Diego Leal. University of Richmond

Transcription

1 Changing notions of territory in the Peruvian Amazon: A case study of Ucayali Diego Leal University of Richmond 1

2 Abstract Land titling in Peru gained recognition as the indigenous political movement s pillar after the 1974 enactment of the Native Communities and Agricultural Promotion in Jungle Regions Law. Since then, millions of hectares of land have been titled in favor of the Amazonian indigenous communities. While nearly fifty communities remain without legal titles to their land in the Peruvian region of Ucayali, the regional political movement has gradually shifted its attention towards regaining administrative and autonomous control over titled territories. Based on a participatory research methodology, this paper explores the evolution of the indigenous rights discourse in recent times. More specifically, it analyzes the growing disconnect regarding indigenous territoriality between the Ucayali indigenous political organizations and the communities they intend to represent. The experience of a land titling project focused on the Ashéninka community of Saweto shows the need of a new replicable and sustainable titling process in order to tackle modern obstacles towards further titling in Ucayali. A brief gender analysis based on interviews and participatory observations in community and federation assemblies suggests that women have the potential to become a new ally in the effort to preserve the territorial integrity of the Amazonian indigenous peoples. 2

3 Changing notions of territory in the Peruvian Amazon: A case study of Ucayali Conflicts related to the territoriality of indigenous communities in the Ucayali region of the Peruvian Amazon have gradually evolved over the past decades. Historically threatened by colonialist policies embodied mostly by the Peruvian State (Chirif & Garcia, 2007), the indigenous peoples of this region and their local, regional and national organizations now face the challenge to organize effectively to maintain control over their communal lands. Global demand for high grade timber, minerals and oil, has resulted in the creation of extractive concessions and various investment opportunities that directly or indirectly affect the indigenous population of the area. Once the symbolic center of the Amazonian indigenous movement (Hvalkof, 1998), land titling has ceased to be a key aspect in most communities discourse related to indigenous rights. Instead, territorial administration, and thus the control of local economies through the autonomous management of natural resources, has taken a leading role in the mind of the Amazonian peoples. Land titling has recently lost relevance within the indigenous political movement in Ucayali. The successful land titling experiences of the native communities that lead the regional political efforts have eclipsed the need for further work. The article "Transboundary political ecology in Amazonia: history, culture and conflicts of the borderland Asháninka" (Salisbury, Borgo & Vela, 2011) is one of the few recent scholarly publications that argues for new titling efforts. Today, nearly fifty indigenous communities in Ucayali continue the struggle to obtain a legal title to their land (DRSAU, 2012). Scholars have conceptualized land titling as a form of community empowerment and protection for indigenous peoples who have historically been threatened by colonialists and nationalistic policies (Halkof, 2006). The potential for a new 3

4 sustainable titling process to prepare untitled communities for a post-titling existence has driven recent efforts by new actors in the field. New titling initiatives A combined project between the Upper Amazon Conservancy (UAC), the Peruvian nongovernmental organization ProPurús, the Amazon Borderlands Research Center (CIFA) of the Universidad Nacional de Ucayali, the Regional Agrarian Office of Ucayali s (DRSAU) new Office of Legal and Physical Formalization of Rural Property (OLPFRP), and the Ashéninka community of Saweto is the most recent land titling initiative in Ucayali (Image 1). With UAC providing all the necessary funding, the project s main goal is to title Saweto s homeland near the Brazilian border. Without the participation of the AIDESEP Regional Organization of Ucayali (ORAU), which represents the indigenous political movement in the region, the three organizations participating in this initiative are relatively new in land titling efforts. 1) The Upper Amazon Conservancy is an NGO dedicated to protecting the biological and cultural diversity of the Amazon headwaters in southeastern Peru. Titling the homeland of Saweto is relevant to the organization because of its location in a borderland area with considerable potential for conservation initiatives. 2) CIFA began operating in 2004 as an interdisciplinary research center with the primary objective of improving living standards and conservation efforts of biological and cultural diversity in the borderlands (Salisbury, n.d.) Within the titling project, CIFA s responsibilities include conducting research to update information regarding Saweto s territory, and constructing a Land Titling Manual to inform new tiling processes. 3) DRSAU s Office of Legal and Physical Formalization of Rural Property (OLPFRP) began operating in early 2012 as the Governmental body responsible of titling indigenous territories. Saweto s titling process represents a crucial opportunity to systematize and 4

