Population, territory and sustainable development

76
Prime examples of this include the Plurinational State of Bolivia and Paraguay, which changed
the structure of their settlement patterns by encouraging mass migration from the historically populated
areas (in the west for both countries) towards the extensive eastern areas, which were much more sparsely
populated and had significant productive potential. Other countries did not drive such large shifts in the
spatial distribution of their populations, but they nevertheless took steps to settle political, demographic
and productive frontiers. Some such policies failed, simply because too few migrants were persuaded to
move to the low density areas that were targeted for settlement and more intensive exploitation.
Recognizing the changes brought about by these policies and programmes in no way constitutes an
endorsement or promotion of them. Many of them led to well-documented harm to the environment, the
unpleasant or harsh treatment of colonizers, aggressive and violent behaviour towards the indigenous
populations who traditionally occupied the land, and below-par, not to mention unsustainable, progress
towards economic and social development (Rodríguez and Busso, 2009; Rodríguez and da Cunha, 2009;
ECLAC/CELADE, 1995; CELADE, 1984). Precisely because of these lessons learned from experience and
other emerging factors, 2 colonization programmes are no longer included in international recommendations 3
or the public policy agendas of the countries in the region. 4 Some vestiges of these policies remain, for
example, in the ad hoc granting of land rights in low-population-density areas, but these programmes are no
longer of the scale, scope or priority seen in the past.
B. DEMOGRAPHIC TRENDS AND CONTEXT UP TO 2000
Many of the major administrative divisions that have seen the most robust population growth since 1950
were the most sparsely populated. To name only those with annual average growth rates of over 5% (at
which point the population doubles approximately every 14 years), the list includes: Sucumbíos (8.2%),
Zamora Chinchipe (5.4%) and Galapagos (5.1%) in Ecuador; Alto Paraná (7.9%) in Paraguay; Rondônia
(7.2%), Roraima (5.8%) and Amapá (5.1%) in Brazil; Quintana Roo (7.0%) in Mexico; Petén (6%) in
Guatemala; Vaupés (5.8%) in Colombia, and Tierra del Fuego (5.5%) in Argentina. In some cases, this
pace of growth has not been sustained over time and has slackened considerably, as will be shown below
with reference to selected areas.
2
3
4
These include a new environmental awareness at the global and regional levels (reflected in some countries of
the region in specific legislation, institutions, policies and programmes), the possibility of generating revenues
and other economic benefits through conservation and the increasing recognition of the territorial rights of local
populations, especially indigenous people.
Colonization projects are not even mentioned in the Programme of Action of the International Conference on
Population and Development. Indeed, in paragraph 9.9, “Countries are urged to recognize that the lands of
indigenous people and their communities should be protected from activities that are environmentally unsound or
that the indigenous people concerned consider to be socially and culturally inappropriate. The term "lands" is
understood to include the environment of the areas which the people concerned traditionally occupy.”
The most recent report on world population policies (United Nations, 2010) contains no mention of active or
planned colonization programmes as public policy. In addition, only 4 of the 19 countries of Latin America that
responded, stated they wished to see greater migration from the cities to the country (in the region city dwellers
would be the main source of settlers for any possible colonization programme). Finally, the number of countries
that reported wishing to see significant changes in the spatial distribution of their populations fell from 22 in
1976 to 12 in 2009.