Valuation of Environmental Services in the Managed Forests of Seven Indigenous Communities in Ucayali, Peru, is a subnational REDD+ initiative led by the Peruvian nonprofit organization AIDER (Association for integrated development and investigation) in the Ucayali region of Peru.1 The initiative aims to reduce deforestation and degradation, conserve biodiversity, increase forest carbon reserves and improve livelihoods through the promotion of sustainable forest management within seven Shipibo Conibo and Cacataibo indigenous communities. Since the initiative’s inception in 2010, the proponent has conducted socioeconomic and deforestation baseline studies, delivered REDD+ training workshops, and promoted sustainable timber, NTFP and fisheries management practices. It has also continued to provide technical assistance for communities to attain FSC forest management certification and to monitor and conduct surveillance of forested areas. Over the initiative’s first ten years, the plan is to conserve 1826 ha annually and avoid emissions of 5,699,386 CO2e (AIDER 2014). Future plans include certification by VCS and CCBA and commercialization of carbon credits. In this chapter, we describe the goals and strategies of the initiative, characterize the participating smallholders and their livelihood activities, discuss the challenges and concerns of key stakeholders, and offer insights on the lessons of this initiative. For this initiative, REDD+ is a way to support the continuation of forest management interventions by the proponent with carbon funds. This site also demonstrates the importance of prioritizing interventions and setting rules that reflect local biophysical and cultural conditions.

9.1 Basic facts: Where, who, why and when

9.1.1 Geography

The Ucayali region is located within the central eastern section of Peru, covering an area of 102,165 km2 and representing 8% of the total national territory (AIDER 2014). In 1980, Ucayali was separated from Loreto (Law No. 23099) and became its own region. It is the second largest region in Peru with 432,159 inhabitants, including 12% of Peru’s total Amazonian indigenous population with 27 different ethnicities (INEI 2007a). The seven communities participating in the REDD+ initiative are located in two of the four provinces of Ucayali: Coronel Portillo (36,815 km2) and Padre Abad (8822 km2).

Eighty-seven percent of the Ucayali region is covered by tropical rainforest with temperatures fluctuating between 19 and 30°C (AIDER 2014). It experiences heavy rainfall between the months of November and March and dry periods in July and August. Rainfall reaches an annual average of 1723 mm and the elevation of the communities in the intervention area ranges from 110–476 masl (Walsh Peru 2012). The project area includes communities located within várzea forests (seasonally flooded forests inundated by sediment-laden water from runoff from the Andes) (Prance 1979). Flooding greatly affects the access and timing of local livelihood activities within the forest. Farming occurs during the dry season when water levels are lower and farmers can plant crops in the bajiales (low-lying, sandy areas that can tolerate extreme waterlogging) (Junk et al. 2010). Communities also increase fishing activities for commercialization during this period, as it is easier to catch larger quantities in smaller areas. Once water levels begin to rise in the rainy season, communities usually increase their logging activities as new waterways provide access into the forest. People from outside of the region also take advantage of this period to illegally harvest timber from the forest.

According to the latest census of 2007, the main agricultural products of the region, in order of importance, were: banana, cassava, papaya, rice, corn and palm oil, and the principal economic sectors were agriculture (18.5%), commerce (17.5%) and manufacturing (15%) (INEI 2007b). Agriculture and forest product harvesting are important livelihood activities within the participating indigenous communities.

Regional land use and forest management were greatly affected by the construction of the Federico Basadre federal highway in 1945, which connected Pucallpa (the main city of the Ucayali region) to Lima. This highway initially facilitated access to extraction of natural rubber and other forest products, and cultivation of crops. It also led to increased Andean migration to the Amazon (Coello et al. 2008). High rates of deforestation in this region were highlighted in a study by Oliveira et al. (2007), in which the authors estimate that between 1999 and 2005, 64% of all deforestation and degradation in the Peruvian Amazon occurred in Ucayali (Che Piu and Menton 2013). An additional study conducted in Ucayali by the National Ministry of the Environment (MINAM) showed that the average annual deforestation rate for 2000–2005 was 16,679 ha, rising to 22,057 ha for 2005–2009; the latter corresponds to 1.9% of the total forest area in Ucayali (2012). Two members of the regional government of Ucayali (GOREU) identified seven main drivers of regional deforestation: (i) the Federico Basadre highway; (ii) palm oil plantations; (iii) artisanal mining for gold (especially along the southern border); (iv) Andean migration (especially from Huanuco); (v) petroleum exploration; (vi) illegal logging; and (vii) coca cultivation (personal communication from P Seijas and D Hernandez, July 2013).