5 institutionalize technical and legal procedures that will form the new land titling system in Ucayali. Image 1. Saweto s leader and ProPurús Executive Director sign a cooperation agreement. Photo by Diego Leal As part of the David D. Burhans Fellowship program, I worked side-by-side between June and August 2012 with the organizations involved in the titling project. I worked primarily as an intern for CIFA, specifically contributing to the creation of a sustainable and equitable titling process for indigenous communities in the Ucayali region. In order to comprehend the dynamics, importance and history of land titling, I firstly interviewed several members of NGOs 5

6 (such as the Instituto del Bien Común and the Asociación para la Investigación y Desarrollo Integral), governmental institutions related to indigenous territories, and members of titled and untitled indigenous communities. A review of important literature on land titling and the history of territorial conflicts in Ucayali also directly informed the research process. Constant communication with ProPurús led me to expand my internship responsibilities and allowed me to participate in several meetings among the four parties involved in this initiative. After spending several days with two of Saweto s leaders in the city of Pucallpa, I became an additional line of communication between the community, CIFA, ProPurús, and DRSAU. This highly flexible and independent position allowed me to observe and register the different perspectives on land titling and indigenous communities territories that each party had. It also became an opportunity to contribute with the planning of DRSAU s field work in Saweto, in coordination with ProPurús. Additionally, I participated in meetings with the Peruvian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Brazilian state of Acre Secretary of the Environment concerning Saweto s titling. I also developed a relationship with the Director of the Forestry and Wildlife Executive Agency s (DEFFS) Area of Forestry Concessions, which is a crucial stepping stone in Saweto s struggle to overcome a major obstacle for titling: superimposed forestry concessions (Map 1). 6

7 Map 1. Extractive concessions in Ucayali: untitled communities are hidden under investment opportunities. As the last part of this participatory process, I contributed with organizing a workshop that brought together Saweto s leadership, the Brazilian Ashéninka community of Apiwtxa s leadership, ProPurús, CIFA, UAC, the Peruvian Army and Navy, members of the Ucayali s Regional Government, and other important actors in the field of land titling (Image 2). During the research process, the Instituto del Bien Común (IBC) became an important liaison between my work and members from indigenous communities. IBC is a non-profit NGO that focuses on improving the management and conservation of common resources in Peru, including 7

8 water, forests and culture. Participating in IBC s workshops and events allowed me to interact directly with and interview several community leaders that travelled to Pucallpa. After developing a close relationship with some of these leaders, I was able to establish contact with the leadership of ORAU, the regional indigenous political organization. Personal communication with community members strongly informed the process of understanding how land titling and new territorial threats relate to the current socio-economic and cultural situation of several communities. Image 2. Ashéninka community leaders meet with ProPurús and other experts in titling and conservation. As a result of this research initiative, I will now be a Culture and Language across the Curriculum Teaching Assistant for Dr. Salisbury s Society, Economy and Nature course at the University of Richmond. Important findings also led me and Dr. Salisbury to agree on 8

9 conducting further independent research on a new sustainable land titling process and threats to communities territories in the coming months. Dr. Salisbury and I expect to publish the results of this research and we will submit them to two academic conferences: the Latin American Studies Association 2013 Congress, and the Association of American Geographers 2013 Conference. Indigenous land titling in Ucayali Ucayali groups 16% of all Amazonian communities in Peru (COFOPRI 2008) with 275 registered communities in the Peruvian Public Registries (DRSAU, 2012). Thorough studies (Garcia, Hvalkof & Gray, 1998; Chirif and Garcia, 2007; Hvalkof, 2006) have documented the history of land titling in Ucayali and its importance as a defense mechanism against colonialist and neoliberal policies embodied by the Peruvian State. Hvalkof s studies (1998, 2002, 2006) have been particularly important to historically contextualize the process and to show indigenous peoples agency to defend their land rights. Research by Kerekes and Williamson (2008) has also investigated the ability and process of government land titling to achieve secure property rights institutions. The enactment of the first land titling-related law in 1974 marked the beginning of a series of legal instruments that have allowed communal homelands titling (Baldovino, 2009). The law acknowledged the need to recognize and respect the rights of ownership and use of land to promote local development. It also defined the State responsibility of ensuring the integrity of indigenous communities territories and leading the land titling process of all communities in the rainforest. Most importantly, it declared the inalienable, imprescriptible, and irreversible nature of communal lands. 9

