Environmental
and economic impacts of Tectona Grandis teca plantations, in Ecuador=
Shakespeare
Agustín Abarca Córdova.[1],
Patricio Alejandro Merino Córdova. [2], Byron Fabricio Estupi=
ñán
Cox, [3]
& Daniel Eriel Izquierdo García. [4]
Recibido: 10-10-2018 / Revisado:
17-11-2018 /Aceptado: 04-12-2018/ Publicado: 05-01-2019
Plantations can be both good and bad, and therefore t=
he
responsibility to review concepts and adopt good practices in all dimension=
s of
sustainable development. It is about establishing appropriate bases to cont=
inue
the reforestation with greater knowledge to enhance the positive impacts and
reduce or eliminate the negative impacts that these plantations may have.
Those responsible for the development of plantations =
in
Ecuador are creating an important knowledge base through research and
experience to make good, better, forest plantations.
The discussion ab=
out
the advantages and disadvantages of the plantation suffers from a fundament=
al
error: the comparison with the native forests, when it is not reasonable to
make these comparisons. Planted forests and natural forests are not equival=
ent.
In the absence of local experiences or systems of indicators, it is advisab=
le to
use as a first guide the principles and criteria in force for forest
plantations applied by the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), and thus to
orientate oneself on what is a good reforestation organization and what is a
good forest plantation
Keywords: Teak (Tectona Grandis), Environmental Impact, Forestry, Socioeconomic,
Plantation.
Resumen
Las
plantaciones pueden ser tanto buenas como malas, y por lo tanto, la
responsabilidad de revisar conceptos y adoptar buenas prácticas en todas las
dimensiones del desarrollo sostenible. Se trata de establecer bases apropia=
das
para continuar la reforestación con un mayor conocimiento para mejorar los
impactos positivos y reducir o eliminar los impactos negativos que estas
plantaciones puedan tener.
Los
responsables del desarrollo de plantaciones en Ecuador están creando una
importante base de conocimientos a través de la investigación y la experien=
cia
para hacer que las plantaciones forestales sean mejores y mejores.
La
discusión sobre las ventajas y desventajas de la plantación sufre de un err=
or
fundamental: la comparación con los bosques nativos, cuando no es razonable
hacer estas comparaciones. Los bosques plantados y los bosques naturales no=
son
equivalentes. En ausencia de experiencias locales o sistemas de indicadores=
, es
aconsejable utilizar como primera guía los principios y criterios vigentes =
para
las plantaciones forestales aplicados por el Forest Stewardship Council (FS=
C),
y así orientarse sobre lo que es una buena reforestación. Organización y qu=
é es
una buena plantación forestal.
Palabras clave: Teca (Tectona Grandis), Impacto Ambienta=
l,
Forestal, Socioeconómico, Plantación.
Introductión.
We can mention that plantations specifically of Tectona Grandis can have
positive as well as negative impacts, and therefore the responsibility to
review concepts and adopt considerable practices in all extensions of
sustainable development. It is about establishing appropriate bases to cont=
inue
with socioeconomic and environmental research with greater knowledge to enh=
ance
the positive impacts and reduce or eliminate the negative impacts that these
plantations may have. Those responsible for the development of plantations =
in
the provinces of Los Ríos, Santo Domingo and Esmeraldas are creating an
important knowledge base through research and experience for the developmen=
t of
better, forest plantations.
The expansion of teak plantations in Ecuador
Ecuador is among the ten countries with the
greatest diversity in the world, it is also among the countries of Latin
America with a higher rate of deforestation in proportion to the size of its
territory. According to the Ministry of the Environment, the main cause wou=
ld
be the expansion of the agricultural frontier.
However, recent studies indicate that the cro=
ps
of the small farmers, who are the ones who feed the country, have not grown,
whereas the agroindustry, with the African palm, sugarcane, and monoculture=
s of
eucalyptus, pines and teak, has grown quickly, obviously causing forest
deforestation to which we refer. In this context, Ecuador exported 190 thou=
sand
square meters of this wood in 2014, with all the environmental impacts that
this entails. The government of Ecuador is responsible for the promotion and
expansion of teak in the country to the detriment of agro biodiversity and =
the
replacement of native ecosystems, such as the dry forest in the provinces of
Guayas and Manabí.
