pilot program to conserve the brazilian rain forests

NC

-IU

CN

/ G

SI S

erie

s 6

Pilot Program to conservethe Brazilian Rain Forests

(PPG-7):possibilities for cooperation with the

Guiana Shield Initiative

Dave Zwaan

Pilot Program to conservethe Brazilian Rain Forests

(PPG-7):possibilities for cooperation with the


Dave Zwaan

Pilot Program to conserve the Brazilian

Rain Forests (PPG-7):

possibilities for cooperation with the


Dave Zwaan

Amsterdam 2004

Zwaan, D. (2004). Pilot Program to conserve the Brazilian Rain Forests (PPG-7):possibilities for cooperation with the Guiana Shield Initiative

E-mail: [email protected]

© Netherlands Committee for IUCNcopyright of photograph and map as indicated in captions

Produced by Dave Zwaan and Cas Besselink, NC-IUCNLayout and cover by Edith CremersCover photo: Giant water lilies (Victoria amazonica) near the Amazon River inthe vicinity of Manaus, Brazil. Photo: Dave Zwaan

Published March 2004by the Netherlands Committee for IUCNPlantage Middenlaan 2kAmsterdam, The NetherlandsWebsites: www.iucn.nl, www.guianashield.org

Pilot Program to conserve the Brazilian Rain Forests (PPG-7): possibilities forcooperation with the Guiana Shield Initiative is the sixth in a series of docu-ments to be published by the Guiana Shield Initiative (GSI) of the NetherlandsCommittee for IUCN. The GSI received funding from the Ministry of ForeignAffairs of the Dutch Government to lay the foundations for a long-term eco-regional project to finance sustainable development and conservation of theunique ecosystems of the Guiana Shield. This eco-region encompasses parts ofColombia, Venezuela, Brazil and the whole of Guyana, Suriname and FrenchGuiana.

The Netherlands Committee for IUCN (NC-IUCN) functions as a platform ofthe Dutch members of IUCN/The World Conservation Union. The NC-IUCNimplements projects and administers small grants programmes for conserva-tion. The office is based in Amsterdam, The Netherlands.Website: www.iucn.nl

AC K N OW L E D G E M E N T S

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The author wants to thank the following persons: Marcello Coelho (OperationsAnalist, World Bank Rain Forest Unit, PPG-7), Phil Hazelton (Consultant, formerNatural Resources Management Specialist of the World Bank, Advisory Boardmember GSI), Joris Jurriëns (First Secretary Dutch Embassy, Brazil), AlbertoLourenço (Coordinator PPG-7, Secretariat for Coordination of the Amazon),Mauro Ruffino (Coordinator ProVárzea), Roberto Smeraldi (Director Amigos daTerra, Chairman International Advisory Group PPG-7, Advisory Board memberGSI), Gregor Wolf (Rain Forest Unit manager, PPG-7).

TA B L E O F C O N T E N T S

TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Abbreviations 6

1. Introduction 8

2. History of the PPG-7 12

3. Structure of the PPG-7 14

4. Projects of the PPG-7 17

5. Lessons Learnt 25

6. Second Phase of the PPG-7 and possibilities 28for the Guiana Shield Initiative

7. References 32

Annexes 33

L I S T O F A B B R E V I AT I O N S

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

AMA Projeto de Apoio ao Monitoramento e Análise, Monitoring andAnalysis Project

BCC Brazilian Coordination Commission (Comissão de CoordenaçãoBrasileira)

CdE Centros de Excelência, Centres of ExcellenceC&T Subprograma de Ciência e Tecnologia, Science & TechnologyDCC Donor Coordination Committee (Comissão de Coordenação dos

Doadores)DfID Department for International Development (United Kingdom)FUNAI Fundação Nacional do Índio, Brazil’s National Indian

FoundationGTA Grupo de Trabalho Amazônico, Amazon Working GroupGTZ Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit,

German international cooperation enterprise for sustainabledevelopment

IAG International Advisory Group (Grupo Consultivo Internacional)IBAMA Instituto Brasileiro do Meio Ambiente e dos Recursos Naturais

Renováveis, Brazilian Institute for the Environment andRenewable Natural Resources

INPA Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas da Amazônia, National Institutefor Amazonian Research

JSC Joint Steering Committee (Comissão de Coordenação Conjunta)KFW Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau, German bilateral government

organization providing funding throughout the major regionsof the world.

MCT Ministério da Ciência e Tecnologia, Brazilian Ministry of Scienceand Technology

MMA Ministério do Meio Ambiente, Brazilian Ministry of theEnvironment

NGO Non-Government OrganizationPD Pesquisa Dirigida, Directed ResearchPD/A Projetos Demonstrativos A, Demonstration Projects - Type APDPI Projetos Demonstrativos dos Povos Indígenas, Demonstration

Projects for Indigenous PeoplesPGAI Projeto de Gestão Ambiental Integrada, Program of Integrated

Environmental ManagementPPTAL Projeto Integrado de Proteção às Terras e Populações Indígenas da

Amazônia Legal, Integrated Project for the Protection ofIndigenous Peoples & Land in the Amazon

L I S T O F A B B R E V I AT I O N S

Prodesque Projeto Integrado de Monitoramento e Controle de Desmatamentoe Queimadas na Floresta Amazônica, Fire and DeforestationControl Project

PROMANEJO Projeto de Apoio ao Manejo Florestal Sustentável na Amazônia,Amazon Sustainable Forest Management Program

PROTEGER Amazon Fire Prevention and Mobilization ProjectPROVÁRZEA Projeto de Manejo dos Recursos Naturais da Várzea, Floodplain

Management ProjectRESEX Projeto Reservas Extrativistas, Extractive Reserves ProjectRFU World Bank Rain Forest UnitRMA Rede de Organizações Não-Governamentais da Mata Atlântica,

Atlantic Rain Forest NetworkSBF Secretaria de Biodiversidade e Florestas, Secretariat of

Biodiversity and ForestsSBVP Sustainable Business Ventures ProjectSCA Secretaria de Coordenação da Amazônia, Secretariat for

Coordination of the AmazonSPRN Subprograma de Política de Recursos Naturais, Natural Resources

Policy Project

I N T R O D U C T I O N

1

INTRODUCTION

The Guiana Shield Initiative (GSI), an international partnership with its secre-tariat at the Netherlands Committee for IUCN (NC-IUCN), has the objective: thesustainable management in the Guiana Shield eco-region, by setting up a pay-ment or compensation system for environmental goods and services, such as theregulation of hydrological cycles, the stabilization of climate and the preservationof biodiversity. By paying “ecosystem managers” in the region for these services,sustainability can be achieved, as they do not have to look for other (unsustain-able) ways to gain income. Since ecosystems do not recognize political borders,managing transboundary issues is one of the elements of the GSI. Examples ofnegative transboundary issues are illegal gold mining and the related spread ofinfectious diseases such as malaria and HIV/AIDS. Other transboundary issuesare river basins and watersheds, and indigenous territories for example (see chap-ter 4, indigenous land project).