10 Although the enactment of this law was a victory for the indigenous land rights struggle, it also established a system of communal land management that did not necessarily respond to the socio-cultural and economic organization of indigenous peoples. The law s concept of community forced the indigenous peoples, who had mainly nomadic lifestyles, to reinvent politically and economically (Chirif and Garcia, 2007). One of the strongest setbacks for indigenous territoriality came in 1993, when President Alberto Fujimori signed a new Constitution that eliminated the inalienable nature of communal territories. Chirif and Garcia (2007) indicate that "the pursuit of fragmentation, which results from the perception of civil property, severely impacted circular forms of land-use" (p.38). Motivated by the need to seek for legal security, the Ucayali indigenous peoples were forced to create artificial borders within territories that they had traditionally occupied. In order to better comprehend the effects that these processes had on indigenous communities, fieldwork was conducted in Pucallpa, the largest city in Ucayali, during a period of 10 weeks. Methods Fieldwork conducted in the city of Pucallpa and the indigenous communities of Puerto Bethel, San Francisco and Yamino, consisted mainly on semi-structured interviews with 57 individuals from 37 different indigenous communities in Ucayali. Additionally, 24 testimonies given by community members in local and regional events relevant to indigenous territoriality were recorded (Image 2). Lastly, 19 interviews were conducted with members of the Instituto del Bien Común (IBC), AIDESEP Regional Organization of Ucayali (ORAU), the Forestry and Wildlife Executive Agency (DEFFS), USAID-Perú, the Forestry and Wildlife Supervision Agency (OSINFOR), the Research and Integral Development Research Association (AIDER), the Regional Agrarian Office of Ucayali (DRSAU), the Office of Indigenous Affairs of the 10

11 Municipalities of Masisea and Coronel Portillo, the regional government of Ucayali, among others. Image 2. Shipibo community members meet with their federation s leaders and the leadership of ORAU. Photo by Diego Leal The interviews sought to understand the reality of indigenous territoriality through the subjective experience of each interviewee. These oral narratives and manifestations formed the core methodology of the research process because they illustrated the perception that each subject had about territoriality. This research method allowed me to directly observe the contrast between interviewees discourses related to land rights and their experiences within the indigenous movement and its communities. An analysis of the interviews results showed how indigenous peoples interpret and conceptualize the laws related to their territories, specifically appropriating concepts of international legal instruments such as the International Labor Organization Convention

12 Results Out of the subjects interviewed, 76.54% were male and 23.46% female (Table 1). It was particularly difficult to find women among community members who came to Pucallpa to conduct legal and administrative matters, or to participate in the events organized by ORAU. Out of the 19 community leaders interviewed, only two were women. There was also a profound difference between the number of men and women who attended the various events held in Pucallpa related to indigenous territoriality. The age of the interviewees was taken into account for the purpose of tracking generational changes regarding the perception of territory. Most of the interviewees were between 21 and 30 years, indicating that the indigenous generation that has constant contact with the Peruvian society and indigenous political organizations had not even been born when the first law establishing communal homelands titling was enacted in Table 1. Total interviewees and division by gender and age. Description Total Percentage Personal Interviews % Registered Testimonies % Total 81 Gender Total Percentage Women % Men % Age Age range Average age

13 Regarding the geographical origin of the subjects (Table 2), members from 37 communities were interviewed. Of the 81 subjects, 50 are from the Province of Coronel Portillo, 17 of Padre Abad Province, 9 of Atalaya Province, and 5 of the Province of Purus. While most native communities in Coronel Portillo and Padre Abad have direct access to Pucallpa by river or land routes, the interviewees from Purus reached Pucallpa by air. Taking into account the access difficulties and economic obstacles to reach the city of Pucallpa, it is worth noting that the federations that bring together communities near Pucallpa have developed a stronger relationship with the leadership of ORAU. In a bidirectional relationship, both the federations, particularly those near Pucallpa, and ORAU benefit from the political and logistical support they mutually provide each other. Table 2. Origin of the interviewees. Origin Total Percentage Communities of origin 37 Subjects per Province Total Percentage Coronel Portillo % Padre Abad % Atalaya % Purús % The positions that the interviewees occupy in their respective communities and federations was an important factor in determining how the reality of indigenous territoriality is perceived in various ways within the indigenous movement (Table 3). The interviews results showed a considerable lack of representation between ORAU and the communities it supposedly represents. The current political discourse on independent forest management has increasingly gained relevance in recent years, even encouraging the creation of a specialized Communal 13

