Social and Environmental Impact Assessment of Land Titles Policies on Indigenous Populations in the Peruvian Amazon

1. Identification of the social and environmental impact assessment of the land titles policies on the indigenous populations of the Peruvian Amazonia Consolidation of the communal property of the indigenous communities Asháninka, as a strategy for sustainable development and conservation of the biodiversity in the Peruvian Amazonia. IAIA 2007 Seoul Korea, June 2007 Nancy Milagros Ortega Vásquez Instituto del Bien Común

2. Contents • Introduction / Information about natives communities Ashaninka • Analysis/Description of cases and summary, description about the communal property and the land titles policies in rural sector • Impacts identified • Conclusions

3. Introduction Information about natives communities Ashaninka

4. The Ashaninka They constitute the most important indigenous population of the Peruvian Amazonia: 52.461 people (21,89% of the total registered indigenous population in 1993) They belong to the linguistic family Arawak Location: river basins of the Apurímac, Ene, Tambo, Perené, Pichis, a sector of the Alto Ucayali and Gran Pajonal rivers.

5. The Asháninka, like many other amazonian indigenous still maintain traditional local redistribution mechanisms that are maintained on the basis of the reciprocity; this means that when exists an agricultural production surplus or a fruitful hunting, it is distributed among the local relatives. Creating by this way, obligations from them, that in their case will do exactly the same.

6. Analysis of cases Description of cases and summary Description about the communal property and the land titles policies in rural sector

7. Native CommunityShimabenzo Recognized and registered: 1975 Common land owners’ title: 1981 Area: 22,342 hectares (of which 1,050hectares are of agricultural use and the rest is of forest use and protection) Population: 173 people (August 2005) River basin: Tambo river

8. Current situation of conflict in N.C. Shimabenzo. • Immigrant farmers are inside the communal territory. • They entered progressively since the middle of the 80s 40%: Entered in the middle of the 80s. 40%: Between 1995 and 1998 20%: New occupants since year 2000 • In spite of the attempts of the community to cause the immigrant farmers leave the zone, they have remained there. • Some immigrant farmers gradually are extending more crop areas inside the territory of the N.C.

9. Parcels of inmigrant farmers in the N.C. Shimabenzo 102 Inmigrant farmers inside the territory of the N.C. Total area of the influence of the migrant farmers: 2,600 hectares approx.

10. N.C. Samaniato Recognized and registered: November 1982 Common land owners’ titled: November 1983 Area: 4,945 hectares (of which 2, 921hectares are of farming use and the rest is of forest use and protection) Population:142 people (March 2001) River basin: Ene river

11. Current situation of conflict in N.C. Samaniato • At the moment of the land titling, a free area was left that was not demarcated within the communal territory • In year 2001, the community began an extension proceeding on the area that was left free during the titling of the communal territory. This proceeding has not been attended by the government yet • The Agriculture Direction of the Regional Government of Junín issues administrative resolutions recognizing possession rights to 3 people (who do not live in the community) within the area asked by the community extension) • The N,C. with the legal support that offers the NGO that advises them in their proceeding of extension, opposes the administrative resolutions, obtaining the invalidity of those resolutions by means of a resolution sent by the Ministry of Agriculture; despite it, one of the 3 particular people demanded to the community in the civil instance and in this case, the judges give the reason to the community about the same land. The same person insists and initiates a legal action against the Ministerial Resolution

12. Location of the area left like free during the land titling Area that was not titled: 1,000 hectares approx. This area constitutes part of the territory of the N.C. Samaniato. In the plane registered in the Public Register Office, it appears only like adjacent: the N.C. of Shimabenzo by the north and N.C. Centro Caparocía by the south.

13. A summary Both Asháninka communities are located in the Central Forest of Peru, in the district of Rio Tambo of the Province of Satipo of the department of Junin. Whereas in Shimabenzo, there are 102 inmigrant farmers on communal territory, in Samaniato it exists an area nontitled that they consider like part of their territory and which they have been able to protect of the inmigrant farmers. These cases are only two of many that exist in the Peruvian Amazonia. The map shows the cases of conflict that have been identified only in the district of Rio Tambo.