The Guiana Shield region is an eco-region which covers the whole of Guyana,Suriname, and French Guiana and parts of Venezuela, Colombia, and Brazil. Theboundaries of the Shield are roughly as follows: South (from East to West): theAmazon River, and Japurá River (Brazil), and the Caquetá River in Colombia;West: the Serranía de Chiribiquete park, the Guaviare River (Colombia), andOrinoco River (including the Orinoco Delta, Venezuela); North and East: AtlanticOcean. The region is very important in an ecological sense as it comprises 25% ofthe tropical rainforests in the world (80-90% of the Guiana Shield Rainforests isin pristine condition). Furthermore 10-15% of the world’s freshwater comes fromthis region, hence its name: Guiana (land of many waters). Besides rainforest, onecan encounter swamps (e.g. Orinoco Delta), savannahs (e.g. in the Rupununiregion in Guyana), tepuis (table mountains in Venezuela), but also mangroveforests (e.g. along the coast of Suriname and French Guiana), and flooded forests(e.g. the várzeas in Brazil). Endemism is very high in the region. Other character-istics of the region are, amongst others: low human population, many indigenouspeoples, and relatively little infrastructure. Because the standard of living is low inthe region, illegal gold mining and illegal logging occur (small-scale mining ismainly caused by Brazilian garimpeiros, who also cross the borders of the neigh-bouring countries of Brazil). Illegal hunting is also not uncommon (this topic isdescribed in the GSI publication Commercial Non-Timber Forest Products of theGuiana Shield 1).

1 Andel, van T.R., A.V. MacKinven, and O.S. Bánki. 2003. Commercial Non-Timber Forest Productsof the Guiana Shield. An inventory of commercial NTFP extraction and possibilities for sustainableharvesting. GSI/NC-IUCN Series 2.


The Pilot Program to Conserve the Brazilian Rain Forests (PPG-7) has manyoverlapping activities with the GSI, as well as overlapping areas (which includethe States of Amapá and Roraima, and parts of the States of Amazonas and Pará,see illustration). Also several possibilities for future cooperation are describedbased on several scenarios. The Pilot Programme is of great importance as itsprojects can act as examples of sustainable management of rainforests (accom-plishments of the projects are described in chapter 4). The Pilot Program focusesuntil now only on the Brazilian Amazon and the Atlantic Rainforest. This is amain difference with the objectives of the GSI, as ecological processes are trans-boundary, which means that what is ecologically happening in the neighbouringcountries of Brazil could influence Brazil (and vice versa of course). In a possiblesecond phase of the PPG-7, the Pilot Program might extend to neigbouring coun-tries, which is of course of importance for the GSI. Even if the second phase ofthe PPG-7 would only continue activities in Brazil then: 1. a relevant part of theGuiana Shield is covered by these activities, and 2. further collaboration withthe rest of the region could follow. This is discussed in the last chapter.

This map of the northern part of South America shows the Guiana Shield region andthe Brazilian Legal Amazon. As can be seen, both regions overlap. AC: Acre, AM:Amazonas, AP: Amapá, MA: Maranhão, MT: Mato Grosso, PA: Pará, RO: Rondônia, RR:Roraima, TO: Tocantins. Map: produced by Dave Zwaan


The focal area of the PPG-7 is the Brazilian Amazon Rainforest, which covers nineBrazilian states (see illustration). The Amazon is the largest tropical rainforest inthe world and plays an important role in carbon sequestration and as a supplierof non-timber forest products. At the same time, it is the main supplier – often inan unsustainable manner – of the third largest timber market in the world, theSão Paulo region. It is estimated that 10%-15% of all existing species live inthe Amazon Region. Only 2% of the Brazilian human population inhabits theAmazon Region, at a density of 3.2 inhabitants per km2 (SIVAM, 2003). Most ofthe residents of the Brazilian Amazon now live in big cities like Manaus or Belém.Although the population figure of the region is low, the number of inhabitants inthe Guiana Shield region is even lower: approximately 0.8 inhabitants per km2.There are different threats to the rainforest in South America, for example over-exploitation of logging, gold mining, and fires.

The Brazilian Amazon Rainforest area was originally estimated at 4 million km2

(almost 48% of the territory of Brazil), while the whole Amazon Basin covers6 million km2 in nine countries. The PPG-7 covers the area called Legal Ama-zônia, which is more than 5 million km2 (60% of the territory of Brazil). The areaof the Guiana Shield region, which overlaps with the Legal Amazon, is approxi-mately 2.5 million km2. By 1999 about 14 percent of the original forest area of theAmazon Region did not exist anymore. In the period of 1999-2000 19,000 km2

was deforested (another 0.5%), mostly in the southern states of the LegalAmazon. In 2002 surprisingly high levels of deforestation were observed, bring-ing the total to 15.3%. And still the figures are not encouraging; economicdevelopment lobby and agricultural lobby are doing probably better thanenvironmental lobby (Joris Jurriëns, pers. comm. 2004). These high levels ofdeforestation were a reason for the new Brazilian Government to take action(with two plans, see chapter 6). This is one of the reasons why the second phaseof the PPG-7 is not a reality yet, as these actions are crucial for the definition ofthe major lines of this second phase (see chapter 6).

The first contact of the GSI with the PPG-7 was in May 2001, when the GSI waspresent at the VIth Participants Meeting in Cuiabá. Mary Allegretti, thenSecretary for the Amazon and in charge of the PPG-7, agreed at that stage to bethe Brazilian Steering Committee member for the GSI. Mary Allegretti has beenof tremendous help and she has showed great interest in the activities of the GSI,which she has fully supported2. One year later, in June 2002, the GSI was alsopresent at the II Encontro Nacional in Rio de Janeiro. This resulted in the first stepstowards more collaboration with the PPG-7. In September 2003 a Memorandumof Understanding was signed between the PPG-7 and the GSI.

2 For more information about the VIth Participants Meeting, we refer to the Fact Finding Missionto the PPG7 and the Guiana Shield Country Brazil (Roraima), downloadable on the websitewww.guianashield.org.


The goal of the PPG-7 is to develop innovative strategies for the protection andsustainable use of the Amazon and Atlantic Coastal Rainforests, as well as toimprove living conditions among local populations (http://www.mma.gov.br/port/sca/ppg7/index.html). In order to reach this goal, several entities worktogether in an international context. Involved are, amongst others: the BrazilianGovernment (with the Ministério do Meio Ambiente, the Ministry of theEnvironment as coordination body, and several institutions such as IBAMA –Brazil’s Environmental Institute, INPA – National Amazonian Research Institute,FUNAI – National Indian Foundation), Brazil’s civil society, and the internation-al community (with donors such as the German GTZ/KFW, and the BritishDFID).

For the GSI, the PPG-7 is of great importance, because it can be an example ofhow projects can be implemented in the whole Guiana Shield area, and the les-sons learnt from the experiences of the PPG-7. On the other hand, the PilotProgram can also learn from projects already going on in the Guiana Shield, andthe GSI will focus on compensation systems for environmental goods and ser-vices which can give another dimension on PPG-7 projects. Furthermore thereare two scenarios: 1) if the second phase will extend to neighbouring countries,the GSI can work intensively with the PPG-7 to attain each of their goals in theregion; 2) if it is decided that there will only be sharing information or even lessactivity, the GSI can suggest to work together on the field of sharing lessonslearnt, duplicating projects, and setting up transboundary projects across theBrazilian border in close collaboration with the PPG-7. This is discussed furtherin the last chapter.

II Encontro Nacional in Rio de Janeiro, 2002. Photo: Dave Zwaan

H I S TO RY O F T H E P P G - 7

2

HISTORY OF THE PPG-7

During the summit meeting of the Group of Seven (G-7) of industrial countries3

in Houston in 1990, it was German Chancellor Helmut Kohl who called for a pilotprogram to reduce the high rate of deforestation in Brazil. This Pilot Program wasapproved in 1991 by the G-7, the European Union, and the Netherlands. In totalapproximately US$ 250 million was pledged for the Pilot Program to conserve theBrazilian Rain Forests. Approximately US$ 50 million was meant for the RainForest Trust Fund (ANNEX 1 shows the Pilot Program funding table). There weresome extra contributions from Germany, the European Union, and the UnitedStates to specific projects by setting up other trust funds – with the World Bankor by co-financing (http://www.worldbank.org/rfpp/). Germany, United King-dom, and the European Union have given the most financial and technical sup-port to the PPG-7 in phase one. The PPG-7 was launched at the United NationsConference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in Rio de Janeiro in1992. All government levels, NGOs, and the private sector work together on plan-ning and implementation of the activities of the Pilot Program. The first projectswere implemented in 1995.