14 Forestry Management Office within ORAU. While the leadership discourse of ORAU takes for granted the need to log entrepreneurially in communal territories, a large number of other interviewees mentioned the subject of logging as a necessary but reversible process. Table 3. Positions and titles of the interviewees. Positions Total Percentage Interviewees without a title or position % Indigenous University Students % Communities leadership committee Total Percentage Chief % Sub Chief % Municipal Agent % Governor % Mothers Club President % Local Federations Total Percentage Federations showed in general sample 9 Positions and Titles per Federation Total Percentage President % Vice-President % Territory Secretary % Other Organizations Total Percentage Regional Institute for Indigenous Communities Development (IRDECON) % ORAU % According to the National Statistics Institute (INEI), the indigenous population of Ucayali represents 14 ethnic families. Responding to the geographical origin of respondents, 55.56% of the subjects are ethnic Shipibo-Conibo, which is the largest ethnic in Ucayali (INEI, 2007) (Table 4). 75% of interviewees who belong to ORAU are from a Shipibo-Conibo community. The fact that most untitled communities do not belong to this ethnic group (for 14

15 example, five Ashéninka communities remain without tile in the Tamaya basin), could partially explain the importance that territorial administration has won over land titling in ORAU s political discourse. Table 4. Interviewees by ethnic family. Ethnic Family Total Percentage Shipibo-Conibo % Cashibo-Cacataibo % Asháninka % Ashéninka % Culina % Yaminahua % Sin Registro % Amahuaca % Cocama % Cashinahua % Being indigenous territoriality the central theme of this research, the interviews began with questions related to land titling and threats to territories. Of the subjects interviewed, 92.59% belonged to a community with title to their land (Table 5). The remaining 7.41% belong to the untitled communities of Saweto. Tomajao, Saasa, and Santa Clara. It is worth mentioning that only 16.67% of the untitled community members were conducted in events organized by ORAU. The absence of untitled communities in these events and the general dynamics between ORAU and its communities suggests that title is not only a defense mechanism against invasions and state policies, but it is also a necessary piece to be included in the initiatives of the indigenous movement in the region. 15

16 A progressive contextualization after observing the results of the initial interviews led me to focus on current threats to communal territories. 100% of the interviewees replied that their communal territory was threatened by various factors. In response to the question How is your territory threatened? 87.65% indicated that invasions by settlers were one of the most worrying threats % referred to invasions by illegal loggers as another relevant threat. The exploitation of forests by legal and illegal loggers, invasions by forest concessionaires, mining problems, conflicts with other indigenous communities, and invasions by settlers engaged in agriculture were some other threats mentioned by the interviewees. Table 5. Land titling and threats to communities territories Land titling Total Percentage Subjects with land title % Subjects without land title % Threats and land conflicts Total Percentage Invasions by Settles % Invasions by Illegal loggers % Forest Exploitation by Legal and Illegal Loggers % Invasions by Forestry Concessionaries % Conflicts with other Communities % Papaya Growers % Invasions by Fishermen % In relation to the threat "exploitation of forests by legal and illegal loggers," interviewees indicated that the main cause was contract violations by timber companies. 46 subjects (56.79%) of 16 different communities indicated that their community currently extracted timber for commercial purposes (Table 6). Within this group, 63.58% (29 subjects, 35.80% of the total sample) reported having a contract with one or more companies to extract timber from their 16

