Piaçava (Leopoldinia piass)aba) Rubber (Hevea spp)

REPORT 1

AMAZONAS, BRAZIL

UNEDITED VERSION

VERENA CRISTINA DE ALMEIDA

INDEPENDENT CONSULTANT

AMAZONAS, BRAZIL

NOVEMBER 2013

Pirarucu (Arapaima gigas)

Essential oils Açaí (Euterpe oleracea) Brazil nuts (Bertholletia excelsa)

NOTE

The present report is an unedited, unofficial document. The designations employed and the

presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion

whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any

country, territory, city or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or

boundaries.

The views expressed in this publication are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the

views of the United Nations.

Contents

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ...................................................................................................... 5

1. Background .................................................................................................................................... 8

2. Main policies and programmes related to biodiversity, sociobiodiversity products value chains and

REDD+.............................................................................................................................................. 10

2.1. Federal Sphere ............................................................................................................................ 10

2.2. State sphere ................................................................................................................................ 11

4. REDD+ institutions and selected projects in Amazonas ................................................................ 14

4.1 State Department of Environment and Sustainable Development of Amazonas – SDS ................. 14

4.2 Amazonas Sustainable Foundation – FAS ..................................................................................... 14

4.3 Biofílica Environmental Investments ............................................................................................ 18

4.4 HDOM Engineering and Environmental Projects Ltda. ................................................................. 20

4.5 Instituto de Conservação e Desenvolvimento Sustentável do Amazonas – IDESAM...................... 20

4.6 Selected projects in REDD+ .......................................................................................................... 21

Institutions in value chains in Amazonas .......................................................................................... 22

5.1. Rubber (Hevea spp) ..................................................................................................................... 23

5.2 Brazil nut (Bertholletia excelsa) .................................................................................................... 24

5.3 Meliponiculture ........................................................................................................................... 26

5.4 Piaçava (Leopoldinia piassaba) ..................................................................................................... 27

5.5 Cocoa (Theobroma cacao) ............................................................................................................ 28

5.6 Agroforestry systems (SAFs) ......................................................................................................... 29

5.7 Açaí berry (Euterpe oleracea) ....................................................................................................... 31

5.8 Pirarucu (Arapaima gigas) ............................................................................................................ 31

5.9 Seed oils, essential oils ................................................................................................................. 32

6. Handicraft .................................................................................................................................... 34

6.1 Selected projects - Federation of Indigenous Organizations of Rio Negro (FOIRN) ........................ 34

6.2 Association of Artisan of Novo Airão (AANA) and Almerinda Malaquias Foundation .................... 34

6.3 Selected projects: Natural ingredients - Socioambiental Institute (ISA) and Indigenous

Organization of the Içana river basin (OIBI) ........................................................................................ 35

7. Obstacles ..................................................................................................................................... 36

8. Needs........................................................................................................................................... 38

9. Opportunities ............................................................................................................................... 39

10. Formulation/adaptation of strategies ........................................................................................ 41

ANNEX 1. The main legal instruments in biodiversity, climate change, sociobiodiversity products, and REDD+ in Brazil

ANNEX 2. Mapping of stakeholders in the Amazonas institutions working in initiatives related to wood products value chains and REDD+ ANNEX 3. Institutions participants, years working in Amazonas, brief reports and expectation of participants in workshop in Amazonas, Brazil

ANNEX 4. Methodology and analysis of the workshop organized under the project

ANNEX 5. Analysis of consistency and applicability of the eligibility criteria for the Bolsa Floresta Programme beneficiaries

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

English Portuguese (original name)

ADS Sustainable Development Agency Agência de Desenvolvimento Sustentável

AFEAM Amazonas State Funding Agency Agência de Fomento do Estado do Amazonas

ASPROC Association of Rural Producers of Carauari Associação dos Produtores Rurais de Carauari

BNDES Brazilian Development Bank Banco Nacional de Desenvolvimento Econômico e Social

CAR Rural Environmental Registry Cadastro Ambiental Rural

CCBA The Climate, Community & Biodiversity Alliance

Aliança para o Clima, Comunidades e Biodiversidade

CECLIMA State Centre of Climate Change Centro Estadual de Mudanças Climáticas

CEUC State Centre of Protected Areas Centro Estadual de Unidades de Conservação

CNS National Council of Rubber Tappers Conselho Nacional dos Seringueiros

COOPMAS Association of Agroextractivists Producers of Sardinha's Colony

Associação dos Produtores Agroextrativistas da Colônia do Sardinha

FAS Amazonas Sustainable Foundation Fundação Amazonas Sustentável

FOIRN Federation of Indigenous Organizations of Rio Negro

Federação das Organizações Indígenas do Rio Negro

FVA Vitoria Amazonica Foundation Fundação Vitória Amazônica

GHG Greenhouse gases Gases de efeito estufa

GIZ German Technical Cooperation Agency Agência de Cooperação Técnica Alemã

IBGE Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics

Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística

ICMBIO Chico Mendes Institute of Biodiversity Conservation

Instituto Chico Mendes de Conservação da Biodiversidade

IDAM Institute of Agricultural Development and Sustainable Forestry of the State of Amazonas

Instituto de Desenvolvimento Agropecuário e Florestal Sustentável do Estado do Amazonas

IDESAM Institute for Conservation and Sustainable Development of Amazonas

Instituto de Conservação de Desenvolvimento Sustentável do Amazonas

INPA National Institute of Research of the Amazon

Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas da Amazônia

IPAAM Institute of Environmental Protection of Amazonas

Instituto de Proteção Ambiental do Amazonas

MDA Ministry of Agrarian Development Ministério do Desenvolvimento Agrário

MDS Ministry of Social Development and Famine Combat

Ministério do Desenvolvimento Social e Combate à Fome

MMA Ministry of Environment Ministério do Meio Ambiente

ONG Non Governmental Organization Organização Não-Governamental

PAA Food Acquisition Programme Programa de Aquisição de Alimentos

PBF Bolsa Floresta Programme Programa Bolsa Floresta

PDD Project Design Document Documento do Desenho do Projeto

PL Project law Projeto de lei

PPCDAm Amazonian Rainforest Plan to Prevent and Control Deforestation

Plano de Ação para Prevenção e Controle do Desmatamento na Amazônia Legal

PPCD-AM Amazonas Plan to Prevent and Control Deforestation

Plano Estadual de Prevenção e Controle do Desmatamento do Amazonas

RDS Sustainable Development Reserve Reserva de Desenvolvimento Sustentável

REDD Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation

Redução de Emissão por Desmatamento e Degradação Florestal

SAF's Agroforestry System Sistemas Agroflorestais

SDS State Department of Environment and Sustainable Development of Amazonas

Secretaria de Estado Meio Ambiente e Desenvolvimento Sustentável do Amazonas

SEPROR State Department for Rural Production of Amazonas

Secretaria de Produção Rural do Estado do Amazonas

SEUC State System of Protected Areas Sistema Estadual de Unidades de Conservação do Amazonas

UC Protected Areas Unidades de Conservação

VCS Verified Carbon Standard Verified Carbon Standard

1. Background

The State of Amazonas is strongly identified with the forest, based on extractivism activities, for

this has been the means of survival and base to the production of traditional communities and

indigenous peoples for many centuries. Amazonas has a vast territory of 1,559,159.148 km2, 97%

of which is covered by forests. It also has a rich biodiversity composed by the largest tropical forest

in the world, crossed by a wide hydrographical network, making fluvial transportation the main

transportation means for the region. The vocation towards conservation and development of

forest-based economic alternatives in the Amazonas is reinforced by the size of the protected

areas, occupying 55,47% of the territory, 28,41% of which are federal, state and local Protected

Areas (UC) and 27,6%, Indigenous Lands.

Traditional communities and indigenous peoples of the Amazonas have carried out activities with

non-wood products value chain for decades. There are many initiatives, though sparse, linked to

non-wood products value chain. The main non-wood products are Brazil nut (Bertholletia excelsa),

rubber (Hevea spp), açai berry (Euterpe oleracea), essencial oils (copaiba – Copaifera sp; andiroba -

Carapa guianensis Aubl.; murumuru – Astrocaryum murumuru), fish (especially pirarucu, in CITES,

Arapaima gigas), piaçava (Leopoldinia piassaba), jute (Corchorus capsularis), and different kinds of

palm fibre, among others. Besides, other complementary activities such as community-based

tourism, sport fishing, ornamental fish capture and handicraft present potential in many regions.

REDD+ initiatives are more recent. The Bolsa Floresta Programme (PBF) of the State of Amazonas

was created in 2007 by the Climate Change State Policy. Although it isn’t strictly a REDD+ initiative,

it intends leading the efforts towards the development of productivity chain of forest-based

environmental services and products, community strengthening and social vulnerability situations.

It is implemented by the Amazonas Sustainable Foundation (FAS) in 15 State Protected Areas. The

first and only REDD+ project in the Amazonas was set, in 2008, by FAS in the Juma Sustainable

Development Reserve (RDS Juma), in partnership with the SDS. Juma REDD is certified under the

CCBA standards, but the project’s results of performance and social and environmental efficiency

are still to be released. However, there are other REDD+ initiatives developing in the Brazilian

Amazon rainforest, in the states of Acre (federal programme) and Rondônia (indigenous initiative

of the Surui Paiter People).

The activities with non-wood products and REDD+ value chains benefit the social, environmental

and economic context of the Amazon rainforest. Nonetheless, only the Juma REDD Project,

implemented by FAS, was acknowledged1 for relating REDD+ to value chains, in spite of not having,

yet, published results about its performance on avoiding deforestation and improving the quality

of life of the communities involved. Besides, there is criticism related to the participatory decision

in the use of the financial resources of this project. Still, there are few initiatives that actually

relate REDD+ to value chains. One of them is the already mentioned REDD Juma and some others

have been developed by IDESAM, as will be shown in the present report.

1 The Amazonas Sustainable Foundation was contacted via telephone and email and invited to participate in the

workshop in Manaus and to answer the questionnaries, but the consultant recieved no answer.

2. Main policies and programmes related to biodiversity, sociobiodiversity products value chains

and REDD+

This section deals with the main legal instruments about biodiversity, sociobiodiversity products

and REDD+ in Brazil and the Amazon rainforest, the aim of which is to point out the political,

economical and social context that pushed those policies, without exhausting all of the normative

instruments valid today. Other legal instruments are found on ANNEX 1.

2.1. Federal Sphere

The Biodiversity National Policy was launched in 2004 and was followed, in 2004, by the

establishment of priority areas with the objective of promoting the sustainable use of the

biodiversity components, taking into account its economic, environmental, social and cultural

value.

A large portion of the greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions in Brazil happen due to the change in the

use of the land. In 2003, deforestation advanced in large scale in the Amazon rainforest and the

practical answer to bridle the arc of deforestation was to create a large number of Protected

Areas.

In 2009, the Climate Change National Policy was created, setting instruments intended for the

reduction of GHG emissions. Among these instruments, the Amazonian Rainforest Plan to Prevent

and Control Deforestation (PPCDAm2) stands out because of three strategic axes: 1. Land Tenure

Regularization; 2. Environmental Control, and 3. Support to Sustainable Productive Activities.