The overall objective of the PPG-7 is, as stated in the 1992 Rain Forest Trust FundResolution: “to maximize the environmental benefits of Brazil’s rainforests consist-ent with Brazil’s development goals, through the implementation of a sustainabledevelopment approach that will contribute to a continuing reduction of the rate ofdeforestation. The attainment of this objective will (i) demonstrate the feasibilityof harmonizing economic and environmental objectives in tropical rainforests; (ii)help preserve the huge genetic resources of the rainforests; (iii) reduce theBrazilian rainforests’ contribution to global carbon emissions; and (iv) provideanother example of cooperation between developed and developing countries onglobal environmental issues.” (Mid-Term Review of the PPG-7, 2000). As theWorld Bank states: the purpose of the PPG-7 is to try out, experiment, and learnabout new ways to protect the forest and to use the forest in a sustainable way.

Overall, these objectives comply with the objective of the GSI: to sustainablyfinance the conservation and sustainable use of the unique intact ecosystems ofthe Guiana Shield.

3 The G-7 consists of the following industrial countries: United States of America, Canada, UnitedKingdom, France, Italy, Japan, and Germany. The G-7 has been called since 1998 G-7/8 or G-8,because Russia has joined. Russia will host the G8 Summit in 2006, and thus completing its processof becoming a full member (http://www.g7.utoronto.ca/).

H I S TO RY O F T H E P P G - 7

It is believed that after the first five years of activities, the concept of sustainabledevelopment is more accepted and that the civil society is more participatory,which in reality is true. The Grupo de Trabalho Amazônico (GTA, i.e. the AmazonWorking Group) represents hundreds of NGOs in the Brazilian Amazon Region.The GTA is involved at all levels of the programme (Phil Hazelton, pers. comm.,2003).

S T RU C T U R E O F T H E P P G - 7

3

STRUCTURE OF THE PPG-7

Below is an organigram of the PPG-7, as it was in the first phase. In the secondphase the structure could change.

Donor Coordination Committee (DCC)International Advisory Group (IAG)

World Bank – Rain Forest Unit (RFU)

Joint Steering Committee (JSC)

Meeting of Participants

Brazilian Coordination Commission (BCC)

Executive Secretary of the Pilot Program(together with the Coordination Secretariat of the Amazon of MMA)

Sustainable Business Ventures Project

Ecological Corridors Project

Monitoring and Analyses Project (AMA)

IBAMA MCTMMA/SCA/PDA

FUNAI MMA/SCA/SPRN

AtlanticRainforestMMA/SBF

Civil Society

INTERNATIONAL LEVEL

NATIONAL LEVEL

• RESEX • PDA • PPD • PPTAL • PGAI2 • RMA • Subprogram• PROMANEJO • PDPI • CdE • Get legal, • GTA Atlantic Rainforest• ProVárzea • Prodesque1 • C&T Amazon!3 • PROTEGER

The projects are described in chapter 4.

1 Fire and Deforestation Control Project

2 Program of Integrated Environmental Management

3 Designed to improve the prevention and control of illegal forest firesand deforestation and thus revert deforestation trends

source: based on http://www.worldbank.org/rfpp/orga/organisation_orga.htm

The activities of the Joint Steering Committee (JSC) are, among others, to makedecisions on the strategy and implementation of the Pilot Program, approve ofnew projects, make decisions on the use of the resources of the Rain Forest TrustFund, and approve new nominations to the International Advisory Group. TheJSC is composed of three parties: the World Bank, the donors, and the BrazilianMinistry of the Environment. The last two years, the JSC did not meet, due to theelections, new government, etcetera (Joris Jurriëns, pers. comm. 2004). In April2004, the JSC will start negotiations on the second phase of the Pilot Program.


The Brazilian Ministry of the Environment (Ministério do Meio Ambiente, MMA)coordinates the program, through the Secretaria de Coordenação da Amazônia(Secretariat for Coordination of the Amazon, SCA). They coordinate the work ofthe technical teams for each project and monitor implementation and results.

Institutions like IBAMA (Brazilian Institute for the Environment and RenewableNatural Resources) design and execute the projects.

Donors like DFID (Department for International Development, UnitedKingdom) or KFW (German bilateral government organization providing fund-ing) are truly supervising their projects, while the European Union does e.g. mis-sions to projects (monitoring).

The World Bank has a fiduciary function. Their Rain Forest Unit administers theprojects and does due diligence. Their role has changed over the years from leaderand coordinator of the Pilot Program towards support to the BrazilianGovernment (Mid-Term Review of the PPG-7, 2000).

The International Advisory Group (IAG) can raise concerns (twice a year). Thisgroup is paid out of the Trust Fund. The IAG has the function of providing strate-gic input and independent monitoring to the Pilot Program, but in the future thisfunction might shift, as involved parties show that they are rather uncomfortablewith IAG reports (Roberto Smeraldi, pers. comm. 2004).

Once or twice a year there is a Participants Meeting (with donors, BrazilianGovernment, NGOs, and the World Bank). These meetings have the purpose toassess the progress of the Pilot Program, offer guidance, and also make recom-mendations. The GSI has attended the meeting in 2001. In 2002, at the II NationalMeeting, the GSI stressed the importance of involving neighbouring countries inthe second phase. Roberto Smeraldi agreed at this meeting that this is indeed animportant issue.

The project proposal process is quite complicated and the process is demon-strated in the following scenario:

The MMA proposes that they want a project on a certain topic. The World Bankwill then write a Project Concept Document, which goes to 1-4 donors and theyhave to commit. Then the actual project preparation will start: the World Bankworks with the MMA or IBAMA etcetera. The proposal will be appraised (evalu-ated) by the World Bank, donors, GTA, and the MMA. After this, it has to beapproved within the World Bank and the Brazilian institutions that are involved.The final document goes to KFW for example, who will rewrite it in their format,with the World Bank document as an annex. If this has happened, it goes to theMinistry of Finance to be signed. The World Bank will monitor the project as a


participant (the World Bank contributes 10% of project budget through the TrustFund). Problems can arise when there are more participants. If KFW and DFIDfor example have appraised to finance a part, it is possible that DFID starts imple-menting, while KFW is not yet ready, causing delay. Each donor has a separateagreement with the MMA (Phil Hazelton, pers. comm. 2003).

P R O J E C T S O F T H E P P G - 7

4

PROJECTS OF THE PPG-7

The projects of the PPG-7 can be divided into five categories (Pilot program toconserve the Brazilian Rain Forests – CDROM, WB/MMA/AMA/SPRN):

a. Experimentation and demonstrationb. Conservationc. Institutional strengtheningd. Scientific researche. Lessons and dissemination

a. Experimentation and demonstration:

DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS (PD/A)PPG-7 demonstration projects take place in all (states) of the Brazilian GuianaShield.

Examples of PD/A:1. in the município (i.e. Brazilian district) of São Gabriel da Cachoeira (borderingColombia/Venezuela): incentive to the recovery and use of traditional medicine ofUpper Negro River indigenous peoples: forest management system in indigenousarea;

2. in the município of Barcelos (bordering Venezuela): Yanomami Agro-forestryproject: agro-forestry system in indigenous area.