17 community forests. The rest of the group (17 subjects, 20.99% of the total sample) does so independently. Additionally, 14 subjects (17.28%) expressed their desire to extract timber from their territories for commercial purposes. In total, 74.07% of the sample currently extracts or wishes to extract timber from its territory for commercial purposes. Table 6. Timber extraction from community forests for commercial purposes. Timber extraction Total Percentage Timber extraction for commercial purposes % Intention to extract timber for commercial purposes % Forms of extraction Total Percentage Contract with logging company % Independent work as a community % When asked why they extracted or wished to extract timber for commercial purposes, 46 interviewees (56.79% of the total sample) said they were looking to have more individual and/or economic independence (Table 7). Taking into account the interviewees who do handcrafts, and work with agricultural crops or small poultry, among other commercial projects, the interviews revealed that the search for capital is strongly motivating production processes in indigenous communities. Regarding this movement towards a mixed economy (including a self-sufficient economy and a market economy,) a leader of ORAU said: "The Western culture is in us; my Shipibo brothers do not want to speak their language because they are embarrassed. Communities always criticize us, they tell us: you always talk about protecting the forest and our culture, but if you do not bring productive projects, there is no money to live. The market economy is already within the indigenous economy, we must accept that the market is already in the minds of the indigenous peoples." 17

18 Table 7. Motives to search for capital. Search for Capital Total Percentage Individual and/or Family Economic Independence % Secondary and College Education % Better Schools % Better Health Services % Better Housing % Better Basic Services % More and/or Better Food % None % As for the legality of logging, DEFFS forestry permits records indicate that only 6 of the 16 communities extracting timber for commercial purposes are authorized to do so. In the Ucayali region, ORAU s Community Forestry Oversight Program reports that 87% of the native communities perform illegal forest activities (VFC 2009). Among the interviewees who expressed their intention to extract timber commercially, 100% indicated that obtaining a forestry permit is virtually impossible due to the excessively high costs and the number of administrative procedures required. Among other relevant data regarding logging, 55.56% (45 interviewees) expressed dissatisfaction with the contracts signed by indigenous communities with loggers. The interviews revealed that most community members are familiar with the "80-20" contracts, in which the company gains rights to 80% of the timber in a given territory, and then buys from the community the remaining 20% at prices well below the market price. Logging companies typically pay for the administrative fees when obtaining a permit. Loggers then deduct these fees 18

19 from the 20% of timber owned by the community. Additionally, loggers charge the community for any expenses made to take the community leaders to Pucallpa to sign any necessary documents, plus all food, clothing, and alcohol given to the community. According to interview results, several communities are now in debt with the logging companies that obtained their forestry permit. In a similar system as the debt-bondage work-relationships used during the rubber-extraction era, the logger is now able to virtually force the community to provide free access to its resources for a longer period than the one originally established in the contract. When asked if the community had authorized working with logging companies through a General Assembly, 66.67% of the interviewees said that community chiefs acted without full consent from the community (Image 4). According to a member of a Cacataibo community, "many leaders make mistakes; they accept gifts and give all the timber, land, lakes, and other resources we have to loggers. We are tired that they always ignore what the community thinks, we must hold them accountable." Similarly, the president of a federation said: Community leaders get the benefits of the contracts, but if there is no pressure then they do not distribute them in the community. If we continue to sell timber, there will come a time when all the leaders will have money, but what will the others eat?" 19

20 Image 4. Members of a Cacataibo community show their community land title and map, while they explain how previous leaders have jeopardized the community s territory. Photo by Diego Leal Forestry Control As the interviews showed, forest management shapes, in one way or another, the discourse of native communities, federations, and the political movement led by ORAU. The recent creation of the Community Forestry Oversight of ORAU is just one example of the growing concern about the loss of administrative territorial control experienced by communities. The enactment of the new Forestry and Wildlife Law in 2010 could partially ameliorate communities position in relation to logging companies and extractive policies dictated by Regional governments. The law establishes new communal procedures for monitoring, control 20

21 and surveillance. It authorizes the creation of a community committee of forestry monitoring and control, which will be registered with the Forestry and Wildlife Regional Authority. Within a national process to ask communities for their opinions regarding the new Forestry Law, the Office of Community Forest Management of DEFFS organized the "Decentralized workshop for socializing the scope of the Forestry and Wildlife Law in the Shipibo community of Puerto Bethel (Image 5). The workshop main objective was to promote a participatory process of intercultural dialogue. Through various working groups, the workshop also aimed to collect contributions on relevant articles for native communities related to forest management and superimposed land rights. Image participants from 38 Shipibo communities meet to discuss the most recent Forestry Law. Photo by Diego Leal. 21

