These exogenous factors may include opening up roads, extractive activities (oil), greater access to populated centers and urban areas, greater contact with mestizo populations and greater demands for goods and services that are not necessarily given by the State. This paper will be analyzed in terms of the changes in the products they planted in the two years of study and their possible relationships with the household life cycle established by the types of developed households. It should be noted that in these populations would correspond to greater or less deforestation of primary forest for access to land, because all live in areas of this type of

• forest. Figure 4 gives an account of the situation that occurred in 2001 and 2012. Of the

eight types of households for 2012 three have presented a decline in land use compared to

• 2001. These are the one, the four and eight, almost one ha in each case. This situation may

have been presented in 2012 for the type of household1 because it may have had a greater link with labor activities outside the community or within it as well, because of the income from oil extractive activities, this could be raised given that the average age of the head of household for 2012 was 28 years. For the type of household four that also reduced its area

• f agriculture could be indicated that this type of household already for the year 2001 had

the greater number of hectares that used for agricultural activities, reason why perhaps for the 2012 one prioritized the products that was to sow as will be seen later and also must be added that these populations leave the land for rest. With regard to household type eight, which corresponds to persons over 65 years of age living alone, this reduction may have

12

arisen because these populations are already beginning to age, and their strength to work more land.

Source: Surveys UNC –CEPAR, 2001 and 2012.

Following figure 4 on the types of households that have increased land use for agriculture, the ones with the highest increases are the type of household six that of three has in 2001 increased to a little more than eight, that almost triplicate its use. This type of household of six is made up of people over the age of 18, which may be linked to having people who can help with deforestation and greater access to land for planting products. This may be due to the fact that new road openings, the presence of oil activities, easier access to the populated centers as well as the urban areas created more incentives for the planting of products for

• sale. which by 2001 was among the types of home that it has had the least, but is the one

that rises most for 2012. This trend of increasing land use is followed by type 7, which is newly formed families, because they doubled the use of land, although they are the ones that registered the least hectares for 2001. Given this again it can be argued that they are the exogenous incentives that lead to a greater increase in land use and especially with greater force given that they are the ones that are forming their home and access to new services among them in the electric light, because for 2001 only 27 % of these populations had it while for 2012 it rose to 78% (Salinas and Bilsborrow, 2017), which prompts demands for greater access to monetary resources for the purchase of goods and payment for these services. The type of household three also presents a significant increase in the use of land, this type corresponds to the households that have children from the 0 years to the 18 or more and as argued they are populations of high fecundity, therefore its growth of the land use may have been the same for access to monetary resources facilitated by exogenous factors, but the justification for this increase is that this type of household has the children who are in the study phase and also with children who are an important support in agricultural work.

0,0 1,0 2,0 3,0 4,0 5,0 6,0 7,0 8,0 9,0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Ha

• Fig. 4: Main land use for agriculture by HH type of Amazonian

indigenous populations, 2001 and 2012. 2001 Average land use by HH type 2012 Average land use by HH type

13

One of the most important crops of the Amazon region and Ecuador itself, was coffee and is still one of the most important commercial products but not with the relevance of the past

• decades. For the first year of study, 2001 cocoa was not a major commercial product,

becoming important already for the following years, as well as in 2012. With regard to the types of households whose land was used for coffee in 2001, there was a fairly uniform trend for almost all types except type seven, and this may have been because they were newly formed families that its increase could grow over time. However, by 2012 all types of households rose to 100% to have coffee within their crops, as shown in figure 5.

Source: Surveys UNC –CEPAR, 2001 and 2012

Knowing this significant change was proceeded to identify in which percentage had increased the land use destined for the sowing of the coffee, this by type of home. Figure 6 shows that, although a relationship between greater land use and its destination would not necessarily be established for the increase of coffee sowing, this is the case with the exception of type 6, which corresponds to those have people over 18 years of age and may be linked to a higher labor force to work, through deforestation and maintenance of this

• crop. Household rates five, seven and eight that also show an increase, this is not as

significant as type 6. The increase in household type five may be related to a greater demand for monetary resources because they have relatives who are attending to the formal education and that can be for the greater coverage and access mainly to the secondary, for the creation of roads and the entrance of rancheras.1

1 Typical car of these zones that in the bottom people go but in the part of above of the truck can be placed

the products that are taken for sale.