The Sustainable Development of Traditional Peoples and Communities National Policy, of 2007, is

intended to promote sustainable development of traditional peoples and communities,

acknowledging, strengthening and granting their territorial, social, environmental, economic and

2 Note that PPCDAm refers to the programme excecuted by the Federal Government to prevent and combat

deforestation. PPCD-AM is a similar programme based on the same structure (Three axes: 1. Land Tenure Regularization; 2. Environmental Control, and 3. Support to Sustainable Productive Activities) in this case, excecuted by the Amazonas State Government. Both of them are independent from each other in governance; the Plan of Amazonas is more focused on the actual situation on the State and its execution is carried out by governmental institutions along with non-governmental partners.

cultural rights in a respectful way, that values their identities, their organizational forms and their

institutions. Some of its main goals are supporting and granting productive inclusion by promoting

sustainable technologies, considering local and natural resources, and traditional practices,

knowledge and technologies. In 2009 the Ministry of Agrarian Development (MDA), the Ministry of

Environment (MMA) and the Ministry of Social Development and Famine Combat (MDS) launched

the Promotion for Sociobiodiversity Products Chains National Plan. Among the products found in

the Amazonas included in the programme we highlight Brazil nut, andiroba, copaíba, rubber, açai

berry and piaçava.

In the federal sphere, REDD+ is being proposed in two bills3, as well as in the Environmental

Services Payment National Policy bill (PL 792/2007). However, the Government has not set a

position about adopting REDD+ as a strategy to stop deforestation, despite the fact that the civil

society has shown its interest in some proposals.

In the year of 2011, the federal government established the decentralization of environmental

licencing in favour of the states and municipalities through Complementary law 140/2011. This

means a new challenge for state and municipalities’ structures, that, at the present time, don’t

have operational capacity to execute all of their attributions, because of insufficient financial and

human resources to attend to that recent demand.

2.2. State sphere

The State of Amazonas established in 2007, its Climate Change State Policy (Law 3,135/2007), in

which it set guiding lines for the creation of the Bolsa Floresta Programme, also launched in 2007

and implemented, today, in 15 UCs of sustainable use of Amazonas to benefit residing traditional

communities, in order to incentive the preservation of natural resources by forest maintenance. In

that same year the Protected Areas State System was created, through Complementary law

53/2007.

Between 2010 and 2012, debates were organized to build a proposal for an environmental services

policy in Amazonas, thus incorporating REDD+ as a tool of the proposed policy. Unfortunately,

3 PL 212/2012 of the Federal Senate and PL 195/2011, in the lower chamber.

since 2012, it is still waiting for the Governor of Amazonas’ approval. In spite of the delay in the

project’s approval, efforts have been directed towards the elaboration of the Environmental

Services Management System, the implementation of the Rural Environmental Registry (CAR) to

register rural properties and, very timidly, discussing social and environmental safeguards that

should support the regulation after the law is passed. But the scenario is still uncertain as regards

as to the approval of the proposal by the state government during the present administration.

The State of Amazonas is in Phase II (2012-2015) of the Amazonas Plan to Prevent and Control

Deforestation (PPCD-AM), which consolidates the activities carried out by State Government

institutions dedicated to combat deforestation in priority areas (Figure 1). This phase intends to

establish the monitoring of the PPCD-AM performance and impact and the programme is still being

structured. Meanwhile, the Sustainable Productive Activities Development axes contemplate the

creation of a Climate Change and Environmental Services State Fund, as well as to structure the

Registration System of projects, programmes and environmental assets of Amazonas, in

accordance to the bill of the Environmental Services Policy.

Figure 1. Priority areas established by the Government of Amazonas through PPCD-AM (Second

Phase 2012-2015) to carry out initiatives to reduce and prevent deforestation.

Source: Amazonas Plan To Prevent and Control Deforestation (PPCD-AM), CECLIMA/SDS, 2013.

3. Mapping of stakeholders

Mapping of the main stakeholders (ANNEX 2) was carried out through a survey of the Amazonas

institutions working in initiatives related to non-wood products value chains and REDD+, and also

applied in meetings with key-players from the government, NGOs and international cooperation.

After the identification of the key stakeholders, an email was sent to them, explaining roughly

what the BioTrade Initiative is and the objective of the work started in Amazonas. In order to know

their on-going REDD+ and value chains initiatives, the institutions were invited to fill in the survey.

Thirty-nine institutions received emails; seven of them belong to the Federal State, six to the state

government, two to the municipal administration, eighteen to civil society/NGOs, one dedicated to

international cooperation and five to the private sector. Other initiatives were surveyed through

secondary data surveys, as they didn’t answer the survey or were absent in the workshop

organized under the project (see ANNEX 4).

Fifteen questionnaires were retuned, twelve of which brought initiatives involving non-wood

products value chains and three about REDD+ initiatives.

The workshop “Non-wood products value chains and REDD+ in Amazonas, Brazil” was held on 14th

November 2013. The activities performed were related to mapping of stakeholders (ANNEX 3). The

methodology and results of the workshop assessment, together with the participants’

recommendations are listed in ANNEX 4.

As a whole, institutions in Amazonas work really hard with non-wood products and their value

chains. The REDD+ issue is still unknown or not dealt with by most of the institutions with a long

history in Amazonas. Although the private sector is relatively strong in Amazonas, its participation

in initiatives of BioTrade4 is very timid.

The next section presents the institutions that work with REDD+ in Amazonas, as well as the ones

dealing with value chains and related good practices, in using non-wood product. However, this

work doesn’t cover all the existing initiatives in Amazonas and their BioTrade and REDD+ potential.

4 BioTrade is defined as the collection, production, transformation and commercialization of goods and services

derived from native biodiversity, in a way that is environmentally, socially and economically sustainable. BioTrade activities relate to those that comply with BioTrade principles and criteria.

4. REDD+ institutions and selected projects in Amazonas

4.1 State Department of Environment and Sustainable Development of Amazonas – SDS

The State Department of Environment and Sustainable Development of Amazonas (SDS), created

in 2003, is responsible for formulating the environmental policies of the State of Amazonas.

Within its structure there are the State Centre of Protected Areas (CEUC), whose attributions are

to create, implement and manage the 41 State Protected Areas (UCs); the State Centre of Climate

Change (CECLIMA) that develops, articulates and implements policies on Climate Change and

environmental services, such as PPCD-AM and the bill on environmental services, in which REDD+

is included.

In spite of all the work carried out by the SDS during the 2010-2012 period, related to the

aforementioned bill, there hasn’t been, so far, a political decision to pass it. Today, the SDS is

working together with the IDESAM in the elaboration of a proposal for the State System of REDD+

and, a bit more timidly, with the Vitoria Amazonica Foundation (FVA) to establish social and

environmental safeguards proposed by the CCBA.

The CEUC, organism responsible for managing 41 state UCs hasn’t participated effectively in the

discussions about REDD+, although the PBF and Juma REDD are implemented in the state's UCs.

Their actions are mainly oriented towards generating income through non-wood products value

chains, like Brazil nut, pirarucu (by management of this species) and oils, among others.

4.2 Amazonas Sustainable Foundation – FAS

FAS is a private, non-profit institution of public interest, created in December 2007, by a

partnership between the Government of the State of Amazonas and the Bradesco Bank.

Originally, the main funding source to PBF would be the Climate Change, Environmental

Conservation and Development State Fund, also foreseen in the Climate Change State Law.

However, the fund was revoked that same year and replaced by an authorization, by the

3,184/2007 law, for the State to participate in a unique private foundation, intended to develop

and manage programmes and projects linked to the Climate Change Law. In this case, only the PBF

was actually implemented. The same law authorized the State to donate R$20 million to that

foundation. Additionally, the Bradesco Bank donated over R$20 million.

FAS begun to manage and raise funds for the PBF, apart from managing the yield of the permanent

fund that created it. In 2009, Coca-Cola gave another R$20 million that, along with other

donations, were invested in a permanent fund managed by the Bradesco Asset Management

(BRAM).

FAS implements the PBF, its structure is based on the policies for social assistance, environment,

health, education and more, put into practice in 15 State UCs of sustainable use, whose

beneficiaries are the populations that live in these protected areas.

In 2008, FAS implemented the REDD Juma project to restrain deforestation and subsequent GHG

emissions in the UC (RDS Juma) in order to set up a financial mechanism to generate carbon

credits. The initiative received financial support from the Marriot International hotel group,

interested in compensating its emissions, generated by the building of its hotels.

Nevertheless, because of the way it was created, there has been much criticism from the organised

civil society, associations and beneficiaries. There are also evidences of lack of compliance to the

dispositions of Complementary Law 53/2007 (State System of Protected Areas), that indicates that

all financial resource produced by products and environmental services from the state Protected

Areas must be directed to manage and administrate the UC, in this case, to the CEUC/SDS. There is

no transparency about the results and performance of the PBF and the REDD Juma project.

Inconsistencies regarding the criteria for beneficiaries’ eligibility to receive the Bolsa Floresta

Family5, are in opposition to the dispositions of the Brazilian Federal Constitution/1988 (ANNEX 5).

5 Even when PBF was the first experience of compensation via environmental services intended to maintain the rainforest, it is important to talk about it in order to recognize elements to be avoided in projects and programmes of environmental services and REDD+, because it generates expectations in the beneficiaries and misleads their understanding of the rights and duties involved. The PBF prrogramme brings a reference to the assitencialism of the insitution involved with the dwellers of the State of Amazonas Protected Areas for it includes a direct financial benefit (explained in the next item), without considering social and environmental principles and criteria for safeguards in programmes related to REDD+. Thus, direct financial benefits to the hands of the benefiaciaries are not encouraged. Other ways of distributing financial benefits are more efective, e.g.: the Surui Carbon Fund, mentioned on the Report 2 of this consultant.

A) Bolsa Floresta Programme (PBF)

The Bolsa Floresta Programme (PBF) is a state government’s programme, created through the

Climate Change State Policy. The programme is implemented in 15 UCs (Figure 2) of sustainable

use of the Amazonas by the Amazonas Sustainable Foundation (FAS), and its beneficiaries are the

inhabitants of those areas.

Figure 2. Protected Areas in the State of Amazonas where the PBF is implemented.

Source: FAS, 2012.

Requisites for receiving the benefits6 of the programme are established in the 26,958/2008 State

Decree, listed in ANNEX 5 which analyses the use of the eligibility criteria and obligations to the

PBF.

6 Each of the four components of PBF is associated to different benefits. Family is a direct financial benefit and the others (Association, Social and Income generation) are non-financial benefits, in the form of products and services.

PBF is divided in four components:

1. Bolsa Floresta Family: incentive for the participation of families in environmental conservation,

focused on social security. Once the family is registered through the woman, the FAS grants them a

R$600,00/year benefit, accessed via a beneficiary card from the Bradesco Bank.

2. Bolsa Floresta Association: investments focused to strengthening community associations, in

relation to participation and social control.

3. Bolsa Floresta Income generation: investments in productive inclusion activities in the battle

against poverty and for environmental preservation.

4. Bolsa Floresta Social: improvements in the quality of life by investing in the community, with

the purpose of overcoming its social vulnerability situation.