The teak plantations in Ecuador are not desti=
ned
for the internal consumption of this wood. All teak is exported. Exports to
India represent 95 percent of the total teak in Ecuador, which means between
150 and 160 thousand tons of teak per year, which represents about US $ 30
million of profit for the industry. The economic benefits for the places wh=
ere
this wood is produced are very few due to the lack of labor generated by th=
is
crop, the lack of social investment by producers, the loss of food sovereig=
nty
and the scarcity of water that it entails.
Devastating
effects
In the province of Guayas, the area with the lar=
gest
number of plantations of teak monocultures in the country, mostly in the
cantons of Balzar, the landscape of teak is bleak. There are no animals in a
teak monoculture plantation. The peasants of the place testify that it does=
not
serve as a shelter for birds: "no bird nests here". Teak trees do=
not
interact positively with the environment, because they are fast-growing abs=
orb
large amounts of water and nutrients, in addition to need agrochemicals. The
government of India, for its part, asks that the logs and blocks of this wo=
od
be fumigated in the place of origin (where the product comes from) with met=
hyl
bromide, whose use is prohibited in Ecuador due to its high toxicity.
Therefore, Ecuador has proposed to fumigate with
aluminum phosphide, a highly dangerous element, since when it comes into
contact with air, it releases a gas called Phosphine, which is very toxic to
the body. In the field of Public Health, this pesticide is responsible for a
high rate of deadly diseases for affected populations and spaces. The use of
this chemical to meet the demands of the industry therefore implies a very =
high
risk to workers, neighboring populations and the environment.
The dispute about the advantages and disadvantages of the plantation
suffers from a fundamental error: the comparison with the native forests, w=
hen
it is not reasonable to make these comparisons. Planted forests and natural
forests are not equivalent. In the absence of local experiences or systems =
of
socio-economic and environmental indicators, it is advisable to use as a fi=
rst
guide the principles and criteria in force for forest plantations applied by
the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) and thus be guided on what is a good
reforestation organization. and what is a good forest plantation.
Table 1. Tala, shipowners =
and
workers in the production of Teak tree from the province of Tarragona (2009=
).
|
|
Talas
(Tons) |
Shipowners |
Talers |
|
Esmeraldas |
275,25 |
12 |
9 |
|
Santo
Domingo de los Tsáchilas |
262,15 |
90 |
268 |
|
Los
Ríos |
647,76 |
37 |
150 |
Source:
BCE.
Elaborated
by: Group of
investigators.
The principles and
criteria for a good plantation.
Even when there are critical
judgments about forest certification, and the process is only a tool to imp=
rove
the sustainability of the management of natural and planted forests, the
current principles and criteria for forest plantations applied by the FSC c=
an
guide which is a good reforestation organization and what is a good forest =
plantation.
If we refer to the principle 10 of the FSC and its respective criteria, we
could define a good plantation as that in which:
“Both i=
n its
establishment and in its administration, the laws are complied with, the te=
nure
rights of the land are respected, the rights of indigenous communities are
respected and opportunities are created for them, the rights=
of
workers and communities in the area of influence of reforesta=
tion
are respected, efficient use is made of the goods and services that the
plantation generates, the environmental impacts are reduced, they are caref=
ully
planned and the execution plans are fulfilled, the impacts of the plantation
are monitored, in a permanent process of learning and the management is don=
e in
an adaptive way, by the learning that the monitoring implies "(FSC, 19=
94.
These requirements correspond to the generic principles of the FSC. =
But
additionally, a good plantation, meets the criteria of principle 10, which =
can
be summarized in the following:
The management objectives of the plantation are clear and documented=
and
the management is oriented towards compliance.
The design and planning of plantations should promote the protection=
and
conservation of natural forests, and not increase pressures on them (wildli=
fe
corridors, protection of river beds, and mosaic of stands of different ages,
rotation, and compliance with the patterns of the stands within their natur=
al
landscape.