0,0 10,0 20,0 30,0 40,0 50,0 60,0 70,0 80,0 90,0 100,0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

% HH

• Fig. 5: Proportion of Amazonian indigenous HH growing coffee by

HH type, 2001 and 2012. 2001 Average of HH type with land use for coffee 2012 Average of HH type with land use for coffee

14

Source: Surveys UNC –CEPAR, 2001 and 2012.

Regarding that 100% of all types of household increased in the sowing of coffee, as argued may be linked by the facilities that were presented to be able to proceed to sell this product, however despite this hypothesis, table 3 indicates that there was a reduction in the sale of this product for 2012. Analyzing this situation more closely, by the end of the last century the production and sale of coffee was on the rise, a process in which the Amazon region participated, including indigenous populations and colonists. But by the beginning of the 21st century, coffee is experiencing one of the worst crises without precedent characterized by the weakening of external demand. Therefore, one might surmise that these indigenous populations continued to sow in the hope that prices will rise again, hence their sowing has not fallen. This is expressed in that it continues its sale in 2012 and that has a significant increase in profit, for almost all types of household is doubled, which is relative because these reported earnings are those achieved in the last 12 months, but nonetheless remains important, as they have no other source of financial resources. To conclude this section of the coffee, it is indicated that almost all household types fell to less than half of the households that sold in 2001 (see table 3), the only one that presents the exception is type seven, which are the newly formed households that may respond to the use of land left or lent by their parents until they manage to build their own farm and type eight because they are over 65 people who can continue to maintain their land use patterns.

0,0 0,5 1,0 1,5 2,0 2,5 3,0 3,5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Ha

• Fig. 6: Mean land area in coffee by HH type Amazonian indigenous

populations, 2001 and 2012. 2001 Average ha with coffee by HH type 2012 Average ha with coffee by HH type

15

Table 3. Mean percent of HH type that sold coffee, cocoa, subsistence crops and cattle and main gain in previous year Amazonian indigenous populations, 2001 and 2012. HH type Sell coffee % Means sells $ Sell subsistence crops% Means sells $ 2001 2012 2001 2012 2001 2012 2001 2012 1 43,4 15,3 69,8 156,2 49,6 33,1 140,7 302,0 2 46,9 18,1 122,5 342,4 57,6 32,7 97,0 462,7 3 38,5 23,6 125,0 299,0 53,1 44,9 165,3 353,0 4 58,6 20,0 96,1 220,0 48,3 53,3 105,0 404,6 5 42,1 19,5 204,0 357,5 42,1 36,6 157,9 445,1 6 40,0 22,2 85,7 123,0 60,0 55,6 125,1 426,1 7 7,7 25,0 120,0 252,3 38,5 25,0 193,0 596,0 8 28,6 37,5 103,8 42,3 35,7 37,5 112,4 238,3 Continue table 3. HH type Sell Cattle % Means sells $ Sell cocoa* % Means sells $ 2001 2012 2001 2012 2012 2012 1 9,7 8,5 318,2 369,0 26,3 230,0 2 12,4 5,8 599,4 366,0 46,8 384,6 3 9,4 4,6 278,1 461,9 54,6 481,2 4 6,9 13,3 1240,0 525,0 46,7 575,9 5 0,0 17,1 0,0 421,4 51,2 281,4 6 13,3 22,2 166,0 137,5 55,6 181,5 7 15,4 8,3 0,0 250,0 33,3 230,5 8 14,3 12,5 430,0 0,0 37,5 228,3 Source: Surveys UNC –CEPAR, 2001 and 2012. * In 2001 the question of whether they sold cocoa was not implemented, because this activity was almost not carried out in the region.