Other areas outside the Guiana Shield where demonstration projects are imple-mented are in the other Amazonian States of Acre, Rondônia, Mato Grosso,Tocantins, Maranhão, and along the coastline of Brazil.

The demonstration projects (PD/A) started in 1994 and ended in 2003 and hadthe aim to promote, test, and disseminate community-based conservation anddevelopment initiatives applied in the Amazon tropical rainforests and theAtlantic Forest, so they could be replicated elsewhere. Examples of the thematicareas are: ecology and environmental quality, policies of participation and social-environmental conflicts resolution, economic productivity, etcetera. Civil societywas involved in all stages of the project (CDROM, WB/MMA/AMA/SPRN).


188 demonstration projects were implemented. Out of the PD/A another projectwas created, the Projetos Demonstrativos dos Povos Indígenas (PDPI), which aimsat indigenous societies and assisting them to safeguard their natural resources.

FOREST RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PROJECT (PROMANEJO)The (sub)projects of PROMANEJO do not take place in the Guiana Shield region,but are found in the States of Amazonas and Pará, just south of the Guiana Shieldborder, and in the States of Acre, Rondônia, and Mato Grosso.

The Forest Resources Management Project started in 1999 and will end in 2004.The objective is to support the development and adoption of timber sustainableproduction systems in the Amazon forest region through managed timberexploitation. Examples of activities of PROMANEJO are: the support to partici-patory management and conservation of Tapajós National Forest (in Pará, southof the Amazon River), initiatives from community-based groups, NGOs and pri-vate companies to test new management alternatives, test alternatives for the con-trol of timber activity and reinforcement of forest policies (CDROM,WB/MMA/AMA/SPRN).

Website (in Portuguese): http://promanejo.ibama.gov.br

FLOODPLAIN RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PROJECT (ProVárzea)(Sub)projects of ProVárzea take place in the States of Amazonas and Pará. Two ofthem are located in the Guiana Shield region: one in the Silves Region(Amazonas), which aims to promote floodplain natural resources conservationby means of eco-tourism and participatory management in this region. The other(sub)project deals with the strengthening of users organizations linked to flood-plain natural resource management. This one is located in the Óbidos, MonteAlegre, and Alenquer municípios. The várzeas stretch out along the Solimões andAmazon Rivers and cover 5% of the Legal Amazon.

The aim of ProVárzea (which started in 2000 and will end in 2005) is to establishthe technical, scientific and policy foundations for the conservation and the envi-ronmentally and socially sustainable management of natural resources within thefloodplains of the Central Amazon River Basin, with a special emphasis on fish-ing resources. Examples of activities are: strategic studies that contribute to theimprovement of policies and regulations for the floodplain; analyzing issues thataffect the conservation and sustainable use of this ecosystem natural resources;promotion of promising initiatives for sustainable management of the floodplainnatural resources by financing local conservation and development projects car-ried out by NGOs and grassroot organizations. Among the developed actionsinclude efforts to encourage involvement of local and fishing communities in


protecting the region upon which their families’ livelihoods depend (CDROM,WB/MMA/AMA/SPRN).

Website: http://www.ibama.gov.br/provarzea/inicio/home.php

SUSTAINABLE BUSINESS VENTURES PROJECT (SBVP)This is a cross cutting project4 mainly financed by the Netherlands (76%)between 2000 and 2001. The projects take place in the whole Amazon Region.

The objectives of the project are: stimulation of the creation of business venturesand to prepare new entrepreneurs in terms of their business management capa-bility, design and propose mechanisms and policies to reinforce the feasibility ofsustainable economic activities in the Amazon Region (sectors like handicrafts,rubber, Brazil nuts, honey, palm heart, fish, etcetera).

The main activities are: advice on all aspects of the entrepreneurship with regardto sustainable products, increase of technical capabilities, build up of productionnetworks, and identify subsidies that may assist in the process of drawing up sus-tainable development policy mechanisms for the region (CDROM, WB/MMA/AMA/SPRN).

b. Conservation

EXTRACTIVE RESERVES PROJECT (RESEX)This project started in 1994 and will end in 2005 and takes place in four extrac-tive reserves. One of them is located in the Guiana Shield region, namely the RioCajari Extractive Reserve (Amapá, near the border of Pará, just above the AmazonRiver). The other extractive reserves are: Chico Mendes and Alto Juruá (in Acre)and Rio Ouro Preto (in Rondônia).

The aim of the project is to develop and test appropriate approaches to the social,economic, and environmental management of Amazon ecosystems in fourextractive reserves. It is based on the knowledge and traditional practices of thepopulations that depend on forest products for their living.

Examples of the activities are: support of the extractive reserves by legalization,strengthening of community organizations, improve subsistence and commercialproduction, etcetera (CDROM, WB/MMA/AMA/SPRN).

4 The other cross-cutting project is the Atlantic Forest Subprogram. As we are discussing theAmazon Region in this report, this project will not be further elaborated.


In the RESEX project, 2.1 million hectares of extractive reserves were established.In the possible second phase of the Pilot Program, a RESEX II will consolidatethese extractive reserves, so they can act as model for the Amazonian Region.

INDIGENOUS LAND PROJECT (PPTAL)Projects take place in all the Amazonian states. PPTAL started in 1996 and willend in 2005. This project aims to contribute to the improvement of the well-beingof indigenous peoples through regularization of their lands, protection of theirborders and conservation of existing natural resources. Examples of activities are:strengthening of indigenous peoples’ control over their territories by encouragingtheir active participation in land legalization and protection, supporting indige-nous organizations’ capacity-building, and supporting alternative approaches todemarcation carried out by indigenous people themselves, with technical assist-ance from NGOs under supervision of the National Indian Foundation, FUNAI(CDROM, WB/MMA/AMA/SPRN).

In this project, 59 indigenous territories were demarcated between 1996 and 2002(in total 30 million hectares). There are 389 indigenous territories in Amazonia(99 million hectares), of which 157 territories (45 million hectares) are includedin PPTAL.

Many indigenous people cross national boundaries. There are approximately 220indigenous groups in Brazil (September 2003). The following are transboundaryin Brazil, Colombia, Venezuela, Guyana, Suriname and/or French Guiana:

• the Baniwa live in Amazonas, Colombia, and Venezuela;• the Bará, Barasana, Desena, Karapanã, Kubeo, Kuripako, Maku, Makuna,

Miranha, Piratapuya, Siriano, Tariana, Tukano, Tuyuka, Wanana live inAmazonas and Colombia (not necessarily in the Guiana Shield);

• the Baré, Warekena live in Amazonas and Venezuela;• the Galibi do Oiapoque, Palikur, Wajãpi live in Amapá and French Guiana;• the Ingarikó live in Roraima, Guyana, and Venezuela;• the Makuxi, Patomona, Wapixana live in Roraima and Guyana;• the Taurepang, Yekuana live in Roraima and Venezuela;• the Tiriyó live in Pará and Suriname;• the WaiWai live in Amazonas, Roraima, Pará, and Guyana;• the Wayana live in Amapá, French Guiana, and Suriname;• the Yanomami live in Roraima, Amazonas, and Venezuela.

(note: spelling of the different tribes varies). Some of the above tribes are relatedor speak the same language (http://www.socioambiental.org/website/pib/english/whwhhow/table.asp). The GSI regards indigenous peoples as ideal ecosystem


managers in the Guiana Shield region. The resguardos in Colombia are a goodexample of indigenous sustainable forest management5.