To date, in addition to AIDER’s initiative described here, there are two REDD+ initiatives seeking to reduce the high deforestation rates in Ucayali. One is led by Bosques Amazonicos (BAM), which focuses on forest plantations and improved forest management on private properties with the aim of attaining FSC certification (personal communication from P Romero, July 2013). (BAM is also the proponent of the REDD+ initiative in Madre de Dios, Peru, described in Chapter 8.) The other initiative, which is under development, involves the national government agency SERNANP (National Park Service or Servicio Nacional de Áreas Naturales Protegidas por el Estado) and the private company Eco-Tribal developing REDD+ in the communal reserve of El Sira (personal communication from K Rios Sanchez and M Gonzales, August 2014).

The AIDER initiative involves seven communities. Two are located within Padre Abad Province and Irazola district, and are accessible by highway (Figure 9.1). The inhabitants here are predominantly of Cacataibo ethnicity. The other five communities are located within the Coronel Portillo Province, two of which are in the Calleria district and three in the Iparia district. They are of Shipibo Conibo ethnicity. They are situated along large tributaries and can only be reached by boat. The main deforestation drivers they face include illegal logging and exploratory petroleum wells. There are 2554 inhabitants (508 families) in the seven intervention communities, which cover a total of 142,247 ha; the project area covers a total of 127,004 ha (AIDER 2013). For the CIFOR-GCS study, we surveyed four of the Shipibo Conibo communities, comprising an area of 21,505 ha and including 441 households. We interviewed a total of 123 households in these four communities (approximately 30–31 households per community).

9.1.2 Stakeholders and funding

The proponent AIDER is a nonprofit NGO founded in 1986. It is committed to sustainable development and environmental conservation through the design, formulation and implementation of projects, and through capacity building in business management and forest governance within native and rural communities (AIDER 2011). AIDER has worked with communities in Ucayali since 2000, and in April 2012 it received financing from the ITTO program for Reducing Deforestation and Forest Degradation and Enhancing Environmental Services in Tropical Forests (REDDES) (see Figure 9.2). The initial funding provided by ITTO was approximately USD 415,385. Other funders that enabled AIDER to conduct preliminary REDD+ studies included TNC’s Peru consortium with Conservation International (CI), WWF, and the Inter-American Development Bank’s (IDB) program, Development of Pilot Experiences to Reduce emissions Derived from Deforestation and Degradation in Community Scenarios of Three Amazonian-Andean regions.2 In 2014, AIDER also received financing from the USAID donor program, the Initiative for Conservation in the Andean Amazon (ICAA), to create Community MRV committees.3 According to their PDD, as of August 2014, the budget for the REDD+ project’s implementation in seven communities for the first five years was estimated at USD 1,914,543 (AIDER 2014).

9.1.3 Motivation

This REDD+ initiative grew out of AIDER’s previous experience with forest management in indigenous communities in Ucayali. Since 2002, AIDER had provided technical assistance in forest management, promoted sustainable economic activities, and supported forest monitoring and surveillance. AIDER identified and prioritized the seven current intervention communities based on the communities’ interest and willingness to conserve their forests, as well as their participation in AIDER’s earlier efforts to promote sustainable forest management in the region. According to AIDER, additional criteria used to select these communities for inclusion in this REDD+ initiative were: (i) high levels of forest carbon; (ii) high rates of deforestation; (iii) significant deforestation threats; (iv) clear land tenure; (v) clear tree tenure and carbon property rights; and (vi) high forest dependence in local livelihoods.