Cocoa is another important product of the Amazon, but by the year 2001 its sale was not required in this region, however, by the middle of the first decade of this century, its demand began in an important way, not only at the level of this region, but also national. Figure 7 shows the significant changes that occur with respect to their sowing. For the year 2001 the tendency to its planting is not very high only the type of household 4 and 5 get to have 20% of households that are planting this product, the rest could indicate that they did it for household consumption. However, for the year 2012 the situation changes

• significantly. The type of home that presents the biggest change is six, because in 2001,

there were no households that planted this product, but by 2012 rose to just over 40% of households, this type of household corresponds to the which has people over 18 years of age, so there is a labor force that allows the respective deforestation and maintain crops and access to resources quickly. It is followed by the type of household seven, which are the newly formed households and that again we can argue that their greater planting may be linked to that they need more resources for the purchase of goods and services, so that through cocoa can be accessed monetary resources continuously throughout the year and also because they have no children and can devote more time to this type of crop. The type

• f household three presents in the same way a tendency of significant increase in the

sowing of the cocoa and that can be bound by its need of monetary resources, since its

16

children are attending to primary and secondary education, as well as the demand of goods and services for this type of population (children between zero and more than 18 years old).

Source: Surveys UNC –CEPAR, 2001 and 2012.

Regarding the increase in the use of soil for the sowing of the cocoa we can see that an increase was presented for almost all the types of household, except for the eight that corresponds to the people older than 65 years living alone and that as already mentioned can be because they maintain their same patterns of land use. The types of households that presented the most significant increase in 2012 are type six and seven (see chart 8). We could continue with the same argument of the previous paragraph for type 6, since its composition of the household corresponds to people older than 18 years, which implies that more deforestation could have been done for the sowing of the cocoa, argument that we could also to indicate that it is valid for the other types of households, but that it becomes more evident for this type of household (6), so that through the sowing of cocoa it could be accessing monetary resources continuously, and on all when mobilized to the populated centers and this would be verified, since 86% of all the sales that are made of the cocoa is made to the buyers of the populated centers, that is to say that they had to be mobilized to those zones to proceed to its sale (this is for all types of household) and 13% sold it to an intermediary on the way, barely 1% sold to an intermediary in their community.

0,0 5,0 10,0 15,0 20,0 25,0 30,0 35,0 40,0 45,0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

% HH

• Fig. 7: Mean of HH type with cocoa Amazonian indigenous

populations, 2001 and 2012. 2001 Average of HH type with land use for cocoa 2012 Average of HH type with land use for cocoa

17

Source: Surveys UNC –CEPAR, 2001 and 2012.

Another element worked in this document corresponds to the use of land for pasture. Figure 9 indicates that the percentage by household type for the two years of study almost maintained the same pattern, except for type of household 4, that had a significant reduction

• f its soil that was destined for grass. The only types of homes that increase are three and
• seven. We could argue for type three, an increase may have been raised because some

compensation projects for the entry of oil companies near or within their communities involved livestock projects, and that these are assumed to have actually increased are those who survived these projects by keeping cattle for 2012. The type of household seven may be increasing its percentage of households by 2012 in the use of land for pasture, because when using land borrowed or given by their parents are already they were grass.