22 Several of the 37 female participants took leading roles in the working groups. On various occasions there was a strong number of women criticizing the excessive attention given to logging. The President of New Ahaypa s Mothers Club stated: "... we re over logging. The leaders are going to continue doing business with abusive companies and we no longer have animals or fish. If we are going to speak about the forest, we have to accept that the forest has many more things than just timber. It seems that the law does not say that." Women and territory One of the strongest patterns observed during field work was the striking difference between male and female interviewees territorial management perceptions. As mentioned above, only two of the 19 heads and sub-heads interviewed were women. This separation between authorities and women is not only evidenced in the participation in community leadership.89.47% of the women interviewed identified the leaders of their community as responsible of territorial conflicts (Table 8). In comparison, only 61.29% of the men interviewed did the same. Additionally, 84.21% of the women interviewed considered that communities need internal governance mechanisms to punish leaders who sign timber extraction contracts with loggers against the community s will. By contrast, only 22.58% of male interviewees had the same view. Table 8. Division between community members and their gender policies. Conflicts with Communal Authorities, Women Total Percentage Communal Chiefs as Conflict Creators % Call for Stronger Internal Governance System % Conflict with Communal Authorities, Men Total Percentage Communal Chiefs as Conflict Creators % Call for Stronger Internal Governance System % 22

23 During an interview, an indigenous federation Secretary of Women Affairs said: "The community committees formed by men usually sell our land to loggers, but we as women are fighting for the welfare of all children in the community" (Personal communication, IBC, ). Female interviewees strong self-identification as women seems to enable them to join in fighting gender discrimination and claiming their space within the territorial struggle. Based on observations, the identification of women with territorial issues has been increasing as national conferences, workshops on gender equity, and non-governmental projects strengthen women's political agency. According to another female interviewee, "women are the new force in the territorial struggle of indigenous peoples. When a woman leads, everyone in the community can go to the Assemblies because the leader can call the women and none are left washing and caring for children." Participatory observation during a community General Assembly allowed me to observe gender dynamics related to forestry and territorial management. While discussing possible agreements with illegal loggers, several women tried to express their opinion during the Assembly; however, nearly every man ignore women s repeated attempts to voice their concerns (Imagen 6). A young woman entered the room, stood in the middle and said: Working with timber has not left us anything. We do not receive all alike. You (community leaders) are getting everything. Loggers have stolen for years and you want to continue, that makes no sense. Think of the children, the future of the community. I may be a woman, but they no longer fool me. We as women have a voice; you will not make the decision just because you are men. All timber is gone and nothing is left. Enough is enough." With a 22-9 vote, the community decided to start working with three loggers illegally to pay a previous fine imposed by OSINFOR. 90% of women who voted opposed the proposal; only one woman voted in favor, joining all the men present. This substantial dichotomy cannot be ignored 23

24 by non-governmental organizations seeking to support communities in their native land administration processes. Image 6. Cacataibo women stand outside their community s hall during a General Assembly. After having repeatedly attempted to voice their opinion, most women stepped outside to comment on the leaders decisions. Photo by Diego Leal The value assigned to each reason for seeking capital also differs significantly between men and women. By answering, "Would you like your community to have commercial projects? If so, why?, three answers were preeminent in women responses, all oriented to the development of their community: better health services, better schools in the communities, and better basic services such as drinking water (Table 9). By contrast, the three most common responses of men 24

25 were individual and/or economic independence, secondary and college education, and better schools in communities. Table 9. Reasons for seeking capital, by gender. Search for Capital, Women Total Percentage Better Health Services % Better Schools % Better Basic Services % Better Housing % Secondary and College Education % More and Better Foods % Individual and/or family economic independence % Search for Capital, Men Total Percentage Individual and/or family economic independence % Secondary and College Education % Better Schools % Better Health Services % Better Housing % Better Basic Services % More and Better Foods % Conclusions This research project documented the changes in discourse related to human and territorial rights of indigenous communities, local federations, and the regional political movement led by ORAU. The results and analysis presented suggest that community land titling has gradually lost the strong attention than it enjoyed in the past three decades. Since fieldwork was conducted primarily in the city of Pucallpa, accessing communities in the borderlands of the Brazilian border was not possible. Some of these communities continue to fight for a title to their 25