The main drivers of deforestation and degradation in the region, as identified by AIDER, are traditional small-scale agriculture by both community members and newly arrived households, small- and medium-scale cattle ranching, small-scale legal and illegal timber harvesting and NTFP harvesting. Although some of these deforestation threats originate with actors outside the communities, the REDD+ initiative focuses exclusively on local households. For example, AIDER has noted that weak regulations and enforcement (at the regional and national level) for controlling timber harvesting, make it difficult for legal timber to compete with illegal timber in the marketplace (personal communication from P Recavarren, February 2013). Therefore, in addition to providing technical assistance to communities for the sustainable management of their forest resources, AIDER has also helped the communities develop business management plans for NTFPs and timber. In 2014 AIDER also proposed to create formal monitoring committees within each community to monitor illegal forest activities. Recently the proponent identified the need to monitor the impacts of mining in surrounding zones, as gold mining is becoming a more important deforestation threat to the region but has not been identified as a threat to the four communities of this chapter.

9.1.4 Timeline

The timeline (Figure 9.2) summarizes the history of the initiative and interventions applied from 2002 until mid-2014. Originally AIDER identified the start date for the REDD+ initiative as April 2012, which is when they were awarded funding from ITTO’s REDDES program. However, since AIDER had been promoting sustainable forest management practices for timber and NTFPs in indigenous communities in Ucayali before this date, they re-designated their start date as July 2010 to reflect that previous experience. Long before either start date, AIDER had worked with a broader set of communities to develop forest management plans in 2002, and since 2005 has assisted them throughout the FSC forest management certification process.

Prior to ITTO funding, AIDER conducted preliminary REDD+ studies with financing from the TNC consortium. These studies established a historical deforestation baseline, estimated carbon biomass, formulated timber and NTFP business plans, and conducted socioeconomic diagnoses. In October 2012 AIDER and the regional indigenous federation ORAU (Organización Regional AIDESEP Ucayali) held meetings to disseminate general information about REDD+ and the initiative to the seven participating communities. Shortly thereafter, in December 2012 until February 2013, we conducted the CIFOR-GCS baseline survey. Afterwards, AIDER continued to hold meetings and workshops with community leaders to define their benefit-sharing arrangements (July 2013), workshops on future scenarios with and without the project (February 2014), and workshops on business administration and declaration of expenses of the project (May 2014).

9.2 Strategy for the initiative

AIDER considers REDD+ as complementary to their activities already in progress with participating communities in the region. Incorporating the sale of carbon credits is seen as an additional bonus to bolster funding for improved forest management activities underway and planned for the following five years (personal communication from C Sanchez, August 2014). While AIDER aims to reduce deforestation (RED), reduce degradation (D) and to increase the reserve of carbon stock through improved forest management (+), their focus is also on promoting social and environmental co-benefits. They aim to improve the quality of life for participants and promote biodiversity conservation, as community members in participating communities are identified as highly dependent on their forests. Additionally, during a biodiversity inventory in the intervention communities, 13 flora species were found to be under threat and 190 fauna species were categorized as vulnerable in the study region (AIDER 2014).

Since the initiative’s inception in 2010, the proponent has engaged in REDD+ capacity-building workshops, promoted increased monitoring and surveillance of forested areas, and continued to provide technical assistance for FSC forest management certification. AIDER deems community members’ participation as vital to the development and implementation of the initiative, and strives to attain equal benefits for women, especially with regard to the distribution of benefits. Since 2012, AIDER has held meetings with community members both in their communities and in Pucallpa to discuss initiative planning. Additionally, there are REDD+ committees (Comite Consejo Consultivo), comprised of community leaders in each participating community, to disseminate REDD+ news and updates, and discuss benefit-sharing arrangements.