ECOLOGICAL CORRIDORS PROJECTThe Ecological Corridors Project consists of two corridors: one is located in theAmazon Region and stretches from the east of Manaus to the border of Colombia(comparable with the size of the United Kingdom), around the Solimões andJapurá Rivers. Part of this corridor is in the Guiana Shield region. The otherproject (with the size of Ireland) is located along the central Brazilian coastline.

This project started in 2002 and will end in 2006, and has the objective to con-serve biodiversity by establishing ecological corridors in the Amazon Region andAtlantic Forest. The ecological corridors aggregate many existing protected areas(varying from state conservation unities to indigenous lands). The activities aree.g.: incentive to the conversion of private areas into conservation areas, supportto the sound resource management, and formulation of policy recommendations(CDROM, WB/MMA/AMA/SPRN).

AMAZON FIRE PREVENTION AND MOBILIZATION PROJECT (PROTEGER II)This project is active in all the Amazonian States, except Amazonas.

The first phase of this project started in 1998, as there were a lot of fires at the time(especially in the State of Roraima). In 2001 the second phase started (until 2004).Activities in the first phase were: awareness raising, mobilizing small farmers, andtraining them on the prevention of fire. The aim of the second phase of thisproject (PROTEGER II) is to minimize the use of fire and promotion of the adop-tion of sustainable practices in the production system of small farmers. The activ-ities in this phase were: training of 425 monitors, seminars for training of themonitors, distribution of 102,000 primers and 81,000 posters, formation of 241environmental community participatory groups, promotion of 12 annual cara-vans for interchange visits, including 36 experiences of management and produc-tion without fire – there will be also seminars on this subject (CDROM,WB/MMA/ AMA/SPRN).

In this project, 12,000 family-based producers (coming from 322 municipalities)were trained in techniques for controlled burning and forest fire prevention.

Website (in Portuguese): www.proteger.org.br

5 Hammen, M.C. van der. 2003. The Indigenous Resguardos of Colombia: their contribution to con-servation and sustainable forest use. GSI/NC-IUCN series 1


c. Institutional strengthening

NATURAL RESOURCES POLICY PROJECT (SPRN)This project takes place in all Amazonian States. The project, which started in1996 and ends in 2006, has the following objective: to support sustainable use ofnatural resources by defining and implementing the appropriate models of inte-grated environmental management along the state and municipal governments inthe Amazon Region.

Examples of activities are: ecological/economic zoning, which defines guidelinesfor the use of natural resources in specific zones within priority areas; monitor-ing of key environmental variables in priority areas; enforcing environmentallaws and regulations; strengthening state and local governmental agenciesthrough staffing, training, improved organization, and equipment purchases;promoting citizen awareness through educational campaigns (CDROM,WB/MMA/AMA/SPRN).

One of the accomplishments of the SPRN is the development of innovativeapproaches to environmental monitoring, licensing and enforcement (focus oncontrolling deforestation and illegal logging). Other accomplishments are thestrengthening of state and municipal government agencies so they can implementdecentralized strategies in environmental management, and the introduction ofnew principles of collaboration and participation to the Brazilian administrativeculture – in particular within environmental authorities (Mid-Term Review, 2000).

AMAZON WORKING GROUP INSTITUTIONAL STRENGTHENING PROJECT (GTA)The Amazon Working Group (Grupo de Trabalho Amazônico, GTA) is an umbrel-la organization created in 1992. Today it has 19 offices in the States of Roraima,Amazonas, Pará (not in the Guiana Shield region), Amapá, and the States of Acre,Rondônia, and Tocantins.

The aim of this project is strengthening of the institutional and operationalcapacity of the GTA, so that it can efficiently represent the Amazon civil societyin the Pilot Program. The current project to support the network’s institutionstrengthening started in 2002 and will end in 2005. The GTA is a coalition of 500grassroots Amazonian NGOs (like rubber tappers, fishermen, and Amerindians).The GTA is participating in several fora on discussions on the Amazon and in themonitoring of all projects of the Pilot Program.

The activity of the project is capacity building of the GTA on a technical, financial,communication, political, and institutional level (CDROM, WB/MMA/AMA/SPRN). The GTA is actively participating in the PPG-7. The building-up of socialcapital and participation of NGOs and the Brazilian civil society is considered oneof the key achievements of the Pilot Program (Mid-Term Review, 2000).


Website (in Portuguese): http://www.gta.org.br

Another institutional strenghtening project is the Atlantic Rainforest Network(RMA), which has also received support under the Demonstration Projects. Theobjective of the Rede Mata Atlântica is to promote the conservation of the AtlanticRainforest through coordinated political action and NGO mutual support, andexchange to promote effective public sector conservation programs. The projectstarted in 2001 and will end in 2004. Website: http://www.rma.org.br/

d. Scientific research

SCIENCE CENTRES AND DIRECTED RESEARCH PROJECTScientific research takes place all over the Amazon Region.

This project, started in 1994 and ended in 1999, had two components: directedresearch (PD) and science centres (C&T). The PD Project (PPD) had the objec-tive to give support to research projects in the Amazon Region. The C&T had theobjective of institutional strengthening of the Emílio Goeldi Museum in Belémand the National Institute for Amazon Research (INPA) in Manaus (Centres ofExcellence). Activities were the institutional strengthening and development,recovery and improvement of infrastructure and equipment, strengthening of thehuman resources basis, and dissemination of scientific information (CDROM,WB/MMA/AMA/SPRN).

With regard to the PPD, 56 directed research projects were implemented on sus-tainable development and conservation. With regard to the C&T project, theinfrastructure and management of INPA and the Emílio Goeldi Museum werestrengthened.

e. Lessons and dissemination

MONITORING AND ANALYSIS PROJECT (AMA)This project started in 1998 and currently has a closing date of December 2004,with a possibility of extension. It covers every state of the Brazilian Amazon. It hasthe objective of contributing to the identification, systematization, and dissemin-ation of lessons learnt and other strategic knowledge derived from the PilotProgram. Activities are monitoring and evaluation, studies and analyses, and dis-semination and interchange (CDROM, WB/MMA/AMA/SPRN). The Mid-TermReview commented on the fact that in reality there was no dissemination (until2000), but since 2001, considerable progress has been made in dissemination,with a number of publications being launched by AMA (Marcello Coelho, pers.comm. 2004).


GSI Project experience

In the first phase of the Guiana Shield Initiative, mainly studies and workshopswere carried out to show the importance of the region6, and which are a basis fora GEF proposal the GSI will submit. The GSI has gained lots of experience withprojects via the small grants Tropical Rainforest Programme (TRP) of the NC-IUCN, which has been operating since 1996. Since 1 January 2004, the smallgrants for Wetlands programme of the NC-IUCN has also possibilities to fundprojects in the Guiana Shield region, which means more possibilities for projectsin the region. A difference with the PPG-7 projects is that they are country drivenand the Netherlands Committee for IUCN does not give technical assistance. GSIprojects will, as mentioned before, focus on compensation systems for environ-mental goods and services and transboundary issues. Although the contributionsare modest compared to the funding of the PPG-7, almost 60 projects7 (or exten-sion of projects) were funded in the Guiana Shield region. In the table below, onecan find how many (sub)projects were funded via the TRP in the Guiana Shieldregion until 2003. They are placed under one of the type of projects the PPG-7 iscarrying out, but some projects are related to several elements (and then only onewas chosen). As the TRP financed a lot of programmes in relation to indigenouspeoples, most projects were placed in the Conservation type.

Type of Experimentation Conservation Institutional Scientific Lessons and Financing project and strengthening research dissemi- involved

demonstration nation (until 31 Dec. 2003)

Country # of EUR # of EUR # of EUR # of EUR # of EURprojects proj. proj. proj. proj.