The plantations have clear elements of biodiversity, to improve
stability (size and spatial distribution of management units within the
landscape, number and genetic composition of species, age classes and
structures and types of products).
Selection of species based on the site and management objectives. Ex=
otic
species are used when their performance is higher than that of native speci=
es
(monitoring mortality, diseases or insect damage and adverse ecological
impacts).
A proportion of the total area of forest management (w=
hich
will be determined in the regional standards) should be managed in such a w=
ay
that the natural forest cover of the site is restored.
Measures to maintain or improve the struc=
ture,
fertility and biological activity of the soil. The techniques, rate of harv=
est,
maintenance and construction of roads and the selection of species should n=
ot
degrade the soil or water or its distribution.
Minimize damage from pests, diseases, fire and the introduction of inva=
sive
plants. (Integrated pest management, prevention and biological control inst=
ead
of pesticides and chemical fertilizers).
The monitoring should include a regular assessment of the ecological and
social impacts on the site and outside it. Large-scale species should not be
planted until the tests have shown that they are adapted to the site, are n=
ot
invasive and do not have negative ecological impacts.
The Territories of Original Peoples.
Reforestation projects must respect the ri=
ghts
of the original peoples. The positive right, western, recognizes the proper=
ties
registered in the registries of property of each country. However, there are
many territories that are claimed by indigenous communities, which have no
support in the legislations of their countries, and whose territories are n=
ot
delimited. This has been the case with considerable areas of forest plantat=
ions
of Pine insigne in the central-southern region of Chile.
The companies have valid titles, but on them the indigenous communiti=
es
claim ancestral rights. Due to the lack of alternative conflict resolution
strategies and the lack of willingness of companies to dialogue with indige=
nous
communities, there have been occupations, forest fires, violent confrontati=
ons,
prison. Occasionally, the surfaces in conflict are smaller percentages of t=
he
planted areas. However, companies that do not want to set precedents are
strictly based on legal rights and do not recognize any original rights. As=
we
will see, these situations have other serious social consequences.
Respect for Cultural Places and Medicinal and Ritual Species.
To avoid negative impacts of forest plantations, their promoters must
respect the cultural and religious places of the indigenous and ladino rural
communities. This implies giving access to local inhabitants to traditional
places of ceremonies and regulating traditional rights such as fishing and
hunting. Communities must also maintain their traditional rights to the
collection of non-timber products and medicinal plants. In extreme situatio=
ns,
reforested companies have practically eliminated all natural vegetation, in=
cluding
streams and minor water courses, eliminating the possibility that tradition=
al
doctors can communicate with their spirits and have nearby sites for collec=
ting
medicinal plants and rituals (as the Canelo, Drymis winteri, in Mapuche
communities of the X region in Chile). The costs associated with these
conflicts can be quite high and it is advisable to look for alternative
strategies for handling conflicts outside the courts.
Workers' R=
ights
There are differences, as identified by Rusch et=
al
(2004), between being a worker of a forestry company, to wish that the chil=
dren
continue with the tradition, since it supposes improvement of the indexes of
human development and income. When reforestation companies and organizations
limit themselves to meeting legal minimums (or even do not even meet those
minimums), the social impacts are not different from any other enterprise in
which there is no corporate social responsibility. The forestry developments
fear to maintain good salaries, train their workers, because they risk not
being competitive and working with very high costs. On the other hand, the
reduction of labor conflicts, the increase in productivity and the lower
rotation of workers are examples of positive impacts of corporate social
responsibility, it allows to capitalize investments in training of human
resources.
Relations =
and
Rights of Communities
There must be a favorable relationship between
social development and sustainable local development, with investments made=
in
reforestation. In many countries, the concentrations of investment in forest
management and reforestation coincide with pockets of poverty, and with reg=
ions
where the product is exported, capital is remitted outside the region, while
poverty increases and local inhabitants they also lack health, education, f=
ood
security and social security services. Forest plantation developers must su=
pport
communities and respect their rights. Many times the disputes of transit
easements, water rights, collection rights, are frequent. To avoid negative
impacts on the communities, it is necessary to have clearly regulated relat=
ions
with them, to have designated representatives in companies and corporations=
and
to request the designation by local representative representatives, who
maintain a permanent dialogue and not only to resolve conflicts. Companies =
and
reforested corporations can contribute to the planning of local development=
and
the creation of opportunities for education, health, business and jobs
additional to those created by forestry itself.