Source: Surveys UNC –CEPAR, 2001 and 2012. 0,0 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 1,0 1,2 1,4 1,6

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Ha

• Fig. 8: Mean land use for cocoa by HH type Amazonian indigenous

populations, 2001 and 2012. 2001 Average ha with cocoa by HH type 2012 Average ha with cocoa by HH type

10 20 30 40 50 60 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

% HH

• FIg. 9: Mean percent of Amazonian indigenous populations with

pasture by HH type, 2001 and 2012. 2001 Average of HH type with land use for grass 2012 Average of HH type with land use for grass

18

Figure 10 shows the increase or decrease in land use for pasture, a figure that to some extent corroborates the percentage of households that are increasing or decreasing the

• pasture. The only exceptions presented are for household type three, five and six, that is,

they present a significant increase in pasture increase. The household type six are the ones that increase the most and this can be related to that they are households that have people

• lder than 18 years and that can collaborate to make the deforestation of the lands, to have

greater access to resources for the purchase of cattle, because as evidenced this is the type

• f household that changes its land use in a more drastic way with respect to coffee and
• cocoa. For 2001, this type of household (6), 33% of households had adult cattle and calves

with an average of 5 adult heads and 2 of calves, by 2012 this percentage of households does not change, but the average of animals because the adult livestock increased to an average of 7 heads per household and the calves to 3. Also in 2001 only 13% sold the cattle for 2012, almost double the percentage of households that sold these animals to a 22%. The

• ther type of home that increased significantly is also type three, which corresponds to

households with children between 0 and 18 years of age, but at the time of the survey, only 13% of households in this area type had cattle, this could have been presented by projects implemented by the compensations of the oil companies, through the delivery of livestock

• r even following the models of land use of the colonist population, which are already in

their phase is sown pasture.

Source: Surveys UNC –CEPAR, 2001 and 2012.

On the changes that may have occurred in the use of land for subsistence crops such as cassava, banana, sweet potatoes, fruit, among others, as is assumed that the total population did so no changes are presented. But in what corresponds to the number of hectares that were destined for these crops, if there are differences, although not very significant (see figure 11). For the year 2001, the type of household with the greatest use of land for this activity are types one and three, although the others do not present distant trends, except for

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Ha

• FIg. 10: Mean area in pasture of Amazonian indigenous populations

by HH type, 2001 and 2012. 2001 Average ha with grass by HH type 2012 Average ha with grass by HH type

19

type seven and eight that corresponds to newly formed households and without children and those over 65 years of age living alone, respectively, and that as is to argue these types

• f household do not proceed to greater deforestation for these crops, since their needs are

not so marked by the number of household members. For the year 2012, the only type of household that declines in land use for subsistence crops is type 1, this could correspond to what was argued above, that the average age of head of household is in the 28 years , so it may be the type of population that is linked to work outside their farm, although not necessarily outside their community. This type of home for 2012 60% had access to some type of work or remuneration. Looking at table 3 on the sale of these products, it is identified that almost all types of household decrease their sale by 2012, although it could indicate that the gains from their sales increased, but again it is a relative value since these gains correspond to the last 12 months and may be linked to greater access to roads and the sale of these products when they go to populated centers or urban areas. It should be noted that they are not expanding land use for the sowing of these products and that their destination is the sale, but that this can be an alternative financial resource.

Source: Surveys UNC –CEPAR, 2001 and 2012.

DISCUSSION The exogenous factors that may have stimulated the greater use of land for agricultural activities destined for sale are the construction of roads or roads hurled to or near their communities, the greater presence of extractive activities, the most common contact with colonist populations; the access to services as light (unfortunately only this service, because the drinking water does not have and compared to the excreta disposal in 2001, 16% of this study population had only latrine, but this percentage was not modified for 2012); greater financial demands for their children to have access to the formal primary, secondary and tertiary education system, and that was fostered by the Intercultural Education laws that the Ecuadorian State began in the middle of the first decade of this century, but which is actually operative to these populations because in their social and cultural considerations

0,0 0,5 1,0 1,5 2,0 2,5 3,0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Ha

• Fig. 11: Mean area in subsistence crops by HH type Amazonian

indigenous populations, 2001 and 2012. 2001 Average ha with subsistance crops by HH type 2012 Average ha with subsistance crops by HH type