Brazil 4 74,500 € 74,500

Colombia 3 69,500 4 151,000 1 21,500 3 121,500 € 363,500

French 1 47,000 € 47,000Guiana

Guyana 1 4,000 13 286,000 2 12,000 € 302,000

Suriname 3 90,500 4 162,000 1 61,500 € 314,000

Venezuela 1 66,000 8 180,500 1 17,500 2 46,000 4 90,500 € 400,500

Guiana 2 32,000 1 2,500 € 34,500Shield general

TOTAL 8 230,000 36 933,000 4 51,000 6 229,000 5 93,000 € 1,536,000

6 Studies have been done on carbon, commercial NTFPs, resguardos in Colombia, Priorities Setting,hydrology, sustainable ecotourism, and monitoring (see www.guianashield.org).

7A description of the projects can be found at http://www.nciucn.nl/english/funds /trp/projectlists/latam_2.rtf and http://www.nciucn.nl/english/funds/trp/project lists/LATIN%20AMERICA.rtf

L E S S O N S L E A R N T

5

LESSONS LEARNT

The Mid-Term Review (2000), carried out by Indufor Oy (Finland) and STCP(Brazil), gave recommendations for the future of the Pilot Program and reviewedthe accomplishments attained (lessons learnt). It should be mentioned here thatthere were comments on the Mid-Term Review from the IAG8. Their main com-ment was that the Mid-Term Review contained many errors, omissions or mis-leading biases with regard to the Pilot Program. The biggest failure, according tothe IAG, was that the review did not develop an analysis of the historical develop-ment of the Pilot Program, as most of the problems mentioned in the Mid-TermReview have their origin in the structure and framework of the five year longnegotiating phase of the Pilot Program. Because of this omission, it is impossiblefor outsiders to understand the reasons for certain arrangements, and strategicdesign of several projects. With this in mind, it is still useful to look at some of therecommendations stated in the Mid-Term Review to learn from the experiencesof the PPG-7. As it is a few years later, some of the issues pointed out in the Mid-Term Review, might be resolved, such as the lack of dissemination (see AMAproject, chapter 4). Most (updated) accomplishments of the Pilot Program areintegrated in chapter 4.

The World Bank’s administrative costs were until 2000 US$ 14 million (17% ofthe total Pilot Program spending). The overall administrative costs were esti-mated 40% of the spending (however, some of these costs can be seen as institu-tional strengthening of the partner institutions). The structure of the GSI will cer-tainly not be simple, as six beneficiary countries will be involved, but the pro-gramme will not be donor driven, which will reduce complex procedures. Itshould be a signal for the GSI to avoid high administrative costs (at least as a per-centage of the total budget), as it will lead to irritations among the beneficiariesand could reduce willingness to participate.

The Mid-Term Review states that there was a lack of strategic vision and use of aprogrammatic approach. It was recommended that this needs to be developed onthe basis of the Brazilian Government’s vision and strategy for its rainforests. Asmentioned before, the GSI will have a different structure (projects will not bedonor driven), but the GSI will have to deal with six different countries with dif-ferent visions on their rainforests, which of course cannot be neglected.

8 IAG Comments on the Mid-Term Review Report (January 2001)


The coherence and interlinkages between many projects were limited. SPRN,improved this matter, though. Transboundary projects will be one of the key ele-ments of the GSI; if the GSI can establish projects on the other side of the borderof Brazil, it would be a good opportunity to create coherence and interlinkagesbetween projects of the GSI and the PPG-7.

As mentioned before, the Pilot Program was mainly donor driven, as there wasnot enough trust in the capability of the Brazilian institutions to efficientlymanage the Pilot Program. It was suggested by the Mid-Term Review to transferthe management of the Pilot Program in Brazilian hands. Ownership is a veryimportant issue for the GSI, and transferring it to the region has to be done assoon as possible. By creating ownership, one creates commitment.

With regard to projects involving indigenous people, the Mid-Term Review men-tions that the conservation of tropical forests and sustainable development of theindigenous communities in their traditional lands are mutually compatible objec-tives. The procedures of the projects were not always compatible with the needsand capacities of the indigenous organizations involved. The Mid-Term Reviewsuggests that socio-economic and cultural needs of indigenous people should beaddressed, and they should have full participation. The GSI fully supports thesesuggestions. When contracting indigenous communities for ecosystem manage-ment, the GSI is planning to involve indigenous lawyers to set up these contracts.The resguardos system in Colombia is an example of indigenous management ofareas. The GSI has published a report about this issue.9

One of the remarks was that there was not enough feedback between research andother components of the Pilot Program, and that the PD should further identifyknowledge gaps and validate demonstration alternatives. The Priority SettingWorkshop of the GSI – organised in April 2002 in Paramaribo, together withConservation International which provided the methodological leadership, andUNDP – brought together 200 (scientific) participants who reached consensusabout the conservation priorities for the Guiana Shield. This is a good base for further study and the GSI should stimulate this network of scientists to con-tribute their knowledge to the region, so all actors can react sufficiently.

Another comment in the Mid-Term Review was that there was only limitedinvolvement of the private sector. In order to attract the private sector, ecological-economic zoning can create confidence among the private sector investors forsustainable development. This activity takes place in the SPRN project. Whendeveloping a solid commercial non-timber forest products sector, for example,

9 Hammen, M.C. van der. 2003. The Indigenous Resguardos of Colombia: their contribution toconservation and sustainable forest use. GSI/NC-IUCN series 1.


one will probably have to engage with the private sector on various levels, as manycommercial non-timber forest products are hard to sell without a good packageand/or distribution channel (importers from abroad, manufacturers, etcetera).The GSI study on non-timber forest products recognises the marketing problemsfor the producers of these products. Future work on NTFPs by the GSI shouldfirst focus on well established products and the regional markets, rather thaninternational markets.

Other relevant suggestions from the Mid-Term Review were:• communication as a tool for coherence;• integration and promotion of awareness raising on sustainability and environ-

mental conservation;• setting up a program-level monitoring and evaluation system to provide feed-

back to project managers and disseminate critical lessons for other initiativesinvolving tropical forests;

• decentralization of environmental administration for greater effectiveness;• necessity of policy enforcement (as not more than 1% of the environmental

offences have resulted in effective punishment and repair of environmentaldamage – until 2000).

With regard to the last comment: the Brazilian Minister of the Environment,Marina Silva, promised on 15 March 2004, a satellite monitoring system, investi-gations, and new laws. The Brazilian Government will push for a law that forbidsto occupy and deforest public lands (Nery, 2004).

S E C O N D P H A S E O F T H E P P G - 7

6

SECOND PHASE OF THE PPG-7 AND POSSIBILITIES FOR THE GSI

As mentioned earlier, the second phase of the PPG-7 is of great importance forthe GSI, as it can entail more collaboration with the Pilot Program. TheMemorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the GSI and the PPG-7 is at themoment limited to information sharing in relation to several transboundaryissues (such as rivers, indigenous territories, (possible future) parks, infrastruc-ture development, and gold mining), including the possible development oftransboundary ecological corridors. At the moment, five municípios within theecological corridors project, border another Guiana Shield country (Barcelos inAmazonas – Venezuela, Japurá in Amazonas – Colombia, Santa Isabel do RioNegro in Amazonas – Venezuela, São Gabriel da Cachoeira in Amazonas –Colombia/ Venezuela, and Caroebe in Roraima – Guyana), but the ecological cor-ridor bordering Colombia may have to deal with the political instability in thatcountry, which may influence the options for a transboundary project. Sharinginformation regarding a monitoring system or methodology is also mentioned inthe MOU. The GSI has done a study about the monitoring possibilities of theGuiana Shield. In this study, the regional potential of the Brazilian SIVAM, nowfocused on the Brazilian Legal Amazon, is highlighted. In addition the MOUmentions the (joint) organisation of workshops on issues such as cooperationbetween managers of transboundary protected areas or indigenous territories,setting up regional markets for tourism, certified tourist products, etcetera. TheWorld Bank PPG-7 unit has much to offer for regional initiatives as to sharinginformation on policies and best practices and as to technical assistance. TheWorld Bank PPG-7 unit can also, if the Brazilian Government agrees, supporttransboundary activities via the Trust Fund. Additional small contributions maybe provided for networking, cross visits, and training, at the technical and scien-tific levels (Gregor Wolf, pers. comm. 2004).