Local Employment Generation
Undoubtedly, forest plantations create local employme=
nt.
But you have to be realistic about the potential for employment. The
establishment, management and use of plantations do not have high employment
intensity. But to judge the reforestations from this point of view, it is
necessary to compare with the local alternatives and ask: who generates more
work, extensive cattle ranching or reforestation? How is the generation of
employment along the entire productive chain? From the nursery, to the final
product in the industry? What forest services are included in the generatio=
n of
employment? What is the job offer in a certain region, to decide on the
technology to be used in operations? How much indirect employment is genera=
ted?
If everything is left to chance, without adequate strategies or planning, t=
he
employment effect can be reduced, temporary and of low quality (from the po=
int
of view of human development).
=
On the
contrary, if the reforestation effort is due to a regional strategy, it sho=
uld
be accompanied by specialization of the work, creation of forest services,
operation as a forest cluster (integrating all elements and members of the
production chain
The
profitability of Reforestation
In the work of Rush et al (2004) there is
concern about the possibilities of small and medium forest plantation owner=
s.
It seems that profitable forestry activity is only feasible for large owner=
s.
We must distinguish between what is a profitable forest operation and what =
is
an operation that allows, for its cash flow and its magnitude, sustain a fa=
mily
in a sustainable manner.
Any well-planned forestry
operation with efficiency in marketing and markets can be profitable. Howev=
er,
a family requires income every week, every month and every year and if the
surface they take advantage of is too small, they can not subsist on it. It=
is necessary
to have a minimum surface area and a regular cash flow. Many solutions are
offered for this, such as silvopastoral and agroforestry systems, sale of
environmental services and tourism, mechanisms for buying wood in advance,
horizontal integration to lower operating costs, vertical integration to ha=
ve
better access to markets, etc. Another aspect that needs to be highlighted,
that at present, there are at least two kinds of projects: those that offer
reforestation as an investment opportunity and those that offer reforestati=
on
as the start of forestry production companies. In recent years, offers of g=
reen
investments in reforestation have appeared in different countries. These of=
fers
contain a proposal for species, growth rate, development and execution costs
and final product prices. There are serious projects of groups that want to
develop a sustainable forest production company. In these cases they work w=
ith
real figures and do not offer anyone to become millionaires in the short te=
rm.
There are, however, other cases in which the promoters of the projects offer
non-existent growth rates (at the most exaggeratedly high), therefore, very=
low
turnover ages and also non-existent product prices. The result is that they
offer hectares planted and maintained at prices of US $ 20 to 50 thousand p=
er
hectare. Many of these promoters, once they have managed to place their sto=
ck
offer, disappear and ruin the investment based on imaginary assumptions. Th=
is
problem occurred with Teca in Costa Rica and Panama and we must prevent it =
from
happening again.
Social
Capital Formation
The development of reforestation, if it fails to create social capita=
l,
does not guarantee economic development and sustainable human development. =
This
implies that a special effort is required from the authorities and companie=
s,
for training human resources, creating institutions, organizing capacities,
local leadership capacities. Thus the result will not only be to form a for=
est
resource, to benefit the flora and fauna, to create employment, to create
tourism, but also to create leadership, to create institutions that allow
communities to take their own destiny into their own hands. There are
interesting cases, such as that of the community of Hojancha in Costa Rica.=
The
community first went through a process of training local leadership,
strengthening the ties of the inhabitants with their territory, appropriati=
on
by the local institutional system, capacity to formulate, manage and manage
projects.
This way the community will be able to reforest and achieve the
development of the local industry, protect watersheds and recover degraded
forests, recovering the potential water producer of the basin, protect fore=
sts
and create ecotourism and environmental education capacity. In this sense, =
in
Hojancha or in Neuquén, in Petén or in Chubut, in Río Negro or in Darién, in
Santa Cruz and in the savannas of Venezuela, forestry development initiativ=
es
must integrate much more than the technical and logistical part of the
plantations. To your strategies.