In relation to verification and monitoring of the PBF, FAS publishes a yearly management report,

which shows information about the administration of financial resources. Every six months,

PricewaterhouseCoopers runs an audit free of charge. However, there is no information available

about carbon stocks monitoring, as well as the activities implemented by FAS directed to the

general public. This could raise questions about the foundation’s transparency, generating

discredit from the civil society in relation to PBF’s effectiveness.

B) REDD Juma7 project

Developed by FAS in partnership with SDS and IDESAM, the REDD Juma was established in 2008. It

aims at restraining deforestation and its subsequent GHG emissions in an area under pressure in

the State of Amazonas. In this project, 339 families8 have beneficiated. It also receives technical

support from IDESAM.

7 Information accessed at the FAS website. Available on: http://fas-amazonas.org/projeto-rds-do-juma/projeto-de-redd-da-rds-do-juma/.

8 Fundação Amazonas Sustentável, Relatório Juma (2008).

Between 2008 and 2012, Marriott International hotels network financed the implementation of

the project with a yearly investment of US$500 thousand, fully invested in the project’s activities,

as well as on the PBF in the Juma RDS (Sustainable Developmnet Reserve, a category of Protected

Area in Amazonas).

The project was validated following the CCBA –Climate, Community and Biodiversity

Alliance criteria. The German TÜV SÜD9 issued the validation, granting the project the Gold quality

standard.

Until 2016, the implementation of the programme must reduce deforestation of 7,799 hectares

(19,971,75 acres) of rainforest, which corresponds to avoiding the emission of 3,611,723 tonnes of

CO2 into the atmosphere.

Apart from the weather benefits expected from the reduction of GHG emissions, it is expected to

generate different social and environmental benefits in the area of the project, by financially

supporting the following activities:

Strengthening of environmental control and regulation,

Income generation through sustainable businesses,

Community development, scientific research and education, and

Direct payment for environmental services by Bolsa Floresta Family

The FAS, in partnership with Imazon, is in charge of monitoring deforestation. However, the

monitoring results have not been published yet. The project’s results to improve the quality of life

and control deforestation in this area of influence are questioned. FAS has not provided any

feedback about it.

4.3 Biofílica Environmental Investments

This is a private company, focused on the management and conservation of forests, by the

commercialization of environmental services, and investment in research and socioeconomic

development of the people and communities living within the projects’ area.

9 Institution that acts in validation and certification of carbon credits.

With the objective of contributing to the creation and development of a solid and trustable

environmental credits market, Biofilica invests in an innovative business model that allows

deforestation reduction, valorisation of forest conservation and carbon emissions reduction.

Through these activities, environmental conservation is an economically interesting activity for

forest owners, communities, governments and investors.

It has worked in private areas of the Amazonian states (Amapá, Amazonas, Pará and Rondônia).

Nonetheless, only the Jari/Amapá REDD+ Project is in execution phase. The others are in the design

phase.

A) Jarí REDD+ Project, Amapá

The project, already in progress, is carried out in a private area, implemented with its own and

private resources. It intends to establish in the future the sale of carbon credits. The largest

obstacle to which is the lack of federal or state regulation on the subject for the commercialization

of carbon credits.

It intends to associate REDD+ to Agroforestry Systems (SAFs) by linking 48 small producers in the

project area. The SAFs, in formulation phase, are carried out with banana, manioc, açaí berry and

Amazonian fruits and have the aim of granting food security, as well as generating income with the

selling of the exceeding production in local and regional markets. Biofilica acts along with other

partners (local government and Jari Foundation) in technical rural assistance for the establishment

of alternatives to logging and burning, and the increase in productivity and profitability of

cultivation in degraded areas. This support was provided after performing a market analysis study.

The local government has improved the roads to ease the circulation of production. Biofilica

monitors the forestry cover, through the analysis of satellite images.

4.4 HDOM Engineering and Environmental Projects Ltda.

HDOM is a company created by the National Institute of Research of the Amazon (INPA), funded in

2009 and established in the city of Manaus. Its main objective is to develop projects directed to

environmental sustainability and carbon market in forest areas.

It acts technically in developing viability studies, inventories of forest biomass, socioenvironmental

assessments, allometric equation adjustment, historic of deforestation projection and the

elaboration of the Project Design Document (PDD).

It has made forest inventories for forest carbon stock estimates in municipalities of Amazonas

(Borba, Manicoré, Novo Aripuanã) and Rondônia (Machadinho d’Oeste); has also participated in

the study of projects’ viability and the development of the allometric equation in Acre (Sena

Madureira).

It performs its monitoring by means of field analysis and temporal analysis of satellite orbital

images.

It receives funding from private and public sources, as well as from international cooperation.

4.5 Instituto de Conservação e Desenvolvimento Sustentável do Amazonas – IDESAM

Idesam (Amazonas Conservation and Sustainable Development Institute) is a non-profit non-

governmental organization, founded in 2004, independent and run under the private law regime.

It coordinates and executes projects, research and scientific studies focused on the preservation

and sustainable development of the Amazonian region.

It has worked in partnership with the SDS in the design of the REDD+ State System. It has also

developed the proposal for the carbon credits allocation based on stock-flow, presented and

validated by all 7 Amazonian states before the federal government.

4.6 Selected projects in REDD+

4.6.1 Suruí Carbon Project – Indigenous Land Sete de Setembro, Rondônia

IDESAM took part in the technical coordination of the Suruí Carbon Project, in the Sete de

Setembro Indigenous Land, in the State of Rondônia, participating in aspects related to forest

carbon, such as building base-line scenarios, quantifying the reduction of emissions and carbon

stockage, the preparation of the Project’s Design Document (PDD) and its validation process. The

project was validated under the CCB and VCS standards in April 2012.

The Suruí Carbon Project made its first sale of indigenous carbon credits with international

certification in September, 2013. Natura, buyer of the equivalent to the emission of 120 thousand

tonnes of carbon, sees this negotiation as a way of compensating for its industrial emissions. The

money received from the carbon sale will be used in the activities developed by the Suruí Paiter

indigenous people, as stipulated in the planning of the Indigenous Territories that includes 284

thousand hectares of Amazon rainforest, focusing on its conservation.

The process of the conception of PDD took about three years (2007-2010), with six institutions

taking part in the research and training tasks10.

4.6.2 Neutral Carbon Programme - IDESAM

This four-year-old programme supports the establishment of Agroforestry Systems (SAFs) in

degraded areas of the Uatumã Sustainable Development Reserve (RDS Uatumã) in order to

generate income and food security for the traditional population of the UC. This will avoid clearing

new forest areas for livelihood production, avoiding, thus, deforestation. Plantations are

performed in areas near the houses, to facilitate the production and the monitoring of the

initiative. Agroforestry production can be framed within the carbon stocks enrichment scope,

10 Available on: http://www.idesam.org.br/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/PCFS_DCP_V1.2.pdf

eligible for REDD+ mechanisms. Monitoring is performed by visiting the field, and the analysis of

satellite images.

The SDS, responsible for managing the UC, monitors the initiative.

IDESAM develops other projects in the Amazon, related to non-wood products value chains, further

listed in Item 5.6.

Institutions in value chains in Amazonas

The activities involving value chains of non-wood products in Amazonas are developed and

articulated by several associations, cooperatives, NGOs, government institutions and cooperation

agencies, which varies depending on the product, as well as on the production season. Therefore,

it is usual to see the same institution performing different activities due to the seasonal character

of the production; its participation also changes depending on the extraction, transportation,

processing and commercialization conditions.

The state government institutions involved are:

- SDS and State Department for Rural Production of Amazonas (SEPROR): capacity to formulate

environmental and forest policies;

- Institute of Agricultural Development and Sustainable Forestry of the Amazonas State (IDAM):

responsible for forest extension activities and rural technical assistance, supporting small and

extractivist producers;

- ADS: promotes marketing of products originated in the forest;

- Institute of Environmental Protection of Amazonas (IPAAM): autarchy organism linked to SDS,

responsible for environmental licensing, regulating and monitoring.

GIZ has supported for many years both federal and state governments in the development of plans

of action aimed at the improvement of the value chains of sociobiodiversity products. Due to the

large territorial dimension of Amazonas, initiatives are sparse and there isn’t effective control or

monitoring on production and marketing, which generates informal market conditions for these

products.

The search for added value through certification is a desirable path for most of the cooperatives

and associations. However, there are many barriers and limitations to legalise their activities, such

as lack of the necessary trained human resources, and shortness of working capital. Another

difficulty is the dependency on middlemen who impose low prices to buy from the associations

that end up selling, considering there are no other options for the sale.

Next is a set of value chains of non-wood potential products from Amazonas, as well as

experiences involving non-governmental institutions and private initiatives in different stages of

the value chain.

5.1. Rubber (Hevea spp)

Rubber productive chain involves 17 municipalities in Amazonas, comprehending 1,725 rubber

tappers that produce 1,000 t/year (ADS, 2012).

The state government supported the building of two processing plants, located in Manicoré and

Iranduba, in the years of 2007 and 2011, respectively.

Private partnership was sought, aiming to consolidate the commercialization of rubber, through

the company Neotec/Levorin, which holds a demand of 6,000 t/year for the manufacturing of

motorcycle and bicycle tires.

The subvention programme of raw natural rubber is established by Law 2,611/2000, regulated by

Decree 23.636/2003, that raised the value of the subvention from R$0,70 to R$1,00.

There is also the Rubber Promotion Programme, created by AFEAM (Funding Agency of the State

of Amazonas), with credit lines for labour instruments for the extraction of rubber, provisions and

road opening. Extractivists may access the resources through associations and cooperatives to

sustain themselves on the first months of work. It aims, therefore, to the strengthening of the

activity through incentives to attract more producers to the first link of the extraction/production

chain.

4.1.1 Selected Project – Association of Rural Producers of Carauari (ASPROC)

According to the ASPROC delegate, production of rubber reached over 52 tonnes in the Middle

Juruá river area, in 2012, but was followed by a fall due to the delay in the payment of the state

subvention. In the meantime, a negotiation is underway to sell the production of rubber in the

region to Neotec/Levorin.

5.2 Brazil nut (Bertholletia excelsa)

In the last decades, the Brazil nut has become a promising product due to its demand/supply based

on its nutritional properties and the generation of jobs and income.

The state government of Amazonas, supported by SEPOR and IDAM created a programme in 2003

to strengthen the Brazil nut productive chain seeks to stimulate the generation of jobs and income

linked to environmental conservation.

In addition, GIZ supported IDAM in the development of a Plan of Action for 23 municipalities in

Amazonas. A specific plan was also prepared for the city of Boca do Acre. These plans have not yet

been implemented to lack of financial and human resources.

The state government implemented five Brazil nut processing plants in the municipalities of

Lábrea, Manicoré, Boca do Acre, Amaturá and Beruri. These plants are under the management of

the civil society through its organizations:

* Association of Agroextractivists Producers of Sardinha's Colony (COOPMAS) – Lábrea;

* Green Cooperative of Manicoré (Covema);

* Association of Brazil nuts Producers of Amaturá (Aprocam);

* Association of Producers of the Antimari Agroextractivists Settlement Project (Atapaea), in Boca

do Acre; and

* Association of Farmers of Beruri.