A first step would be to look at PPG-7 projects in the fifteen Brazilian municípiosthat border the other Guiana Shield countries (see ANNEX 2). These projectsconcern the following programme elements: PD/A, Ecological Corridors, PRO-TEGER II, ProVárzea, SPRN, and PPTAL. Similar projects (with a GSI focus)could be executed on the other side of the border, if there is a transboundaryaspect (an indigenous area, for example). Other projects could be duplicated, ofcourse, with information sharing (best practices) or training, technical assistance,etcetera.


The problem at this moment is that negotiations for the second phase have notyet started and that there is no idea how long they will last once started.Preparatory talks about the second phase have been going on for a couple of yearsnow, but with limited content and perspectives. Until now there is no plan tonegotiate a programme with neighbouring countries (Roberto Smeraldi, pers.comm. 2004).

The delay of the second phase of the Pilot Program is a consequence of two majorBrazilian Government initiatives:

1) The GT do Desmatamento (Grupo Permanente de Trabalho Interministerial doDesmatamento, Permanent Interministrial Working Group on Deforestation),lead by the Casa Civil da Presidência (Civil House, which provides services ofconsulting, analysis, information, and technical support for the President) torespond to the on-going deforestation with a comprehensive set ofGovernment actions developed with fourteen Ministries (such as theMinistries of the Environment, Science and Technology, Defense, Agriculture,Development, Justice, Mines and Energy, Planning, and Transport). Theseactions range from better enforcement of existing regulations and policies tosupporting sustainable alternatives. This plan was announced on 15 March2004.

2) Another reason for the delay of the second phase is the Plano AmazôniaSustentável – PAS, which is a commitment of President Lula and sevenGovernors of the Legal Amazon (excluding the States of Mato Grosso andMaranhão) to sponsor a comprehensive sustainable development plan for theNorth Region of Brazil. The Secretaria de Coordenação da Amazônia and theMinistério de Integração Nacional prepared the technical proposal which isreaching the level of an internal debate with other Ministries (AlbertoLourenço, pers. comm. 2004).

The GT do Desmatamento and PAS are major new policies, meaning a radical shiftin terms of how the Amazon is seen by the Government (Alberto Lourenço, pers.comm. 2004). The Action Report of the GT do Desmatamento has been greatlyinfluenced by the PPG-7. It is a prime example of “mainstreaming” and of howthe Pilot Program has been influencing public policy (Gregor Wolf, pers. comm.2004). Comments in an editorial by Roberto Smeraldi on the GT doDesmatamento state that “the principal problem with the GT is that it is bornbefore the Sustainable Amazonia Plan (PAS), which should be its older brother.Announced since May 2003, PAS should become the directing instrument for apolicy of regional development” (www.amazonia.org.br). The second phase ofthe PPG-7 will start after the Joint Steering Committee meeting in April 2004.


With regard to a programme with neighbouring countries, the signs at theParticipants Meeting in 2001 were encouraging, as the donors agreed to furtherexamine the potential for application of the example of international cooperationto other countries and regions. For the GSI, this was of course a good sign forfuture cooperation. The Participants therefore suggested systematic exchange ofexperiences and lessons learnt be envisaged among the eight Amazon countries(i.e. the countries that signed the Amazon Cooperation Treaty, which includes theGuiana Shield countries, except French Guiana). It was decided then, that one ofthe characteristics of the second phase would be the strengthening of the programapproach and the integration with other projects and programs in the AmazonianRainforest (Resolution of the Participants Meeting, Cuiabá, 1 June 2001). This isof course a matter of interpretation (it does not mention which rainforest –national or international –, but as the GSI is operating in the whole Guiana Shield(including the part shared with the Brazilian Legal Amazon), the GSI would cer-tainly be one of the programmes that could qualify for integration.

At the World Summit of Sustainable Development in Johannesburg, 2003,Commissioner Paul Nielson of the European Union stated as an EU-condition tosupport a second phase, the PPG-7 should be extending to neighbouring coun-tries. While acknowledging its desirability, the PPG-7 experts consulted for thispaper emphasise the multitude and complexity of issues still to be addressedwithin Brazil, before extension to neighbouring countries can become a priorityissue in the second phase of the Pilot Program. The second phase will be probablya mainstreaming phase (integration of the environment into all levels of the insti-tutions: cross-sector approaches, such as urban waste management). Germanywill admit new pilot projects in strategic areas, but also wants to be part of amainstream plan, such as PAS. The Brazilian Government is of the same opinion:although admitting some new pilots, the second phase is of ambitious main-streaming efforts. (Alberto Lourenço, pers. comm. 2004). Another reason forabandoning the pilot phase is that the donors feel that multi-donor projects havehigh transaction costs in terms of bureaucracy (Mauro Ruffino, pers. comm.2004). This was also mentioned in the Mid-Term Review.

It remains unclear how much budget will be available for the second phase of thePilot Program. Several PPG-7 experts (Roberto Smeraldi, Alberto Lourenço,Mauro Ruffino, Joris Jurriëns, and Gregor Wolf) have stated that the UnitedKingdom and the Netherlands have ended their aid cooperation with Brazil. TheIndependent of 12 November 2003 reported that “Britain was to slash its aid pro-gramme aimed at saving the Amazon Rainforest and preserving the culture of itspeople to meet the soaring cost of rebuilding Iraq”. In the case of the ProVárzeaProject, this means that the development of models of co-management andimplementation of public policy will be affected and more funds will be needed(Mauro Ruffino, pers. comm. 2004). Only Germany has shown strong commit-ment, by not only remaining in the PPG-7, but also by raising their budget


(Alberto Lourenço, pers. comm. 2004). The Netherlands can still fund small-scalestrategic activities (Joris Jurriëns, pers. comm. 2004). With regard to the fundingof individual pilots in the second phase, the funding will be less external, butmore from Brazil, the Inter-American Development Bank, and the World Bank.In this respect, the Pilot Program is evolving, as Brazil is developing a strategy forthe region (Gregor Wolf, pers. comm. 2004).

Although there are still many obstacles to be overcome to extend the PPG-7 to theneighbouring countries, the GSI is much in favour of this option, as theAmazonian Forest extends beyond political borders. The PPG-7 and the GSIcould have complementary projects, with a GSI-focus on transboundary projectsin the true spirit of an eco-regional concept. When collaborating, synergy effectscan emerge. If the PPG-7 extends to neighbouring countries, these countries canbenefit from the well-developed methodology of the PPG-7 and its experiences.Definitely at the short-term, there is another option for the GSI to work togetheron transboundary issues – linking GSI-projects to PPG-7 projects, or workingtogether in the Brazilian Guiana Shield region, or by sharing information or pro-moting duplication of successful projects. While the PPG-7 is willing to connectwith similar initiatives in neighbouring countries, it may not be able to designPPG7-financed projects reaching across national borders. Nevertheless, the PPG-7acknowledges that there are many initiatives in neighbouring countries, whichhave highest relevance for its own mission objectives and which could serve asuseful examples for the PPG-7 (Gregor Wolf, pers. comm. 2004).