14. Communal property and Indigenous Territory • The concept of private property does not exist. • The land (territory) is a good that belongs to the collective (communal property) and it has a particular value. • It is not possible to be sold, it is non-alienable, non-attachable and non object of being acquired by usucapion. • It is the base of their economic sustenance, but also for its social life, its culture, identity and spiritual force, intimately tie to their "system of knowledge and traditions"

15. Consolidation of the communal property • Elements of socioeconomic and environmental order exist that sustain the communal property: the necessity to count on territories in collective property, and with certain political, social and cultural autonomy, that allows them to have the control of its inhabitants on them.

16. The practices of hunting and harvesting, require to avoid the exhaustion of natural resources, of quite ample areas, in where they have a certain protection of the pressures of the market, and other influences, like for example the interference of immigrant farmers. Fuente: UNICEF • The communal property has an important social and environmental function, whereas it is going to allow the cultural continuity of the indigenous towns and the conservation of the amazonian forests.

17. Rural titling policies in Peru • It is oriented to promote the land markets • It promotes the individual titling of rural land properties • It has not considered the demands of the indigenous population. In 2001 Peru celebrated a contract of loan with the Interamerican Development Bank (IDB) with the purpose of cooperating in the execution of a Land Titling and Registration Program. This program was not designed on the base of careful and good studies in the communities and the systems of possession of communal land nor of their degrees of interaction with the market. • There is no Territorial Ordering nor a reliable land database of rural land properties that can serve as tools for the sustainable development of the zone

18. Balance of the rural land titling in Peru (2000-2006) • 2000-2003: 56 Native Communities titled (55 in Loreto, 1 in Junín) • 2004-2005: 5 Native Communities titled (4 in Junín, 1 in Ucayali) and 7 extensions (Junin) • 2006: No N.C. was titled Total: 61 Native Communities titled, 7 extensions • Communities waiting for having a status 66 N.Csto be recognized and titled, 110 N.Csrecognized but not still titled 54 N.Csthat have asked for extension of their land.

19. Individual rural land properties titled in Junin(2000-2006) • 2000: 8,551 • 2001: 2,238 • 2002: 4,142 • 2003: 9,901 • 2004: 10,058 • 2005: 7,552 • 2006: 6,384 TOTAL: 48,826

20. Impacts identified

21. Impacts identified • Lack of legal security on the territory (it means the absence of guarantees that allow the N.C. to oppose their rights to other people (For example, Migrant farmers and extractive companies) • Loss of territory and cultural values of the Ashaninka Native Communities. • Incentives for the land invasion and illicit natural resources extracting • Superposition of concessions for extracting of resources inside the Native Communities territories • Conflicts between indigenous and inmigrant farmers.

22. Deforestation.By slash-and-burn agriculture, by illegal extraction (opening of ways and retirement of valuable species), and the forest fires. In our country we have 72 million hectares of forests that cover more than 56% of the national territory. The INRENA esteem that exists a total of 9.2 million deforested hectares, that is to say, 12% of the forest surface, and that annually it is lost around 261,158 hectares of forest. It is at the rate of 725 hectares per day • unsuitable use of the land • Overexplotation of natural resources. • Pollution

23. Conclusions

24. Conclusions • To recognize the communal property of the native communities helps to fortify the social structure of the area. It will reduce the costs that imply the titling of rural land and the elaboration of the database like planning tool and development of the Amazonia.

25. It’s necessary to implement a suitable land titling and registration program based on the respect by the forms of communal possession of the indigenous population • It’s necessary the construction of a suitable legal frame, and the necessary mechanisms for the protection of the amazonian indigenous territories, in order to don’t stimulate the immigration from the andean zones (mountain range) to the Amazonia

26. The indigenous land titling and the territorial ordering are effective mechanisms of political stabilization. The baseline studies on the matter must necessarily include a good process of environmental and social impact assessments and the forms of governance on the land allocation

27. PATSONKI MARONI