As a whole, the challenges for this productive chain are:

- lack of market access by producers’ association and cooperatives;

- adding value near the production area;

- guaranteeing quality in primary handling (drying and stocking):

- developing new products for the retail market; and

- promoting organic certification and fair trade.

5.2.1 Selected project11 – Association of Agroextractivists Producers of Sardinha's Colony

(COOPMAS)

COOPMAS participates in almost all of the Brazil nut chain stages, collecting, processing and

marketing. They are not able to reach the final buyer, although they seek many partners in order

to find solutions and strategies for accessing the market. At different points, they received support

from several organizations with technical assistance, organization and training for traditional

communities and indigenous peoples from the protected areas. ADS has helped in the search for

markets and advised the associations and cooperatives in the marketing area.

Primary transport is divided in two stages, the first one, from the collecting point to a strategic

point where the cooperative is able to arrive. The second one happens when a significant volume is

reached, so that transportation costs are viable. Whenever possible, they profit from the presence

of partner institutions (local government, IDAM, SDS) to reduce transportation costs. When those

institutions are absent, transportation costs are paid by COOPMAS.

Processing is 100% made by COOPMAS in the plant. IDAM supports them with technical assistance

and the necessary paperwork for the licensing of the activity. ADS has supported the mounting of

equipment and the processing plant’s organization. Residues generated in this stage are used for

composting the families’ vegetable-gardens to increase the production of food in the communities.

Secondary transport comes after processing in the plant, where nuts and almonds are void-

packaged in 20kg packages.

Part of the commercialization, about 10%, is destined to school meals, through the state

government’s Food Acquiring Programme (PAA). The company CAIBA Indústria e Comércio12

purchases nearly 90% of the production (by contract) for national and international markets. Most

of the product’s commercialization is concentrated in Sao Paulo, that ends up regulating the

market price. However, the best price for these nuts is paid by PAA.

COOPMAS commercializes only 1% of its production to the final consumer, but it intends to

broaden its access to the market by certifying its products.

11 Information gathered at the workshop “Cadeias de valor de produtos não madeireiros e REDD+ no Amazonas, Brasil”, held on 14th november 2013.

12 http://www.caiba.com.br/empresa.php

The most positive benefit already mentioned was the addition of value to the local product,

generating jobs and income for the communities involved. About 150 cooperative members and 70

jobs created at the plant, which didn’t happen before the establishment of the processing plant.

Among the challenges to overcome there is lack of infrastructure that has limited the development

of the activity, causing the use of only 20% of the production potential. The goal is an increase of

60% in production capacity, once infrastructure improvements are made. Access to credit is

difficult as there aren’t enough trained professionals to develop projects for public bids (Brazilian

Development Bank - BNDES). This is very common in many institutions in Amazonas, limiting the

development of new products, the addition of value and, subsequently, diminishes the possibility

of reaching more markets by product diversification and higher prices. Taxes on production are

high and a tax reform is necessary to reduce the pressure on primary producers. Middlemen

activity represents a deterrent for fair trade.

Among the lessons learned, commercialization contracts between cooperatives and the private

sector is a high point; this allows better safety conditions for the people involved in the extraction

and processing of Brazil nut.

5.3 Meliponiculture

The objective of the Meliponiculture Programme is to establish breeding and handling native wild

bees as an income generating activity, enhancing the productive process at a commercial scale that

may give the meliponines’ honey quality, health conditions and purity, compatible with national

and international standards.

According to data from IDAM (2013), a pilot was set up in the city of Benjamin Constant. The

increase in production is expected after implementing a honey processing facility, on the first

semester of 2013.

5.4 Piaçava13 (Leopoldinia piassaba)

The Piaçava programme seeks to strengthen the productive chain and empower the piaçabeiros

(piaçava extractivists), promoting improvement in their quality of life. It proposes a plan of action

that facilitates economic and territorial zoning and training of piaçabeiros in the municipalities of

high and middle Rio Negro, along with all the actors in this chain. The plan also establishes the

regulatory framework for the activity.

GIZ supported the IDAM to develop a plan of action for the piaçava value chain in the city of

Barcelos; although, due to shortness of resources, it hasn’t been executed.

Piaçava extracted in Amazonas is softer than the one from Bahia, but still competes in the national

market of brooms.

There are allegations of slavery of piaçabeiros and the state government has tried to find a solution

to it, organizing inter-institutional meetings and exchange of experiences.

Table 1. Number of beneficiaries and production volume in the state of Amazonas.

Non-wood producers – Piaçava/per city in the state of Amazonas, 2012 – IDAM

Cities Beneficiaries Production (t)

Barcelos 100 500

Santa Isabel do Rio Negro

332 500

São Gabriel da Cachoeira

60 300

Novo Aripuanã 8 16

Benjamin Constant 6 1

TOTAL 506 1317

13 Piaçava is a palm fibre used to make brooms and brushes.

Source: IDAM, 2012.

5.5 Cocoa (Theobroma cacao)

The cocoa productive chain is promising for the economy of riverside populations living on the

banks of the Madeira river. Cocoa is well adapted to the climatic and environmental conditions of

the Amazonian rainforest and it is a product widely used around the world, receiving an increasing

demand.

Although it holds special properties for consumption and allows the participation of small family

production, organic and fair trade certification have not granted it a market differential.

The study14 made by CEPLAC, IDAM, FAS and local producers identified the following obstacles:

- inadequate infrastructure for primary handling of cocoa seed production (drying and

fermentation)

- lack of knowledge about proper techniques for cocoa handling;

- unavailability of commercialization via association of producers (production’s organization and

working capital);

- lack of knowledge about potential market/market channels.

14 2012 Activities Report. Fundação Amazonas Sustentável.

5.6 Agroforestry systems (SAFs)

According to the Brazilian forest code (Law 12,651/2012), SAFs can be adopted in areas of Reserva

Legal15 the objective of which is forest preservation. Apart from the strategy for food security, it

has local and regional market potential for exceeding production. Lately, the federal government

has launched the Agroforestry and Organic Production National Plan to promote local

development. There is great potential in fruit production, focused on the food industry.

Nonetheless, activities in Amazonas, are incipient and sparse.

5.6.1 Selected projects – Instituto de Conservação e Desenvolvimento Sustentável do Amazonas

(IDESAM)

The institute has strong presence in the city of Apuí (one of the most deforested in the Amazon) in

which it develops activities focused on forestry-based economy and low carbon, sustainable

production and financial mechanisms for forest preservation.

It is the sole institution that stands out in the context of value chains and REDD+ because it has

worked with activities diversification, promoting local entrepeneurship with the communities,

where it associates community-base tourism and non-wood products value chains (fruit pulps and

oils) in the RDS Uatumã.

A) Coffee project – Coffee in agroforestry systems to strength low carbon economy in Apuí.

Although it is not strictly an Amazonian product, it fits a due to the social and environmental

context of southern Amazonas. However it might not be a BioTrade product which focuses on

native species.

15

Reserva Legal corresponds to the 80% of private land (in Amazonian Rainforest) that should remain untouched, though the new forest code allows the establishment of SAFs, making it more productive.

Apuí county is located in southern Amazonas, by the trans-Amazonian highway (BR-230) – the

most important frontier for deforestation in the state. Deforestation in the area is mostly

associated to extensive cattle breeding: many forest areas are destroyed and turned into low

productivity pasture that follow a circle of continuous expansion in new lands. Apuí is the third

most deforested area in Amazonas (behind Lábrea and Boca do Acre) and has the third largest

herd in the state, with nearly 137 thousand heads16.

This initiative, created and implemented by IDESAM, aims to promote and strengthen the

“agroecological coffee” productive chain in Apuí as a sustainable alternative of income generation

in order to stop deforestation countywide. The importance of the contribution of coffee to Apuí’s

economy justifies the initiative, though it is being gradually left aside because of lack of incentives,

technical support and difficulties in commercialization. There are only 200 active coffee producers

in the county, today; production reached 4,960 sacks/year, between 2008 and 2012, short for the

potential of Apuí.

To reach the objective, the project is structured in key axes:

1. Increase in productivity and quality of coffee by adopting agroecological techniques;

2. Partnership of producers that produce of agrarian and forest species of economic and food

interest;

3. Market research and incentives for commercialization and consumption of agroecological

coffee, adding value to environmental services offered by the agroforest systems, especially

climate benefits.

B) Forest business incubator, in Uatumã RDS.

It acts all across the activities of IDESAM programmes. Its objective is to demonstrate the

economic value of the forest and promote the establishment of productive chains compatible to

the Amazonian biome, such as: non-wood forest management, agroforestry systems and

technological systems of low environmental impact for sociobiodiversity products processing.

16 Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics, 2011.

Bearing that objective, the initiative provides technical, administrative, commercial and accounting

support to business projects based on the traditional knowledge of the communities of inner

Amazonas. Specially the RDS Uatumã, has strong potential for fruit production (pulp for food and

seeds for cosmetics). The biggest challenges are related to the geographical isolation of the

communities, and the absence of long-lasting technical support, mainly in management, access to

credit, developing productive chains and marketing.

5.7 Açaí berry17 (Euterpe oleracea)

In Amazonas, part of the collected açaí is bought by the federal government’s PPA and distributed

among local schools.

In the Middle Juruá river area, traditionally an extractivist region, viability researches of trade

between açaí extrativists associations and Coca-Cola are underway, as the latter has developed a

banana-and-açaí-berry-extract-based soft drink. Coca-Cola has already signed contracts with local

açaí berry producers in the Madeira river region, whose project under implementation. According

to ASPROC, in 2011, 995 t of açaí berry were produced in the Middle Juruá river region.

5.8 Pirarucu (Arapaima gigas)18

Pirarucu, a species classified in the CITES (Appendix 2), has a tasty flesh that is highly appreciated,

and favours its consumption, therefore, creating large market at national level. The pirarucu

fishery is a very strong activity specially developed in the area of RDS Mamirauá, included in the

Ramsar Sites list in 1993.

The management of pirarucu is conducted in managed fishing areas (lakes, streams, rivers)

17 During the açaí berry harvest season, all the people are fully engaged in the tasks involving this chain, hence it wasn’t possible to gather more information.

18 Fishing season activities made it impossible to gather further information.

through the establishment of Fishery Agreements. These are instruments intended to organize the

activity, avoiding the species population reserves to be compromised by overfishing. This activity

includes a large number of riverside populations in Amazonas, generating income during the

fishing season.

Taking into account only the fishing activity in the state’s UCs, the volume of production19 until

2010 was estimated between 1,000 and 1,500 t, but this was based on quotas of the breading

areas for that time. Approximately three years ago, fishing areas went from 12 to 17, a 41%

increase. Even without a study that considers other potential areas, pirarucu holds a great

potential for local, regional and national economy. However, further studies are needed to learn

about the capacity of its water ecosystems and the organization of the communities.

5.9 Seed oils, essential oils

There is great BioTrade potential in seed oils thanks to the vastness of Amazonian species and their

wide distribution in almost all of the state of Amazonas. Oils from andiroba (Carapa guianensis

Aubl.), buriti (Mauritia flexuosa), babaçu (Orbignya phalerata), murumuru (Astrocaryum

murumuru) and copaiba (Copaifera sp), among others, provide economic alternatives for the

riverside communities that contribute for the forest conservation. Another perspective is the

possibility of producing biofuel, less toxic and environmentally friendly.