Income from
Products and Income from Environmental Services
Forest plantations can produce high, regular or =
low
incomes, like any other investment. But it must be made clear that
reforestation, although it can have a reasonable profitability, is far from
obtaining the interest rates of trade, capital speculation, technological
investments, etc.
Conclusions
·
A
reforestation is not good or bad a =
priori.
A reforestation is good or bad according to principles and clear criteria in
environmental, social and economic matters. It is not a matter of saying,
plantations are good or bad, but to say that the plantation of Teak is good=
or
bad, sustainable or not sustainable.
·
We know mo=
st
of the variables that build a good plantation project and we have more and =
more
knowledge to make most projects sustainable. Forest plantations in Patagonia
seem to be a reasonable alternative to land use and business for different
levels of investors.
·
It is our
responsibility as communities, as entrepreneurs, as researchers and as regi=
onal
and national government, that this option be healthy.
Bibliographic references.
Carrere R. 1998.Ten Repl=
ies
to Ten Lies. Briefing Paper. Plantatio=
ns
Campaign. World Rainforest Moveme=
nt.
De
Camino R, A. Bárcena. 1995. Imp=
roving
the effectiveness of international cooperation for sustainable development =
in Latin
America. In Cortés, de Camino, Contreras. Readings of the workshop on
government policy reform for forest conservation and development in Latin
America. CIFOR, USAID, IICA, EPAT-MUCIA, IDB, W=
B. Washington.
De Camino R y G. Bukowski. 1995. Impactos ambienta=
les
de las plantaciones forestales. Revista Forestal Centroamericana 101.
Turrialba.
De Camino R. 1999.
Latinoamérica. Plantations and natural forests. The need for a balan=
ced
approach. IUFRO Latin American Forest Congress. Valdivia.
Chile.
De Camino R, G. Mes y J. Breitling
2004. Sobre los productos y servic=
ios
ambientales del bosque y plantaciones forestales. Ambioentico no. 135. UNA.
Costa Rica
Duek J. 1981.
Evaluación del impacto ambiental. Plan de manejo conservacionista de=
las
microcuencas de Cocorotico y El Tejar.
CONARE. Universidad Simón Bolívar. Venezuela.
FSC 1994. FSC Principles & Criteria of Forest Stewards=
hip.
http://=
www.fsc.org/en/about/policy_standards/princ_criteria
Loguercio G. 2005. Acciones emprendidas en Patag=
onia
para la captura de Carbono entre 1=
990 y
2004. Informe Técnico. Fundación Bosques de la Patagonia. 39 pgs.
Para citar el artículo indexado.
Abarca
S., Merino P., <=
span
lang=3Des-419 style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;line-height:150%;font-family:"Times=
New Roman",serif'>Estupiñán
B, & Izquierdo D. (2019). Impa=
ctos
ambientales y económicos de las plantaciones de teca Tectona Grandis, en
Ecuador. Revista electrónica Ciencia Digital 3(1), 118-127.
Recuperado desde: http://cienciadigital.org/revistacienciadigita=
l2/index.php/CienciaDigital/article/view/274/658
El artículo que se
publica es de exclusiva responsabilidad de los autores y no necesariamente
reflejan el pensamiento de la Revi=
sta
Ciencia Digital.
El
artículo queda en propiedad de la revista y, por tanto, su publicación parc=
ial
y/o total en otro medio tiene que ser autorizado por el director de la Revista Ciencia Digital.
[1] Universidad Técnica Luis Vargas Torres, Esmeraldas, Ecuador,= shak63@hotmail.e= s
[2] Universidad Técnica Luis Vargas Torres, Esmeraldas, Ecuador,= patric_merino@hotmail.com
[3] Universidad Técnica Luis Vargas Torres, Esmeraldas, Ecuador,= byrondj627@hotma= il.com
[4] Universidad Técnica Luis Vargas Torres, Esmeraldas, Ecuador,= jones_izquierdo2= 3@hotmail.com
www.cienciadigital.org =
Vol.
3, N°1, p. 118-127, enero - ma=
rzo,
201