20

and education begins to have greater importance for the human development of their children and therefore a greater possibility of access to labor and monetary resources, not necessarily linked to agricultural activities.2 Although these populations have a large household composition in number of members, this would imply deforestation of these areas, but this process is not as significant as expected, because in general in 2001 they had 3.81 ha of average per household and for 2012 rose to 5.90 ha. Almost all types of households present an increase in land use for agricultural activities, but it is only the type of household six, which presents the most significant changes. This type of household corresponds to those with children over 18, which leads to a relationship that members of economically active age had more

• pportunities to be able to do more deforestation and in this way to plant products for

greater access to resources by the sale of these agricultural products and livestock from these newly exploited lands. This change may be due to these external factors that led to greater deforestation compared to 2001, as they nearly tripled land use. The type of household one that corresponds to households with children from zero to six years of age present a decrease of the use of soil, and a decrease for almost all the analyzed products only with the exception of the cocoa and that as evidenced in the graphs, can that the land that had previously been used for coffee, grass and subsistence crops, was changed to plant cocoa, a product that allows access to monetary resources on a continuous basis and less labor for maintenance and by 2012 Today is an important product in this region. But it should also be added that the average age of the head of household for the year 2012 is 28 years, and therefore may be the type of household where the boss can be linked through contract or provision of services (cleaning weeds roads, guards near communities

• r others but do not require any type of qualification) with companies that are close to their

communities, which limits the use of their time in agricultural activities. The type of household seven is also presenting a more dynamic regarding the percentage of households and the type of land use that is being presented, which in the long term may generate new forms of cultivation for these populations, since this type of household presented higher trends of change between the two years of study, especially in what corresponds to cocoa and coffee. The type of household three, that corresponds to the type of household with the children between zero and more than 18 years, it is necessary to emphasize that the use of its land is being changed of important form, that is to say a greater demand of soil is presented for the commercial products such as coffee and cocoa, and this may to some extent be the best possibilities generated by the exogenous factors for access to monetary resources for this type of population that is in very important stages of childhood, childhood and adolescence

2 In in-depth interviews and informal conversations, the argument arose that the land was running out so

they should have fewer children, as their children will not have land to work with.

21

and given the new social processes in which these communities of greater encounter with the other migrants societies are, there is a greater demand of goods and services, such as better food, education, dress and others. The type of household two would enter into these same considerations, however for this type it is necessary to note that a greater presence in the home could be required, especially by the wife, for the care of the minor children, which would limit their participation in the agricultural activities, element that can be supplanted in the type of household 3 by the children already majors. For this reason the type of household two does not rise as important as the three its use of the soil and for the commercial crops. The type of household five in the same way presents an important increasing tendency in the use of soil for the types of cultures analyzed and this again has a justification to that they have a greater workmanship for the work, and that even can be given by the wife, since she has no children under 7 years. CONCLUSIONS It is clear that this document shows only some of the elements that may be determining the increase of land use in these populations. This analysis was done at the micro level, but as noted at the beginning it is necessary to understand the relationship between environment and population in a broader way and where surely the meso and macro levels will be even stronger determinants, nevertheless this document what it did is to place the first element of analysis to continue with the complexity of this study and specifically in Ecuador that has possible even stronger triggers for the change in the land use of the Ecuadorian Amazon Region and that will directly affect the populations of this region, including megaprojects such as the implementation of mining for the extraction of copper in the open. Therefore, what is expected is that the design of these policies contemplate the real impacts to the populations of this area as well as the environment and this is not a resource. Acknowledgment To all members of the indigenous communities who provided us with their data and to some extent their experiences, and their community leaders; to the work team; the Ecociencia Foundation, CEPAR and the University of North Carolina, and a special thanks to Clark Gray (PI) for providing the data. The investigations were supported by grants R01 HD3877701 and R00 HD061752 from the National Institutes of Health (NIH). REFERENCES Anderson, L.E., 1996. The causes of deforestation in Brazilian Amazon. Journal of Environment and Development 5, 309–328.