GIZ supported the elaboration of two plans of action for the seed oils value chain in the

municipalities of Boca do Acre and Silves. These were not executed because of lack of resources to

implement the activities.

Among the obstacles that need to be overcome are:

- lack of safety equipment for harvesting and handling of fruits;

- there isn’t enough primary processing infrastructure (dryers and presses);

- lack of working capital for product commercialization, and

- small buying market.

19 Information provided at the Manaus Desk by an ISA technician who worked for over ten years in the pirarucu chain

In the middle Juruá River, the production of oil from the seeds of andiroba and murumuru is an

important option for income generation; these are used especially in the cosmetic industry.

5.9.1 Selected project – Association of Rural Producers of Carauari (ASPROC)

The association is located in Carauari, a region traditionally dedicated to extractivist activities. It

has worked for 22 years, ten of which organizing the riverside production and marketing,

supporting value chains of sociobiodiversity products and proposing public policies to establish

minimum prices for sociobiodiversity products. Apart from the oil, it also acts in the pirarucu and

rubber20 chains.

ASPROC promotes the trade of the products from communities located four days away (by boat)

from Carauari, distributing their production to processing cooperatives and supplying them with

basic products at fair prices. It improves the access of the community products to local and

regional markets, avoiding middlemen, also known as hagglers, who used to establish abusive

prices in negotiations. The products bought and circulated are destined to cosmetics sector

(murumuru and andiroba seeds for oil extraction), natural ingredients (açaí) and natural fibres

(rubber and cipó-titica (Heteropsis Jenmani). This initiative developed by ASPROC, known as

“Comércio Ribeirinho da Cidadania e Solidário”, received a prize from Millennium Development

Goals21 in 2012.

Riverside commerce involves 500 families distributed all along the Juruá river communities. There

isn’t available data about average monthly per-family income, obtained from the sales of

extractivist products.

A cooperative (Roque Community) extracts oils from andiroba and murumuru seeds and sells them

to Natura22, a cosmetics company. The relationship between ASPROC and Natura begun in 1999

with the sale of oils extracted, partially through industrial process and partially through traditional

artisan methods. At the beginning, prices were set by Natura, which created conflicts with the

communities and tension during negotiations. ASPROC, based on a study of the costs of oil

20 Mentioned on the item 5.1.1.

21 http://www.odmbrasil.gov.br/sobre/vencedores/4a-edicao-2011/comercio-ribeirinho-da-cidadania-e-solidario.

22 Contact with the company to gather further information was unsuccessful due to end-of.year schedule

incompatibility.

production, succeeded in conducting the negotiations with Natura to establish a price according to

volume and costs of oil production. The implementation of the Middle Juruá Fund was another

lesson learned; the fund was established three years ago and provides R$200 thousand/year

(about USD 1000,000/year) for small associations projects. The call for projects is made through a

bidding process using project selection criteria and focusing on the improvement of value chains. It

is managed by a Management Committee formed by representatives of the government

(Biodiversity Conservation Chico Mendes Institute (ICMBio) and SDS/CEUC) and private institutions

(National Council of Rubber Tappers (CNS) and Natura).

6. Handicraft

6.1 Selected projects - Federation of Indigenous Organizations of Rio Negro (FOIRN)

FOIRN, an institution gathering 90 indigenous associations distributed all along Rio Negro, works

with indigenous handicraft marketing. Still at formulation stage, the initiative includes Agroforestry

Systems involving 23 indigenous peoples that use different natural fibres (tucum - Artrocaryum

chambira, piaçava - Leopoldinia piassaba, pau-brasil - Guilandina echinata, arumã fibre -

Ischnosiphon arouma, pau de corva), tucum seeds and ceramic. FOIRN has supported the access to

regional and national markets of its beneficiaries products. This was financed through its own

resources as well as from the Socioambiental Institute (ISA).

The Baniwa indigenous people art stands out, commercializing arumã baskets that are sold at

some handicraft markets around the country.

6.2 Association of Artisan of Novo Airão (AANA) and Almerinda Malaquias Foundation

AANA and the Almerinda Malaquias Foundation work with braided arumã (Ischnosiphon arouma)

fibre and with dead wood (waste from saw mills and from the local wood industry in logging

areas), in a fair circuit of handicraft production and marketing, preserving the forest, traditions and

cultural heritage.

Selling of handicrafts results in an alternative income for artisans, enhanced by potential demand

of local tourist.

6.3 Selected projects: Natural ingredients - Socioambiental Institute (ISA) and Indigenous

Organization of the Içana river basin (OIBI)

The search for sustainable economic alternatives for their communities, more and more

threatened by illegal mining, drug trade and predatory extractivism, made the Baniwa indigenous

people (located on the Indigenous Land, São Gabriel da Cachoeira, Amazonas) invest on the

jiquitaia pepper23. This good can be produced in socioenvironmental value chains and sold in

Brazil, as well as on the international market.

In the last three years, after market trails, the “Pimenta Baniwa” pepper has been promoted

among chefs, especially in cities like Manaus, Rio de Janeiro and Sao Paulo, as well as in tasting

events and visits to São Gabriel da Cachoeira and the Içana river. The business plan for “Pimenta

Baniwa” was elaborated focusing on the strong social and economic viability of the initiative. Since

then, the Baniwas are looking for the support of different segments of society to implement the

project. One of the main achievements so far is the opening of the first store of “Baniwa Pepper

House” in the commuinty of Tunui Cachoeira, in middle Icana River. The store offers local and

utensils appropriate for processing, packaging and stocking of the jiquitaia produced from peppers

cultivated by the women in the fields and pepper gardens they keep in their yards.

23 Jiquitaia pepper is a mix from various different types of peppers cultivated by indigenous women.

7. Obstacles

The obstacles were identified in the questionnaires answered by the institutions that work with

REDD+ and value chains, and also thanks to the contributions gathered during the workshop in

Manaus, Amazonas.

Legal instruments

Excessive requirements for land tenure regularization, environmental licensing, accreditation

and certification;

Excessive bureaucracy for the legalization of social organizations, small businesses and

cooperatives;

Delay in the environmental licensing of management plans;

Lack of legal instruments referring to non-wood products, except pirarucu;

Labour issues must be reviewed and improved for the producer/extractivist’s safety;

Lack of regulation to support the recovery of degradated areas in UCs in Amazonas and

incentives for agroforestry production;

Brazilian legislation on access to genetic patrimony and related traditional knowledge, as well as

on the distribution of benefits, is inadequate due to the fragility/limited understanding that

companies and communities have in relation to the associated legal requirements. In 2007 a

bill was issued, and in 2011 its discussion was retaken more strongly, but still needs to be

revised/broaden;

The necessary procedures for the companies to perform bioprospection are too slow. On the

other hand, communities don’t feel protected by the legislation. As a whole, small companies

can’t fulfil all the necessary requisites (e.g.: for a company to issue the bioprospection request

it has to already have signed a contract with the communities to use the product/knowledge,

without knowing if production is viable). The communities have difficulties understanding the

law and thinking about their rights, apart from facing difficulties to negotiate fairer contracts.

In relation to the distribution of benefits, Brazil falls short form other countries in terms of the

distributed amount. While in other countries 0,7% of the net profit, in Brazil, it is about 0,05%.

The sector that has distributed larger benefits is the cosmetics one, in opposition to the

pharmaceutical, whose distribution is almost inexistent.

Bureaucratic barrier to legalize non-profit organizations;

Access to public resources

Bureaucracy to release public funds;

Little access for civil society organizations (associations and NGOs) to public resources due to

excessive bureaucracy and little flexibility in the use of resources;

Taxes and fees

Excessive taxation on non-wood products marketing, increasing production costs;

Few tax exemptions;

Government institutions

Insufficient infrastructure and inefficiency of some public organisms that offer inadequate

information, delay or make not viable the procedures of non-wood products value chains;

Absence of public policies and lack of incentives to the production of environmentally friendly

products (e.g. organic);

Infrastructure

Precarious or missing adequate infrastructure in rural areas;

Limited infrastructure for the transportation of production (railroads and roads in bad

conditions, in addition to transportation options);

Human resources and business vision

Institutions with insufficient financial resources and underqualified human resources to deal

with REDD+ and BioTrade issues;

Lack of technical training of the associations for commercial activities; and

The companies still don’t feel motivated enough to invest in products and services that are

socially and environmentally sustainable.

8. Needs

- Disseminate the concept of BioTrade to stakeholders identified in the mapping exercise, as it is

not known in Amazonas;

- Broaden the learning and discussion about REDD+ among the stakeholders related to value

chains of non-wood products in Amazonas;

- Promote the exchange of experiences with BioTrade and REDD+ initiatives in other countries.

This would broaden the knowledge of the stakeholders in Amazonas involved in the value chains of

non-wood products and of the interested municipal governments;

- Identify potential stakeholders in the industry that may have interest in Amazonas;

- Strongly identify, articulate and integrate the private sector to the local/traditional communities

and indigenous peoples associations implemented in other states of the Brazilian Amazonian

region. Also establish an exchange of experiences based on good practices;

- Develop opportunity cost studies at a regional scale (considering microbasins as a geographic

element for planning) using as criteria the deforestation pressure and the potential to develop

BioTrade products in those regions;

- Promote and support effective monitoring of the forest cover in government institutions in

order to establish a relation of their value chain practices and the prevention of deforestation;

- Strengthen civil society organizations such as associations and cooperatives;

- Promote, among the state government institutions, the analysis of the legal instruments

involving value chains of non-wood products and environmental services, in order to establish

coherence between the available instruments;

- Develop accessible communication tools with appropriate language about BioTrade Initiative,

REDD+ and the synergy with non-wood products value chains; and

- Stimulate the improvement of the infrastructure by partnering with private initiatives and

municipal governments.

9. Opportunities

- 97% of the Amazon rainforest has the potential to develop BioTrade activities;

- vast biodiversity with a wide distribution of species on the territory, generating high BioTrade

potential;

- cultural diversity: traditional peoples, riverside communities, 63 indigenous people adding social

and cultural value to BioTrade products;

- The low level of competition among private sector companies in Amazonas could attract new

market entrants, thus, making possible the development of new BioTrade products;

- from the exchange of experiences with BioTrade and REDD+ initiatives developed in other

countries, promote that the stakeholders of Amazonas learn more about it;

- sharing experiences and lessons learned from the good practices in Amazonas, such as:

o ASPROC and Natura with seed oils;

o ASPACS and ACIBA with Brazil nut;

o IDESAM and associations from the RDS Uatumã with Carbon Neutral and SAFs;

o ISA and OIB with Baniwa pepper;

o FOIRN and ISA with indigenous handicraft;

o Almerinda Malaquias Institute with artisan associations from municipalities under

deforestation pressure (see Figure 1);

- The precedent to develop community projects due to the Carbono Suruí in Indigenous Land

(state of Rondônia) that made the first sale of carbon credits to Natura;

- Many NGOs have experience in monitoring the forest cover and the use of natural resources

(IDESAM, FVA, ISA, Imazon);

- Large number of associations involved in activities of non-wood products value chains

(production/extraction) all over Amazonas;

- High degree of interest in the BioTrade Initiative by civil society associations, NGOs, local

governments for it shows potential to:

o Increase direct benefits for the communities

o Work with value chains that may increase the number of families involved

o Stimulate the participation of the young in value chains

- Amazônia Fund (Federal Decree 6,527/2008), apart from financing projects focused on reducing

deforestation, 20% of the resources is focused on the development of deforestation monitoring

and control systems in other tropical countries.