The GSI looks forward to further cooperation with the PPG-7 in the ways men-tioned above.

R E F E R E N C E S

REFERENCES

International Advisory Group. 2001, IAG Comments on the Mid-Term Review Report.Downloadable from http://www.worldbank.org/rfpp/iag/IAG_on_MTR.htm

Indufor Oy and STCP. 2000, Mid-Term Review of the Pilot Program to Conserve the Brazilian Rain Forests. Downloadable from http://www.worldbank.org/rfpp/docs/mtrexsum.htm (summary)

NC-IUCN/MMA. 2003, Memorandum of Understanding between the Guiana ShieldInitiative/Netherlands Committee for IUCN and the PPG-7/Ministério do MeioAmbiente, unpublished document dated 21 August 2003

Nery, N. 2004, Brazil Struggles to Slow Amazon Destruction, Reuters,dated 15 March 2004

Resolution of the Participants Meeting Cuiabá. 2001, Pilot Program to Conserve theBrazilian Rain Forests, dated 1 June 2001

Smeraldi, R. 2004, Realistic in its diagnostic, efficient in its implementation?www.amazonia.org.br, dated 15 March 2004

Woolf, M. 2003, UK cuts rainforest funding to meet Iraq costs, The Independent,dated 12 November 2003

World Bank. 2002, Pilot program to conserve the Brazilian Rain Forests, an innovativeexperience in international cooperation for sustainable development. World Bank,PPG-7, Secretary for Coordination of Amazonia, Ministry of the Environment.

Worldbank. 2004, Printout of Active and Closed Funds in the Rain Forest Trust Fund.E-mail from Marcello Coelho (World Bank) to Dave Zwaan on 12 March 2004.

World Bank/Ministério do Meio Ambiente/AMA/SPRN (CDROM, WB/MMA/AMA/SPRN). Pilot program to conserve the Brazilian Rain Forests. CDROM published byWorld Bank, Brasilia, Brazil.

http://www.amazonia.org.br

http://www.g7.utoronto.ca/

http://www.mma.gov.br/port/sca/ppg7/index.html

http://www.nciucn.nl/english/funds /trp/projectlists/latam_2.rtf

http://www.nciucn.nl/english/funds/trp/project lists/LATIN%20AMERICA.rtf

http://www.proteger.org.br

http://www.socioambiental.org/website/pib/english/whwhhow/table.asp

http://www.worldbank.org/rfpp/

A N N E X 1

Funding of the first phase of the PPG-7

Source for Rain Forest For Projects TotalTrust Fund US$ x million

US$ x million (rounded)

Contracted CommittedUS$ x million US$ x million

Germany 19.35 87.60 64.31 171.27

European Union 14.05 43.52 6.77 64.34

United Kingdom 2.32 20.27 0.73 23.32

United States 6.25 3.95 9.15 19.35

Netherlands 4.88 0.48 4.26 9.63

Japan 6.80 0.45 7.25

Italy 3.85 3.85

France 1.41 1.41

Canada 0.74 0.74

Brazil - Government 28.75 10.86 39.61

Brazil - Communities 5.00 5.00

Total 58.25 191.44 96.08 345.77

• Germany mainly participates in PD/A, PDPI, Promanejo, Provárzea, SPRN, AMA, andEcological Corridors, and associated bilateral programs are financed.

• The European Union mainly provided funding for Resex, C&T, PD/A, SPRN, andEcological Corridors.

• United Kingdom has funded projects like C&T, Promanejo, Provárzea, SPRN, andPDPI.

• The United States funded projects like C&T and PROTEGER.• The Netherlands has funded mainly SBVP and Strengthening of the Program

Coordination.• Japan has funded PDPI.• Italy contributed mainly to the Rain Forest Trust Fund.• Canada contributed mainly to the Rain Forest Trust Fund.• France contributed in PD/A.• Spain participates via scientific cooperation in two bilateral associated projects.

Other multilateral actors are: United Nations Development Programme, Inter-AmericanDevelopment Bank, and Global Environment Facility.

The Natural Resource Policy Project (SPRN) has received the biggest part of the budgetof the total Pilot Program financing (23%), followed by PD/A (15%).

Source: www.worldbank.org/rfpp/fundtabl.htm

A N N E X 2

Location of projects in the Brazilian Guiana Shield (derived from CDROM, WB/MMA/AMA/SPRN)

In every Brazilian Guiana Shield município: SBVP, PPD, and AMA projects are carried out.In brackets: neighbouring state (AP, AM, PA, RR) or neighbouring Guiana Shield country(COL, VEN, GUY, SUR, FRG). Projects with the potential for transboundary developmentare in bold.

Amapá

Laranjal do Jari (PA):PD/A, RESEX, SPRN

Macapá: PD/A, Proteger II,SPRN, GTA

Mazagão: Proteger II,RESEX, SPRN

Porto Grande: PD/A,Proteger II

Vitória do Jari (PA–SUR/FRG): RESEX, SPRN

Amazonas

Barcelos (RR–VEN):PD/A, EcologicalCorridors

Caapiranga: EcologicalCorridors

Coari: Ecological Corridors

Codajás: EcologicalCorridors

Faro: Ecological Corridors

Iranduba: EcologicalCorridors

Itacoatiara: EcologicalCorridors, SPRN

Itapiranga: EcologicalCorridors

Japurá (COL): EcologicalCorridors

Manacapuru: EcologicalCorridors

Manaus: C&T, GTA,Ecological Corridors,SPRN

Maraã: ProVárzea,Ecological Corridors

Nhamundá: EcologicalCorridors

Novo Airão (RR): PD/A,Ecological Corridors,SPRN

Presidente Figueiredo(RR): PD/A, SPRN,Ecological Corridors

Rio Preto da Eva: PD/A,Ecological Corridors

São Gabriel daCachoeira (AM -COL/VEN): PD/A,Ecological Corridors

São Sebastião doUatumã: EcologicalCorridors

Santa Isabel do RioNegro (AM – VEN):Ecological Corridors

Silves: PD/A, ProVárzea

Urucará: EcologicalCorridors

Pará

Alenquer: Proteger II,ProVárzea

Almeirim (AP–SUR):Proteger II

Monte Alegre: ProVárzea,Proteger II

Óbidos (SUR): PD/A,ProVárzea

Oriximiná(RR–GUY/SUR): PD/A,Proteger II

Prainha: Proteger II

Terra Santa: Proteger II

Roraima

Amajari (VEN):Proteger II

Alto Alegre (AM):Proteger II, SPRN,PPTAL

Boa Vista: GTA, PPTAL,Proteger II, SPRN

Bonfim (GUY): PPTAL,Proteger II, SPRN

Cantá: Proteger II, SPRN,PPTAL

Caracaraí (AM–GUY):Proteger II, SPRN,PPTAL

Caroebe (GUY):Proteger II, SPRN,PPTAL, EcologicalCorridors

Iracema (AM): SPRN,Proteger II

Mucajaí: Proteger II,SPRN, PD/A

Normandia (GUY):Proteger II, SPRN

Pacaraima (VEN):Proteger II, SPRN

Rorainópolis (AM):Proteger II, SPRN

São João da Baliza (AM):Proteger II, PD/A,PPTAL, EcologicalCorridors

São Luiz: Proteger II,PD/A, PPTAL

Uiramutã (GUY/VEN):Proteger II

pilot program to conserve the brazilian rain forests

Documents