22

Barbier, E. B., 1997. “The Economic Determinants of Land Degradation in Developing Countries”. Philosophical Transactions: Biological Sciences 352(1356, Land Resources: On the Edge of the Malthusian Precipice?): 891-899. Barraclough, S.L., Ghimire, K.B., 1996. Deforestation in Tanzania: beyond simplistic

• generalizations. The Ecologist 26 (3), 104–107.

Bass, M., Finer M., Pittman, N., Swing, K., and others, 2010. Global Conservation Significance of Ecuador’s Yasuni National Park, Plus One 5(1): 1-22. Bilsborrow, R., 1987. Population pressures and agricultural development in developing countries: A conceptual framework and recent evidence. World Development 15(2): 183- 203. Bilsborrow, R., et al., 2004. Changes in population and land use over time in the Ecuadorian Amazon. Acta Amazónica 34(4): 635-647. Curran, S. and A. De Shebernin, 2004. “Completing the Picture: The Challenges of Bringing “Consumption” into the Population–Environment Equation.” Population and Environment 26(2): 107-131. Davis, K., 1963. The theory of change and response in modern demographic history. Population Index 29: 345–366. Finer, M., Jenkins C.N., Pimm, S., Keane, B., & Ross, C., 2009. Oil and Gas Projects in the Western Amazon: Threats to Wilderness, Biodiversity, and Indigenous Peoples, Plos One 3(8): e2932. Geist, H.J., Lambin, E.F., 2001. What drives tropical deforestation? A meta-analysis of proximate and underlying causes of deforestation based on subnational scale case study

• evidence. LUCC Report Series No. 4. University of Louvain, Louvainla- Neuve.

Hecht, S.B., 1985. Environment, development, and politics: capital accumulation and the livestock sector in Amazonia. World Development 13 (6), 663–684. Lambin, E. F., B. L. Turner, H. Geist, S. Agbola, A. Angelsen, B. John, O. Coomes, R. Dirzo, G. Fischer, C. Folke, P. S. George, K. Homewood, J. Imbernon, R. Leemans, X. Lin,

• E. Moran, M. Mortimore, P. S. Ramakrishnan, J. Richards, H. Skanes, W. Steen, G. D.

Stone, U. Svedin, T. Veldkamp, C. Vogel and J. Xu, 2001. “The causes of land-use and land-cover change: moving beyond the myths.” Global Environmental Change 11: 261-269. Lutz, W., W. Sanderson, et al. (2002). “Conclusions: towards comprehensive P-E studies.” Population and Development Review 28 (supplement: Population and Environment - methods of Analysis): 225-250. Marquette, C. M. 1998. Land use patterns among small farmer settlers in the northeastern Ecuadorian Amazon. Human Ecology: an Interdisciplinary Journal, 6(4): 573-598.

23

Nepstad, D., Schwartzman, S., Bamberger, B., Santilli, M., Ray, D., Schlesinger, P., Lefebrvre, P., Alencar, A., Prinz, E., Fiske, G., Rolla, A., 2006. Inhibition of Amazon deforestation and fire by parks and indigenous lands. Conservation Biology 20 (1), 65–73. O’Neill, B., MacKellar, F. L., & Lutz, W., 2001. Population and Climate Change. New York: Cambridge University Press. Salinas, V., Bilsborrow R., Gray C.,, 2017. Cambios socioeconómicos en el siglo XXI en poblaciones indígenas Amazónicas: Retos actuales. Paper prepared for submission. Salinas, V. & R. Bilsborrow, 2016. Diferencias en la fecundidad por etnia indígena en la Amazonía del Ecuador. VII Congreso da Asociación Latinoamericana de Población e XX Encontro Nacional de Estudos Populacionais, Foz do Iguaçu/PR-Brasil, 17 e 22 Oct. 2016. Zimmerman, B., Peres, C.A., Malcolm, J.R., Turner, T., 2001. Conservation and development alliances with the Kayapó of southeastern Amazonia, a tropical forest indigenous people. Environmental Conservation 28 (1), 10–22.