AIDER completed its CCBA PDD in April 2014 and as of August 2014, is awaiting CCBA certification; it is also seeking VCS verification.4 The benefit-sharing arrangements for the sale of carbon credits has not yet been agreed upon. Since July 2013, the proponent has met with community leaders to discuss benefit-sharing arrangements, and the REDD+ committees have served as an important platform to discuss how carbon payments will be distributed (i.e. to community members, to REDD+ committees or through AIDER), including what portion will be spent on planned REDD+ activities and what portion will be allocated to each community.5 AIDER is responsible for the sale of carbon credits – finding buyers and receiving payments – but no contracts or agreements have been signed as of August 2014. AIDER plans to sell carbon credits in 2015 in order to generate income to finance the initiative.

In 2012, AIDER replaced one community participating in the initiative with a new one, maintaining the same number of communities involved but increasing the forest area from 90,728 ha to 127,004 ha. From 2012 to 2014, primary interventions carried out in some of the communities and considered integral to the REDD+ strategy include: REDD+ capacity-building workshops; construction of a CITE Indígena (Centro de Transformación e Innovación Tecnológica Indígena) sawmill and warehouse in Pucallpa; reforestation with tanoni trees (Thevetia peruviana), the seeds of which are used for handicrafts; bolaina (Guazuma crinite) timber plantations financed by Movistar; sustainable management of aguaje palm (Mauritia flexuosa) financed by TNC; and sustainable fish farming of paiche (Arapaima gigas) financed by TNC. Not all households participate in the activities but each intervention activity involves 8 to 12 individuals, including men and women. Forest monitoring and surveillance activities are also considered an important intervention to be implemented in 2014 through community MRV committees, which will also include women.

Other organizations are also working in CIFOR-GCS’s four study communities. Activities include improved agriculture and farm animal training by FONCODES (Fondo de Cooperación para el Desarrollo Sostenible), and ongoing REDD+ capacity building by the indigenous federation of ORAU, with funding from the USAID and Peru Bosques project. In addition: the national government’s nutrition program, known as Vaso de Leche, provided food for families with children under five years of age; projects to provide electricity, potable water through communal wells and water tanks were undertaken by municipal and regional government agents; a community antenna was purchased through a local cable committee; and the construction of an office for local authorities was commissioned through the district government. One community also had a recycling program for plastic bottles with an international environmental organization and participated in workshops provided by the Red Cross on pre- and post-flooding strategies.

9.3 Smallholders in the initiative

For the CIFOR-GCS survey, we selected four of the Shipibo Conibo communities that had long-standing relationships with AIDER and were originally targeted for the initiative. Between December 2012 and February 2013, we interviewed a random sample of 123 households or 27% of the 441 households in these four communities, labeled UCAY1–4 (see Table 9.1). In each community, we also held one community meeting (with an average of 15 men and women) and one women’s meeting (with an average of 12 women).

The four intervention communities are defined and legally recognized as ‘native communities’ in Peru. They were officially formed in the period of 1945–1975. They have their own local governance structure with leaders elected every two years. Community decision making is attained through consensus at meetings (general assemblies) and includes the participation and voting rights of all women and men who are of Shipibo Conibo descent and over the age of 16 (or who have children). Community members have access to communally managed forests and are granted rights to farm in specific areas designated for agriculture by the elected local authorities. Community members farm between 1 and 8 ha of land. In each community there are various associations, which predominantly focus on health and family issues (parents’ association, mothers’ club, health committee). Additionally, UCAY1 and UCAY2 have artisan committees whose members are mainly women and focus on making clothing, tapestries, ceramics and jewelry from natural forest products.

Table 9.1 summarizes the characteristics of the four study communities participating in the initiative in 2012. All communities had access to primary and secondary schools. Most teachers lived temporarily in the communities during the school year and were from other regions. Classes were taught in Spanish, as only a few teachers speak the predominant Shipibo language. Medical posts were present in three out of the four communities, but doctors and nurses visit the communities infrequently to attend patients. Two communities have roads that are usable by four-wheel drive vehicles, but few people could afford vehicles and thus the main mode of transportation in all communities was by foot or canoe.6 People used fluvial transportation as their main mode of transportation to Pucallpa, since there were no roads to the capital city.