26 territories and it is crucial that the issue is not forgotten. If titling efforts cease when nearly fifty communities continue untitled in Ucayali, hundreds of families could be absorbed by colonialist processes and/or exploitative working systems. Using mainly Chirif and Garcia (2007), and Garcia, Hvalkof and Gray (1998) reserach, a historical contextualization allowed to better understand how conflicts related to indigenous territoriality have evolved from a struggle for legal recognition to administrative territorial control. Following the exploitation patterns of a purely extractive economy in Ucayali (Hvalkof 2002), logging companies continue to exploit local knowledge and indigenous labor through debt-bondage systems. However, Ucayali indigenous peoples have maintained their political agency and remained important exponents of the international movement for indigenous rights. The experience of Saweto s titling process, plus interviews with experts in the field of titling, indicate that new titling efforts may not have immediate positive results. Although there is a solid legal basis for titling, some weaknesses in regulation and operational procedures affect efforts undertaken by communities and organizations. Scholarly publications regarding indigenous territoriality have contextualized land titling as a community empowerment approach that strengthens preexisting organization schemes instead of creating completely new forms of participation (Chirif & García, 2007). Based on this concept, the technical and administrative support from key organizations such as IBC and ORAU will be crucial in preparing untitled communities for post-titling threats. The evolution of the human rights and territory perceptions can be seen both in discourses and actions of communities, associations, and regional organizations. The creation of the Community Forestry ORAU Oversight and Community Forest Management Bureau of the 26

27 DEFFS are signs of the growing attention given to land and forestry management and control of local economies. The constant waves of resources demand have strongly affected the indigenous economy by weakening its sustaining pillar: immediate access to natural resources. Interviews revealed the communities intention to search for the necessary support to protect their economic integrity in new forms. Ucayali s indigenous peoples now see the market economy as the most immediate and accessible option. 27

28 References Baldovino, S Manual de Capacitación: Manual de saneamiento físico legal-rural. Sociedad Peruana de derecho Ambiental SPDA. Available from: (Accessed August ). Banco Central de Reserva del Perú Informe Económico y Social Región Ucayali 2012; Encuentro Económico. Available from Institucional/Encuentros-Regionales/2012/Ucayali/Informe-Economico-Social/IES- Ucayali.pdf (Accessed August ) Chirif, A, & García, P Marcando Territorio: Progresos y limitaciones de la titulación de territorios indígenas en la Amazonía. Grupo Internacional de Trabajo sobre Asuntos Indígenas (IWGIA). Dirección de Saneamiento Físico Legal de la Propiedad Agraria Reconocimiento, Titulación y Registro de Comunidades Nativas en Ucayali. Presentación digital. García, P., Hvalkof, S., & Gray, A Liberation through land rights in the Peruvian Amazon. Grupo Internacional de Trabajo sobre Asuntos Indígenas (IWGIA). Copenhagen. Hvalkof, S Beyond Indigenous Land Titling: Democratizing Civil Society in the Peruvian Amazon. The Spaces of Neoliberalism: Land, Place and Family in Latin America. Kumarian Press, Inc. Connecticut, USA. Hvalkof, S Progress of the victims: Political ecology in the Peruvian Amazon. In Reimagining political ecology: New ecologies for the twenty-first century., eds. Aletta Biersack, James B. Greenberg, Durham: Duke University Press. Kerekes, C., & Williamson, C Propertyless in Peru, even with a government land title. American Journal of Economics and Sociology 69 (3) (JUL): Linares, C., Arce, R., Pinedo, D., de los Ríos, R., Silva, M., Ramirez, G., & Rojas, S La Veeduría Forestal Comunitaria: Una respuesta a los retos del manejo forestal comunitario. Instituto de Investigaciones de la Amazonía Peruana. Lima, Perú. Organismo de Formalización de la Propiedad Rural Demarcación y titulación de comunidades nativas. Presentación digital. Available from: (Accessed August ). 28

29 Salisbury, D.; Borgo, J., & Vela, J Transboundary political ecologyin Amazonia: history, culture, and conflicts of the borderland Asháninka. Journal of Cultural Geography, 28:1,