10. Formulation/adaptation of strategies

In 2014, the FIFA World Cup as well as state and federal elections will take place in Brazil. These

events will generate extra holidays and could complicate the preparation BioTrade activities

(logistics, accommodation). Therefore, is advised that any potential activity of the BioTrade

Initiative to be implemented in Brazil in 2014 be carefully planned in order to avoid being impacted

by these events.

It is, is suggested that the first task to be performed is the articulation of non-government

institutions and the private sector, to enhance their awareness and knowledge on BioTrade and its

relation to REDD+.

Below are some guidelines for a possible implementation of a pilot-project:

1. Selection of potential/strategic areas (Figure 1), such as

Two types of areas could be considered:

Areas under deforestation pressure: Manaus Metropolitan Area and Southern

Amazonas (respectively, 19% and 52% of the deforestation in the State take place in

these two areas).

Areas with a deforestation rate trend (11% of the deforestation in the State).

Further analysis would be needed to assess the REDD+ potential of these areas.

2. Selection of the potential project area, some considerations:

The area of the State of Amazonas is formed by about 54% of federal land and

about 41% of state land. Approximately 7,7% of these areas are overlapping. Protected

Areas, Indigenous Lands and settlements are included in the federal areas. Settlements

are at the top of the deforestation ranking, followed by Protected Areas and

Indigenous Land. This happens because of several factors, among which, the lack of

local governance is the most relevant. An accurate research of those areas is needed,

focusing on social conflicts, governance analysis, infrastructure and social aspects.

The first commercialization of carbon credits between an indigenous community

and the private sector (the Suruí Carbon Project) sets an important precedent for new

REDD+ and BioTrade initiatives. After the Indigenous Land is ratified, indigenous

peoples could manage their forest resources, and market the products and

environmental services originated in their territories.

The Suruí Carbon Project, even though it was developed in the absence of

federal or state regulation on REDD+, showed the existence of a potential to

implement REDD+ projects on Indigenous Lands. It also showed the importance of

supporting activities fostering sustainable income generation and food security of the

indigenous peoples for such projects to succeed in this context.

The lack of legislation on REDD+ in Brazil, and particularly in Amazonas, limits the

implementation of BioTrade and REDD+ initiatives in private areas, thus, failing to

grant the right of the communities involved as well as consider that there are other

validation instruments (CCB) and safeguards. Meanwhile, the research of the potential

of BioTrade and REDD+ is already mentioned in the legislation of the States of Mato

Grosso and ACRE.

3. Assessment and analysis of the status of the project area:

Analyze the potential of non-wood products' value chains in priority areas (e.g.

consider production potential, technology, workforce, processing, commercialization,

market research).

Assessment on the project area's governance and possible partnerships to

elaborate and implement a Project Design, as well as prospecting companies

interested in BioTrade. A more robust mapping of the private sector is also needed,

because of the small presence of the sector in Amazonas, related to these subjects.

4. Knowledge and capacities development

Given the knowledge gaps of the stakeholders identified during the mapping, a

strategy for developing a BioTrade project through a synergic relation between non-

wood products value chains and REDD+ should also integrate a capacity building

dimension.

Stakeholders from strategic regions (areas under high deforestation pressure,

such as Southern Amazonas and the Manaus Metropolitan Area) with cultural and

social added differential (Juruá river and Rio Negro basin), should participate in e-

Courses on REDD+ and BioTrade.

Trainings must be performed in Portuguese or any other language the interested actors

speak.

In implementing REDD+ projects, efforts must be made to comply with the free

information access requirements/procedures. This would require time and

resources, as well as the joint effort of several institutions.

Further studies, articulated with Universities (INPA, UEA, UFAM, others) and Research

Institutions, should offer elements on the potential of BioTrade products, and

support the development of new products in accordance with the BioTrade

Principles and Criteria.

The exchange of experiences is also an activity that promotes learning and the

establishment of inter-institutional alliances; hence, organizing these spaces with

the participation of the private sector, associations and local governments is of the

utmost importance.

The search for partnerships with other cooperation agencies is also strategic. GIZ has

shown interest in partnering to develop communication tools for training and

learning, directed to groups working with non-wood products value chain.

ANNEX  1.  The  main  legal  instruments  in  biodiversity,  climate  change, sociobiodiversity products, and REDD+ in Brazil  

Theme  Legal Instrument 

Biodiversity 

Protected Areas National System 

Federal Law 9.985/2000 

Protected Areas State System of  

State Complementary Law 53/2007 

Biodiversity National Policy   Federal Decree 4.339/2002 

Priority Areas for Conservation, Sustainable Use and Benefit Sharing of Brazilian biodiversity and  Priority Areas for formulating and implementing public policies, programs, projects and activities under the federal government responsibility 

Federal Ordinance 126/2004 

Climate Change 

Climate Change National Policy Federal Law 12.187/2009 and Federal Decree 7.390/2010 

PPCDAm Strategic plan mentioned on Federal Law 12.187/2009  

Forestry Law (CAR)  Federal Law 12.651/2012 

Climate Change State Law State Law 3.135/2007 and State Law 3.184/2007 

Bolsa Floresta Programme  State Decree 26.958/2007 

Indigenous people 

National Policy on Territorial and Environmental Management of Indigenous Lands– PNGATI 

Federal Decree 7.747/2012 

Indigenous Statute Lawi 6.001/1973, Art. 231 of Federal Constitution/1988,  

Brazilian Federal Constitution  Art. 231/1988 

People and Traditional Communities 

National Policy on Sustainable Development of Traditional Peoples and Communities  

Federal Decree  6.040/2007 

Financing fund 

Amazonian Fund  Federal Decree 6.527/2008 

Climate Change National Fund Federal Law 12.114/2009 and Federal Decree 7.343/2010 

Transparency     Federal Law 12.527/2011  

ANNEX 2. Mapping of stakeholders in the Amazonas institutions working in initiatives related to wood products value chains and REDD+ 

Government 

Institutions National 

StateMunicipal 

Civil society and NGOs 

Cooperation International  

Private sector 

   STAKEHOLDERS IN VALUE CHAIN 

1 ABOT (Association Barcelense of Tour Operators) 

         X       

2 ADS (Sustainable Development Agency) 

   X             

3  Almerinda Malaquias Foundation           X       

4 AOBT/AM (Association of Boat Tourism Operators of Amazonas) 

         X       

5 ASPACS  (Association of Agroextractivists Producers of Sardinha's Colony 

         X       

6 ASPROC (Association of Rural Producers of Carauari) 

         X       

7  Association of Artisan of Novo Airão           X       

8  Association of Producers Nova'Arte           X       

9 Brazilian Business Council for Sustainable Development 

               X 

10 CEPLAC (Executive Committee on the Cocoa Crop)  X                

11 CNS (National Council of Rubber Tappers) 

         X       

12  Coca‐Cola                 X 

13 COIAB (Coordenação das Organizações Indígenas da Amazônia) 

         X       

14  CONAB (National Supply Company)  X                

15 FOIRN (Federation of Indigenous Organizations of Rio Negro) 

         X      

16  FVA (Vitoria Amazonica Foundation)           X       

17 GIZ ‐ German Technical Cooperation Agency (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit) 

            X    

18 IBAMA (Instituto Brasileiro de Meio Ambiente e Recursos Naturais Renováveis) 

X         

     

19 ICMBio (Biodiversity Conservation Chico Mendes Institute) 

X         

     

20 IDAM (Institute of Agricultural Development and Sustainable Forestry of the State of Amazonas) 

   X      

     

21  IDESAM (Institute for Conservation  X                

and Sustainable Development of Amazonas) 

22 IDSM (Mamirauá Institute for Sustainable Development) 

         X       

23 INCRA (National Institute of Colonization and Agrarian Reform) 

         X       

24 IPAAM (Amazon Institute of Environmental Protection of Amazonas) 

   X             

25  IPE (Institute for Ecological Research)           X       

26  IPI (Piagaçu Institute)           X       

27  ISA (Socioambiental Institute)           X       

28 Municipal Department Fairs, Markets, Production and Supply of Manaus 

      X   

     

29  Natura                 X 

30 OIBI (Indigenous Organization Içana River Basin)          

X       

31 SDS (State Department of Environment and Sustainable Development of Amazonas)     X             

32 SEBRAE (Brazilian Service of Support for Micro and Small Enterprises) 

X         

     

33 SEIND (State Department for Indigenous Peoples) 

   X            

34 SEMPAB (Municipal Department of Environment of Manaus) 

      X          

35 SEPLAN (State Department for Planning and Economic Development) 

   X             

36 SEPROR (State Department for Rural Production of Amazonas) 

   X             

37 SUFRAMA (Superintendence of the Manaus Free Trade Zone) 

X                

38 WCS‐Brazil (Wildlife Conservation Society) 

         X       

39 WWF‐Brazil (World Wide Fund for Nature) 

         X       

STAKEHOLDERS IN REDD+ 

40  Biofílica Environmental Investments                 X 

41 CECLIMA (State Centre os Climate Change) 

   X             

42 FAS (Amazonas Sustainable Foundation) 

               X 

43 Hdom Engineering and Environmental Projects Ltda 

               X 

44 IDESAM (Institute for Conservation and Sustainable Development of Amazonas) 

         X       

  TOTAL  7  8  2  19  1  6 

 

ANNEX 3.  Institutions of participants, years working in Amazonas, brief reports and expectation of participants in workshop in Amazonas, Brazil  

INSTITUTION  TECHINICAL 

BRIEF REPORTS AND EXPECTATION Name 

Time working in Amazonia 

Name and position in institution 

Time working in Amazonas 

FVA  22 years 

Yara Camargo 

5 years 

Support  to  strengthen  the productive  chains,  especially Brazil nut  in RESEX, piaçava  fibre in  the  middle  Rio  Negro  and arumã  fibre with  the Association of  Artisan  of  Novo  Airão. Management of  the organization of  activities  and  training. Implementation  of  public policies, fundraising and others. 

Coordinator for Policy Public Program 

Expectation:  to  achieve  the proposed objectives. 

ISA  20 years 

Guillermo Estupiñán 

12 years 

Support  to  the management and organization  of  fishing, commercial  and  sport  fishing activities in the middle Rio Negro.

Independent Consultant 

Expectation:  learn  about  the initiative. 

Natasha Mendes 

4 years 

Acts  in  the  Baniwa  Pepper project  of  the  Içana  river associations  on  the  high  Rio Negro,  in  São  Gabriel  da Cachoeira  county;  has  the responsibility  of  supporting  the tasks  related  to  the  chain  of production  and commercialization of handicrafts; makes  the  link  between  the people  at  the base  and  the  final clients. 

Technical staff Expectation:  to  learn  and contribute  to  the BioTrade chain in Amazonas. 