The main staple foods were bananas, cassava and fish. As communities are located along rivers and tributaries, many people engaged in fishing on a daily basis and depended on fish as their main source of protein. Bananas were identified as the agricultural crop with the highest production value (cash and subsistence) in all four communities (33% for UCAY1, 43% for UCAY2, and 62% for UCAY3 and UCAY4). In the 12 months prior to the study (2011), communities experienced unusually high levels of rain and flooding and many farmers complained of losing their banana stands. Communities, specifically those with more lowland forests such as UCAY1, experienced a high level of temporary out-migration during this particular farming season and decreased banana production. Members of UCAY3 mentioned a growing interest in papaya cultivation due to its high market value, and members of UCAY1 opted to focus on logging as an alternative to agricultural crops in the year following the high flooding as they were already engaging in timber harvesting activities with AIDER.

Table 9.2 summarizes the socioeconomic characteristics of households interviewed in the four communities. Primary and secondary schools were present in all four communities, and adults (≥ 16 years old) had studied for an average of 6–7 years. In terms of infrastructure, UCAY2 was the only community with access to piped water. Most households depended on water from the river or cisterns that collect rainwater during the rainy season. Most families in the study communities of UCAY2, UCAY3 and UCAY4 had access to electricity (74%–80%), while only 6% of households sampled in UCAY1 had access to electricity. There were no community members with their own landlines; instead each community had one public pay phone, and only a few households (6%–26%) had their own cell phones, which they used when traveling. The value of transportation assets was low for all four communities as the main modes of transportation were by foot and canoe.

As shown in Table 9.2, UCAY4 had the highest total household income (USD 13,175) and highest percentage (39%) of people who agreed that their household income was sufficient to cover their needs in 2010–2012. Although UCAY1 had the second highest percentage (32%) of households who agreed that their income was sufficient, they had the lowest average income of the four communities (USD 3760). Households in UCAY4 derived a higher share of their income from agriculture and forest products than households in UCAY1. And as mentioned earlier, the higher percentage of income from forest products in UCAY1 was, unlike the other communities, derived predominantly from timber, while income from forest products in UCAY4 came from fish, suggesting that fishing could be more profitable than logging. One factor that could be influencing UCAY4’s higher income, especially from the agricultural sector (Figure 9.3), is the larger average land area controlled by their households (8.95 ha in addition to access to communal forest) as compared to the other three communities (see Table 9.2). In all of the communities, forest products were harvested from extensive communal forests.

All four indigenous communities of the initiative were highly dependent on their forests for livelihood activities and income. Figure 9.3 shows that 65% of income in the four communities was derived from the forest, while 19% was derived from agriculture, followed by 6% from salaried work and 6% from households’ own businesses. Table 9.3, which summarizes indicators of forest dependence, reinforces the importance of forest income in these communities, as it shows that 56%–68% of the average household’s total income (including sales and subsistence) was derived from forest products and that 93%–97% of families interviewed reported selling forest products.

Important products derived from the forest included: timber, fuelwood, fish, wild meat, primary materials for artisanal products (e.g. seeds and tree bark for dyes), and palm fruits. These provide both cash (e.g. from sales of timber and artisanal materials) and subsistence (e.g. fish). In three of the communities (UCAY2, UCAY3 and UCAY4), the forest products that contributed the most to household income (including sales and subsistence) were fish, timber and fuelwood. UCAY2 reported an average of 79% of forest income from fish, UCAY3 reported 88%, and UCAY4 reported 84%. UCAY1 was the only community where households gleaned a higher percentage of their forest income from sawn wood (49%), which was followed by fish (37%). Almost all households across the communities (93%–100%) reported fuelwood as their primary cooking fuel (Table 9.3).

While agriculture contributed the second largest share of income, a high percentage of household members (≥ 16 years old) reported agriculture as their primary or secondary occupation rather than forest-based activities. This could be because agriculture is perceived as an activity that household members participate in on a daily basis, requiring more time than forest-based activities, although fishing is also a daily activity for many households. Very little income was derived from livestock (2%) in the four communities, as cattle-ranching was not common, but households typically had chickens and ducks.

