Avoided Deforestation (REDD) and Indigenous ... - Amazon Fund
Avoided Deforestation (REDD) and Indigenous ... - Amazon Fund
Avoided Deforestation (REDD) and Indigenous ... - Amazon Fund
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
esources in l<strong>and</strong>s to which they have the title, except for areas that are explicitly reserved<br />
by the State or that have exclusive rights for excluding third parties.” 111 At the same time,<br />
the forestry law specifically prohibits granting concessions to third parties in native or rural<br />
community l<strong>and</strong>s; 112 this allows for the interpretation that indigenous people have the right of<br />
exclusive use over forest resources on their l<strong>and</strong>s, which would be of more consequence with<br />
the current international norms in Peru; however, the current legislation in Peru leaves room for<br />
many contradictory interpretations.<br />
However, since the indigenous people directly exploit forest resources-- according to the<br />
Article 43 of the forestry law of 2001 <strong>and</strong> Article 11 of law decree 22175 of 1978 which indicate<br />
that the legal regime that applies to native forest logging is the same forestry law <strong>and</strong> not<br />
special rules regarding indigenous people --, it is possible to affirm that forest harvesting by<br />
native communities is subject to the elaboration <strong>and</strong> approval of forest management plans.<br />
These plans should be subject to approval by the appropriate authority, <strong>and</strong> the request<br />
to carry out forest management should be accompanied by “a certified copy of a community<br />
certificate where they agree to carry out said harvest.” 113 These rules do not distinguish traditional<br />
use activities from forest harvesting. Still, the dem<strong>and</strong> such a community agreement for carrying<br />
out the said harvesting is noteworthy, as it is a legal requirement, in the studied legislations, that<br />
only exists in Peru.<br />
Overlap between NPA <strong>and</strong> Native Community L<strong>and</strong>s<br />
The law is ambiguous regarding the restriction of rights of use <strong>and</strong> enjoyment of natural<br />
resources <strong>and</strong> also about the existence of the overlap between protected areas <strong>and</strong> native<br />
community l<strong>and</strong>s. Legislation appears to favor environmental regulations over indigenous<br />
people’s special rights of ownership <strong>and</strong> use of natural resources.<br />
On one h<strong>and</strong>, Article 54 of the Environmental Code (Legislative Decree Nº 613/1990)<br />
establishes that the Peruvian State recognizes native <strong>and</strong> rural communities’ ownership rights of<br />
111 Law 26821 of June 10, 1997. Article 18.<br />
112 Supreme Decree 014-2001-AG of August 4, 2001. Article 43. – Forests in native <strong>and</strong> rural community l<strong>and</strong>s are<br />
those located within territory that belongs to native <strong>and</strong> rural communities. Their use is subject to the provisions<br />
of the law <strong>and</strong> present regulations. Forest concessions are not granted to third parties in native or rural communities.<br />
(Emphasis by author)<br />
113 Law 27308, Forestry Law of Wild Fauna. Article 12 <strong>and</strong> Article 149 of the Supreme Decree 014-2001-AG of<br />
August 4, 2001.<br />
Av o i d e d d e f o re s t A t i o n (redd) A n d i n d i g e n o u s p e o p l e s: experiences, chAllenges A n d o p p o r t u n i t i e s in t h e A m A zo n c o n t e x t 59