ANNEX 3.  Institutions of participants, years working in Amazonas, brief reports and expectation of participants in workshop in Amazonas, Brazil  

ASPROC  22 years 

Antonio Adevaldo Dias 

  

ASPROC’s  main  mission  is  to organize and market the riverside production of the region. Rubber, seed oils,  legal fishing, açaí berry and  palm  fibres.  The  work developed  by  ASPROC  includes almost the whole chain, from the process  of  organization  of  the people  around  their  productive process, until placing the product in  the  market;  tries  to  grant minimum  prices  and  credit access  for  the  families.  ASPROC has  received  an  award  for  its contribution  to  the  reduction  of famine in the region. 

Projects coordinator 

COIAB  +20 years 

João Neves Sial 

4 months 

It performs the follow‐up of the COIAB projects, public policies and the implementation of indigenous peoples’ rights  

Coordinator Expectation: acquiring and applying new knowledge 

SEMMAS  24 years 

Maria de Fátima Pereira do Nascimento 

7 years 

Elaborate  and  implement projects,  conflict  mediations, councils and others. 

Manager (SEMMAS/Tupé) 

Expectation:  to  enrich knowledge  and  share experiences. 

Angeline Ugarte Amorim 

2 years 

Manages the protected areas, and also designs a management scenario, that hasn’t render results yet. It started to work with carbon initiatives and with children, in partnership with INPA. 

Manager (SEMMAS/APAS) 

ICMBIO (Chico Mendes Institute of Biodiversity Conservation) 

5 years 

Flavio Paim 

3 years 

Articulate  federal  public  policies with federal Protected Areas. 

Environmental analyst 

Expectation:  to  gain  experience on  the  issue  and  share  that information with colleagues 

ANNEX 3.  Institutions of participants, years working in Amazonas, brief reports and expectation of participants in workshop in Amazonas, Brazil  

IDAM  8 years 

Vanessa Souza da Silva 

6 months 

It works  on  the  implementation of  the  public  policies  of  the government of Amazonas,  it also acts  in  the  production  of  non‐wood  products  and  in  the organization  of  the  productive chain  of:  açaí  berry,  Brazil  nut, fibres  (piaçava,  cipó‐titica),  seed oils (andiroba, buriti, copaiba and murumuru).  It  also  provides technical  assistance  and  rural extension. 

Manager Expectation:  to  understand  the function of IDAM in BioTrade. 

ASPACL/COOPMAS ‐  Lábrea 

17 years 

Astrogildo Oliveira Costa  12 years 

It  collects  and  processes  Brazil nut,  seed  oils  (andiroba  and murumuru)  and  rubber extraction  in  the  county.  It supports  project  that  supplies most  of  the  beans  used  by SEDUC. 

President  Expectation: to gain experience. 

INCRA  + 40 years 

Leocinira Mendes dos Santos 

8 months 

They  provide  assistance, monitoring,  licensing, inspections,  credit  and  creation of  settlements;  credit  financing for people settled by INCRA. 

Analyst Expectation: to try to  implement REDD in the region. 

Vinícius Passos Pizzido 

7 years 

They  provide  assistance, monitoring,  licensing, inspections,  credit  and  creation of  settlements;  credit  financing for people settled by INCRA. 

Analyst Expectation:  to  try  to  implant REDD in the region. 

GIZ  50 years 

Johannes Zimpel 

5 years 

GIZ  focus  in  Brazil  is  the sustainable  use  of  natural resources;  in  the  state  of Amazonas  they  work  with  açaí berry,  seed  oils,  cocoa  and rubber.  They  support  their partners  in  the  elaboration  of public  policies  for  capacity building. 

Regional Coordinator 

ANNEX 3.  Institutions of participants, years working in Amazonas, brief reports and expectation of participants in workshop in Amazonas, Brazil  

ADS  10 years 

Pedro Luiz Biondo 

3 years 

Activities  are  focused  to strengthen  the  production  chain of  Brazil  nut  and  piaçava,  jute and  mallow  fibre.  Promote  the awarding  of  prizes  to  the producers.  

Trade fairs and organic certification manager 

WWF‐Brazil  31 years 

Marcelo Cortez 

3 years 

They mainly  support  projects  in the  UC.  Their  activities  are developed with two communities in  southern  Amazonas  focused on  the  production  of  their main products,  copaiba  seed  oil  and wood. 

Conservation Analyst  

Expectation:  To  improve knowledge  and  maintain  the same  line of  thought with works focused on REDD+ and BioTrade. 

WCS‐Brazil  15 years 

Carlos C. Durigan 

20 years 

Research  and  technical  support. WCS  doesn’t  have  a  specific initiative for productive chains. 

Amazon Program Director 

Expectation:  Better understanding  of  REDD+  to develop  projects  that  fit  its objectives. 

IDESAM  9 years 

André Luiz Menezes Viana 

6 years 

Provides  support  through technical  assistance.  Its  main activity  is  to  capture  carbon emissions  with  different  species of flora. 

Forestry Management Coordinator Program  

They  support  the  associations with  the  sale  of  their  products and training.  

IDAM  18 years 

Nadiele Pacheco 

8 years 

Its main  activity  is  the  technical support  to  producers  in  the different  value  chains  of  non‐wood products. 

Head of Forestry Department 

Expectation: How  can  IDAM  link its  activities  to  BioTrade  and REDD+? 

FOIRN  26 years José Maria Gomes Iana 

7 years Elaborate  projects  to  train leaders  and  fundraising.  Discuss public policies. 

ANNEX 3.  Institutions of participants, years working in Amazonas, brief reports and expectation of participants in workshop in Amazonas, Brazil  

Projects Manager Expectation:  learn  more  about REDD+  and  try  to  raise  funds  to benefit all the actors involved. 

Hdom Engineering and Environmental 

Projects Ltda 4 years 

Francisco Higuchi 

4 years 

Work  in  environmental consultancy,  elaborate  and execute sustainable development projects,  plan  for  forest management. 

Partner/director Expectation:  keep  up‐to‐date with  the  discussions  in  order  to improve knowledge. 

 

ANNEX 4. Methodology and analysis of the workshop organized under the project  

 

 METHODOLOGY

The methodology was defined in two preparatory meetings with the moderators hired, on November 4th and 11th, 2013.

Based on the Guidelines for a methodology for the implementation of workshops for the promotion of Value Chains (GTZ-Brazil and MMA, 2009), Steps 1 and 2 of the Value Links-Biodiversity1 methodology were used for the development of the activities during the workshop.

Forty-eight key actors were invited, considered relevant in developing Value Chains in the State of Amazonas, among (i) Governmental Institutions, (ii) Non-governmental Organizations and (iii) private initiatives to raise information related to value chains and REDD+. The focus was on the identification of opportunities, needs and obstacles to improve/work on, in order to achieve a possible integration of the productive chains that count with REDD+ arrangements; and between private initiatives and the communities. The information gathered in Amazonas (questionnaire, meetings and workshop) was also useful for the development of training for leaders and decision-makers from companies that intend to establish good practices and designs involving forest conservation and the search for demand for environmental products and services.

At the workshop, the two first steps were carried out according to the following programme: 

8:30‐9:00  Registration of participants 

9:00‐9:15  Opening 

9:15‐9:30  Presentation of Plan Agenda 

9:30‐9:50  Presentation of Training Manual 

9:50‐10:00  Plenary ‐ Questions 

10:00‐10:15 Break ‐ coffee break 

10:15‐10:30 

Presentation of work methodology 

Presentation of participants 

10:30‐12:00 

Activity 1 ‐ Local analysis of reality  

Mapping of actors 

12:00‐13:30 Lunch 

13:30‐14:30 Presentation of Results of Activity 1  

14:30‐15:30  

Activity 2 ‐ Analysis of chain or productive sector 

Mapping of specific data 

15:30‐15:45 Break ‐ coffee break 

15:45‐16:45 Presentation of Results  of Activity 2  

16:45‐17:30 Finish 

                                                            1  Steps 1 and 2 of the Value Links methodology are similar to what the “Guidelines for a

Methodology to Support Value Chains for BioTrade Products” proposes in its steps 1, 2 and3.

 

ANNEX 4. Methodology and analysis of the workshop organized under the project  

 

 A power-point presentation was used to introduce the methodology and the instructions to perform the group activities, and afterwards its slides were posted on the wall-panels. The information raised by the participants was registered in cards following the Metaplan technique and their interventions and contributions were registered in a report form.

Finally, at the end of the activity, the participants filled out the assessment form while other considerations were registered on the panels.

PARTICIPANT’S INTRODUCTION

Each participant filled out an identification card and presented it to the others, according to their position in the Value Chain.

The participants were divided into two groups in order to have equal number of members, according to their position in the Value Chain in each group (since there were no participants who developed REDD+ initiatives), their experiences with the resource to be mapped and their territory of action. The mapped products during the activities correspond to the resources exploited by the workers of the chain present in the workshop (Brazil nut and copaiba oil).

ACTIVITY 1 – MAPPING THE ACTORS

Consisted in gathering and analysing existing information about the productive reality of a given territory, focusing on:

- Identification of the main income generating products;

- Identification of the links in the value chain;

- Identification of the actors involved in the processes of developing value chains;

- Period and time dedicated by the groups to those products;

- Relation between the groups and the markets;

- Prices and values applied; and

- Level of generated income and number of people/families involved and (in)directly beneficiated.

ACTIVITY 2 – MAPPING OF SPECIFIC DATA

Consisted in gathering and analysing existing information about the Chain or sector being discussed. It also included data that would help us identify the composition of the Chain and the product flow as well as the addition of value and its contributions for the generation of income and jobs, focusing on:

ANNEX 4. Methodology and analysis of the workshop organized under the project  

 

- Data of economic transactions;

- Data about operators and actors;

- Job generation;

- Finance flow;

- Use of natural resources;

- Existence of previous research;

- Volume of production; and

- Forms of usage/transformation of the product.

After finishing mapping the value chains, the groups made a short analysis of the situation stated in the cards. The information exposed on the following tables (in Portuguese) was included in the body of this report, items 5.2.1 (brazil nut) and 5.9.1 (essential oils).

PRODUCTS GENERATED

PARTICIPANTS’ PROFILE

The detailed participants’ introduction can be found on ANNEX 3.