Forest collection activities were discussed in women’s meetings. According to the participants, most men and women accessed the communal forest to collect a diversity of products. Men went in familial groups for hours to days at a time to hunt wild meat (a practice that is becoming less and less frequent due to the larger distances needed to travel to find animals). Men also went to the forest to harvest timber, collect palm fruits and gather palm leaves for thatching roofs. Women entered the forest to collect fuelwood and NTFPs (i.e. seeds and bark) for their artisanal products. Fishing was an activity mostly conducted by men, although women reported fishing during the absence of their husbands, i.e. when they emigrated temporarily for salaried work.

Three of the communities reported an increase in consumption of forest products due to the increasing population of their communities. They also cited an increase in the sale of forest products partially due to women’s growing interest in selling their artisanal products in Pucallpa in order to generate their own income and complement household income generated by male members of their family.

In UCAY1 and UCAY4, less than a quarter of households (19% and 23%, respectively) reported clearing forest areas in 2010–2012 for the purpose of growing crops, while close to half of the households in UCAY2 and UCAY3 reported clearing forest. Among households that cleared forest, the average amount of secondary forests cleared was higher (0.41 ha) than the average amount of mature forest (0.05 ha) cleared. UCAY1 and UCAY4 cited a decrease in forest clearing due to increased regulations for timber harvesting associated with FSC certification guidelines, internal community rules, and increased monitoring by the national agency OSINFOR (Organization for the Supervision of Forest Resources and Wildlife). The higher percentages shown for clearance of forests for agricultural products in UCAY2 and UCAY3 could be due to the floods of 2011 that destroyed crops and washed away farmland.

9.4 Challenges facing the initiative

We identified a variety of challenges and concerns with the planning and implementation of the REDD+ initiative based on information from the proponent, participating communities and observations from our field team. In all four communities, there was a general lack of knowledge about REDD+ and confusion about its meaning. Households continually asked our field team about the definition of REDD+.7 In our interviews, few households had heard of or understood AIDER’s initiative. This lack of knowledge could be because AIDER had only begun dissemination activities a few months earlier, as the initiative was in its initial stages of development when the team arrived. Also, since AIDER had been involved with other activities in the area, it was difficult for communities to separate the REDD+ initiative from their prior activities.

The proponent identified several challenges associated with advancing the initiative. The first problem was the slow process of PDD validation for authority to sell carbon credits. They have also faced the difficult task of defining activities and projecting their long-term costs, which according to one proponent employee makes them feel that “the price to conserve forests is eventually defined by the carbon buyer” (personal communication from P Santiago, August 2014). It has also been a slow and difficult process to explain the ‘intangibility’ of carbon to communities and to undo misinformation and/or negative news about REDD+ and carbon prices. For example, news of ‘carbon cowboys’ illegally buying and selling carbon at exorbitant prices in Peru not only circulated in the communities but also across the country in 2011 and 2012. AIDER not only had to disseminate accurate information to communities, but also ensure that their staff were well trained and informed. Another challenge faced by the proponent was reaching agreements with indigenous federations (i.e. COICA and ORAU) that also represent community members. (These federations also have interests in managing carbon sales from the communities and initially saw AIDER as potential competition in the carbon marketplace.) AIDER and communities mentioned problems with illegal loggers, both outsiders and from the communities, as challenges to implement sustainable management practices. And as mentioned earlier, communal forest can be easily accessed via multiple water routes during the rainy season. Similarly, many local respondents reported conflicts with external fishermen, who entered by the same water routes, and are believed to both overfish and pollute the water. There is clearly a need for community monitoring and surveillance of these waterways.

The communities expressed a number of concerns about participating in the initiative. They were worried that they would have to change and/or restrict their livelihood activities, which could lead to a decrease in their household income without due compensation. They worried that the initiative would not provide an alternative income source and that it would not protect their forests from claims by big companies. For example, UCAY2 has had conflicts with oil companies entering their land for exploratory wells. While all communities have well-defined and legally recognized boundaries, there is still an underlying concern that the government could take their land away. They were also concerned about transparency by the proponent and full inclusion of community members. Individuals feared they would not be sufficiently informed of planned REDD+ activities, and that only a select group of community members would benefit, as had happened in previous external interventions in the communities.

The main recommendation for the initiative, offered by community members, was for the proponent to increase the quantity and improve the quality of information on REDD+ disseminated to community members, and to target younger members of the community to ensure all were well informed. Communities requested improved coordination between AIDER’s technical staff and the community. There was a high level and willingness of community members to become involved in the initiative and to protect their natural resources, but they felt strongly that they should be compensated for this engagement.

9.5 Lessons from the initiative

The AIDER initiative in Ucayali is an important example of indigenous communities participating in a subnational REDD+ initiative. The four intervention communities in this study are characterized by households that rely on products from communally managed, flooded forests – although most report their primary livelihood as farming as it is the activity they dedicate the majority of their time to. The forest provides them with essential inputs for the construction of houses and canoes (their main mode of transportation), craftsmanship (growing in importance for women in many communities) and their diet (with fuelwood as their primary fuel source, and fish and wild meat as primary protein sources). The communities have secure land tenure, with well-defined and legally recognized boundaries. However, while they have secure access to their forests, community members still cite concerns that the government could revoke those rights and permit large companies to access their lands, as experienced with exploratory drilling by petroleum companies in the region, and in UCAY2 and UCAY3. Communities have also reported problems with degradation (i.e. decline in the quality of communal forests and consequently the need to travel further to find wild meat), as well as problems with over harvesting and contamination by external fishermen of their flooded forests’ waterways.

The initiative has promoted sustainable forest management by community members through a variety of mechanisms including certification, reforestation, forest surveillance and monitoring, and business planning for timber and NTFP harvesting. Many components of the initiative are similar to the proponent’s previous activities, with the main additions being the carbon sequestration and deforestation baseline studies conducted in 2011. Thus, in this initiative, REDD+ is seen as a way to sustain efforts to promote sustainable forest management, now and into the future, with carbon funds.

Reviewing this REDD+ initiative, it is also important to take into account the unique advantages and challenges of the flooded forest environment. Flooding supports a healthy fish population that is critical to the local diet and supports some of the highest incomes reported by local households. At the same time, it facilitates access by illegal loggers and outside fishermen. Flooding also maintains agricultural productivity by depositing additional nutrients and extinguishing pests, but excessive flooding can destroy crops and wash away arable land. In this case, the exceptional floods of 2011 led to the temporary migration of community members of UCAY1 to the nearby city of Pucallpa. It also negatively affected farmers’ motivation and capital for engaging in farming activities the following year. Some households with more lowland than upland forest areas used for farming were subjected to higher levels of flooding and reported the need to use arable land outside of their communities. This led to some farmers having to travel greater distances to farm in neighboring communities, which increased their agricultural input (i.e. travel time, expenses, etc.) and lowered their output (profit). Some households reported clearing more forestland following the floods, demonstrating that events beyond the communities’ or proponent’s control can affect deforestation levels. Thus, this site demonstrates the importance of prioritizing interventions and setting rules that reflect the local biophysical and cultural conditions.

9.6 Acknowledgements

We are deeply indebted to all of the community authorities and families of the eight Shipibo Conibo communities visited at the Ucayali site. We thank them for sharing their valuable knowledge and time with us. A special thank you to AIDER’s team in Lima and Pucallpa for sharing their REDD+ initiative information with us: Jaime Nalvarte Armas, Percy Recavarren Estares, Carlos Sanchez, Pio Santiago Puertas, Ivan Icochea Davila, Danis del Aguila Saavedra, Carlos Samaniego and Angel Egoavil Rios. We are also grateful to the phase 1 and 2 members of our field team for their outstanding dedication and continued participation in the study: Pascual Blanco Reyes, Santiago Nunta Cauper, Medardo Miranda Ruiz, Dina Gianina Reyes, Leandro Ihuaraqui Gadiel, Franco Santana Mori, Lyan Mui Campos, Katty Garcia and Maria Coda Vasquez.