TOTAL OF PARTICIPANTS

TOTAL OF INSTITUTIONS

TOTAL CHAIN OPERATORS

TOTAL OF SERVICE

PROVIDERS

TOTAL OF REGULATORS

AND INSTITUTIONS

TOTAL OF COOPERATIONS

AGENCIES

20 16 02 10 03 01

ANNEX 4. Methodology and analysis of the workshop organized under the project  

 

MAPPING THE BRAZIL NUT VALUE CHAIN, LÁBREA/AM               

                

             MAPPING THE COPAÍBA OIL VALUE CHAIN IN RDS UATUMÃ/AM

supplies gatheringPrimary transport

beneficiation

Secondary transport

commercialization

consumption

Dec- Mar

COOPMAS

2 Phases

Apr-Oct

CAIBA Final

consumption

500 families; 104 cooperative

members; 52 non members

60% of brazil nut in natura

70 employees in

agroindustries

Production in 2013 = 80 tSubsidys:

Government (ADS) - 10 t - R$ 18,00/t

CAIBA (company) - 70 t – R$ 14,00/t

IDAM AFEAM IDAM Transport service by

river or road

ADS

FUNAI

ICMBio

UFAM, UEA and IFAM (universities)

IFAM

Local government

Municipal Health

Surveillance

SEFAZ

SEBRAE ADS

MDA

IPAAM MAPA

Go

vern

me

nt

ANNEX 4. Methodology and analysis of the workshop organized under the project  

 

 

Supplies Beneficiation TransportCommercializ

ationSecond 

beneficiation

Extraction Filtering

and bottling

INDUSTRIAL

Association of Agroextractivists Producers of RDS DO UATUMà‐ AACRDSU 

FIRMENICH – Essence and cosmetic company that sells oil

200 Liters/year, only 2 families work 

R$21, 00/l 

AGO - SET

AACRDSU RECEIVES R$ 0.65 per liter 

filtered 

IDESAM – technical support and commercialization

Boat ITAPIRANGA ‐ MANAUS 

TRANSPORT MANAUS – SÃO 

INPA

SEFAZ

Management Council

SDS / CEUC – state management of RDS Uatumã

Management Plan

ANNEX 4. Methodology and analysis of the workshop organized under the project  

 

OCCURRENCE AREA OF PRODUCTS MAPPED The Figure 1 below show the occurrence os sociobiodiversity products in Amazonas/Brazil, based on secondary data (AMAZONAS, 2013; FEDERAL, 2011). Figure 1. Occurrence of acai. Rubber, piaçava and honey in Amazonas municipalites.

ANNEX 4. Methodology and analysis of the workshop organized under the project  

 

The following Figure 2 shows occurrence of seeds (for oil – copaiba and andiroba) and Brazil nut in Amazonas state. The last map shows the number of products’ occurrence for municipalities. Figure 2. The occurrence of seeds (oils) and Brazil nuts in Amazonas, Brazil.

ANNEX 4. Methodology and analysis of the workshop organized under the project  

 

FINAL CONSIDERATIONS

‐ Strengthen the existing initiatives in Amazonas;

‐ Introduce (positive) experiences in development on other locations;

‐ Structure existing value chains in Amazonas;

‐ Further the initiatives of promotion of value chains in Amazonas;

‐ Realise parallel development of the promotion of value chains and

REDD+ in Amazonas;

‐ Consolidate/systematise existing information about value chains in

Amazonas;

‐ Promote communication (exchange of information) and partnerships;

‐ Promote other activities of levelling of information; and

‐ Mobilise other key-actors.

REFERENCES  

AMAZONAS, Governo. Plano de Prevenção e Controle do Desmatamento do estado do  

Amazonas – PPCD‐AM. Fase II (2012‐2015). Secretaria de Estado do Meio Ambiente e  

Desenvolvimento Sustentável – SDS. Junho, 2013.  

FEDERAL, Governo. Extração Vegetal e Silvicultura 2011. IBGE. Disponível em:  

http://cidades.ibge.gov.br/comparamun/compara.php?lang=&coduf=13&idtema=102 

&codv=v19&search=amazonas|alvaraes|extracao‐vegetal‐e‐silvicultura‐2011.  

Guia Metodológico de implementação das Oficinas de Promoção de Cadeias de Valor.  

GIZ‐Brasil. Brasília, 2012.  

Guidelines for a methodology to support value chains for BioTrade products. United  

Nations, New York and Geneva, 2009.   

ANNEX 4. Methodology and analysis of the workshop organized under the project  

 

 WORKSHOP ANALYSIS 

 Twelve participants answered and returned the questionnaires; most of them are from the  civil  society  and  NGOs  (Graphic  1).  The  other  participants  (8)  left  in  different moments  during  the  workshop  due  to  their  schedules  and  didn’t  return  the questionnaires. Of the questionnaires answered, 75% were filled  in by men, and 25% by women. 

 As a whole, participants considered  the  information presented at  the workshop was 

relevant to their work in their institutions, most of them also agreed that the contents 

were relevant and will use it (Graphic 2). However, graphic 3 showed different degrees 

of  improvement  in the knowledge of the subjects approached (BioTrade and REDD+), 

showing  the  need  for more  information  and  levelling  on  the  subjects. According  to 

their comments, it is necessary to learn more about the BioTrade Initiative, as well as 

about REDD+. 

 

  

25

17

8

33

8

Graphic 1. Participants per Sector (%)

National government

State government

Municipal government

Civil society and NGOs

Private sector

42

33

25

50

58 58

8 8

17

Utility Content Likely to use

Graphic 2. Information presented (%)

totally agree

agree

neutral

ANNEX 4. Methodology and analysis of the workshop organized under the project  

 

 

 

 

Graphic 4 shows that panelists had a good performance  in their presentations and  in 

answering to questions, and that also encouraged the participation from the audience.  

 

Generally speaking, participants were satisfied with the workshop and are  interested 

to receive further information (Graphic 5). 

8

42

33

17

Graphic 3. Enhance the participants knowledge about the theme discussed (%)

completely

generally

more or less

partially

8

25

42

75

50

33

8

17 17

8 8 7

Effectiveness ofpresentation

Answer questions Encourageinteraction

Graphic 4. Panelists  performance (%)

totally agree

agree

neutral

no aswer

ANNEX 4. Methodology and analysis of the workshop organized under the project  

 

 

 

At the end of the workshop, the participants were asked to give their opinion, and this 

activity  was  included  in  the  comments  and  suggestions  part  of  the  assessment 

questionnaires as follows: 

Recommendations and suggestions from the participants in the workshop  

‐ partnership between REDD+ and BioTrade is interesting to develop REDD+ from existing value chains of forestry and non‐wood products; 

‐ the perspective of value chains being strengthened by REDD+ is appealing; ‐ reduces the pressure over the forest with the strategy of the relation between 

forestry  non‐wood  products  and  REDD+  and  provides  extra  benefits  for  the communities: 

o working  with  value  chains  may  increase  the  number  of  families involved; and 

o estimulate the participation of the young in value chains. ‐ be  able  to  know who  supports  BioTrade  initiatives  apart  from  governments 

(other stakeholders); ‐ need to know more about the objectives and guidelines of BioTrade Initiative; a 

suggestion  was made  to  organize more  events  that may  bring  information about  the actual operation of  the  relation between REDD+ and value  chains, because they don’t know how to link them, despite the fact that they work with value chains of non‐wood products; 

‐ it  is possible  to   adjust and  improve  the activities  in Amazonas based on  the knowledge of positive results of the BioTrade Initiative in Africa, Asia and Latin America; 

‐ there  is  interest  and  need  to  receive  further  information  about  the  subjects approached  in  the workshop,  even  in  other  languages,  as well  as  about  the products generated in the workshop; 

‐ municipal government is interested in initiatives of this kind; 

25

6767

33

8

satisfaction with theworkshop

interested in furtherinformation

Graphic 5. Qualification of satisfaction and interest (%)

totally agree

agree

neutral

ANNEX 4. Methodology and analysis of the workshop organized under the project  

 

‐ there were many  institutions  that didn’t attend  the workshop  to know about the  BioTrade  Initiative,  their  presence  could  have  increase  the  information available about the issues dealt with; 

‐ there is a need to deepen the knowledge about issues related to value chains of  non‐wood products  and REDD+,  so  that  the  communities  can actually  access REDD+  resources,  focusing  on  strengthening  the  activities  that  involve production of non‐wood products; 

‐ discussion about REDD+ must be deepened; ‐ the  workshop  is  important  for  facilitating  an  exchange  of  experiences  and 

knowledge, since many of these initiative are carried out in isolation; ‐ there  is uncertainty  about  a potential  limitation of REDD+ over  the products 

extracted according  to  the  indigenous  traditional  livelihoods;  zoning must be made  in Indigenous Lands to point out areas for fishing, hunting, extraction of non‐wood natural resources. With the resources obtained  from the execution of  the  Land  and  Environmental  Management  Plan  of  Indigenous  Lands, workshops on formation of leaders should be organized. 

ANNEX 5. Analysis of consistency and applicability of the eligibility criteria for the Bolsa Floresta Programme’s beneficiaries  

State Decree 26,958/2007 ‐ are eligibility criteria and obligations to the Bolsa Floresta Programme 

Eligibility criteria ‐ art 2º Applicability  Remarks 

Consistent  /  not consistent 

I – must be  inhabitant of a  state  Protected  Area with at least two years of proven residence 

Applicable  

Consistent 

II  –  have  an  the Identification  and Individual  Taxpayers’ Registry 

Applicable  

Consistent 

III  –  when  with schoolchildren,  keep them  matriculated  and attending  classes, whenever  there  are schools in the county 

Applicable  

Consistent 

IV  –  Participate,  before receiving  the  benefit,  in the  training workshop on Bolsa  Floresta Programme,  offered  by the  team  of  the  State Department  of Environment  and Sustainable Development – SDS 

Applicable 

This,  however,  doesn’t effectively  happen.  The number  of  professionals to  satisfy  the demand  is insufficient,    apart  form the  lack  of  planning between  FAS  and  SDS, making  it  impossible  for the  SDS  to  implement the  activity.  Therefore, there  isn’t control of the information given  to  the communities. 

Not consistent  

Duties of the beneficiaries ‐ art 3 

Candidates  must  be registered,  at  their homes,  by  the accredited  SDS  team and  must  sign  the Agreement  of Commitment  before receiving the benefit  

Applicable Usually  there  isn’t  a follow‐up of  the SDS  team in this activity 

Not consistent 

ANNEX 5. Analysis of consistency and applicability of the eligibility criteria for the Bolsa Floresta Programme’s beneficiaries  

 I  –  Comply  with  the rules set  in the Plan of Use or Plan of Reserve Management 

Applicable 

It is necessary to analyze FAS’ work  in  relation  to  the appreciation  and consideration  of  the dispositions  of  the  Plan  in each  UC,  as  well  as  to  the fulfilment  of  directions  from the  meetings  of  the  UCs Management Councils 

Consistent 

II – Must be associated and  free  of  debt  with the  Association  of Residents  of  the Community  and  the Protected  Area,  and participate  actively  in their activities 

Not applicable 

This  cannot  be  mandatory, complying  with  the  1988 Federal Constitution 

Not consistent 

III  –  Keep  the  size  of the  cutted  areas  not larger  than  it was  the year  of  institution  of the  Bolsa  Floresta Programme, cultivating  only  in secundary  areas, without  advancing over  areas  of  primary forest. 

Applicable 

The state government doesn’t have information about the assessment of the cultivating areas made at the time of the implementation of PBF in the UC to monitor environmental performance, since the information wasn't delivered to SDS for analysis  

Not consistent 

§  1.º Whenever  there isn’t  an  association  of residents  of  the community,  the beneficiary  must  take part  in  an  association linked  to  the  state Protected Area. 

Not applicable 

This  cannot  be  mandatory, complying  with  the  1988 Federal Constitution 

Not consistent 

§  2.º  Children  of residents  that  may have recently formed a family, with a separate house  from  the parents,  and  that qualify  for  item  I  of article  #2  of  this decree,  may  advance cultivating  areas  over  primary  forest  in  an 

There  is doubt  about the compliance with  this requirement 

   

ANNEX 5. Analysis of consistency and applicability of the eligibility criteria for the Bolsa Floresta Programme’s beneficiaries  area  not  larger  than the average size of the cultivated areas.