Two Screenings of the film "CRUDE: The Real Price of Oil"

As a fundraiser for Village Earth's "Peruvian Rainforest Support Network" project, we will be screening the new film "Crude: The Real Price of Oil".

Watch the trailer here:

For more information about the film visit: http://www.crudethemovie.com/

The first screening will be on February 18 at 7:00PM (doors open at 6:30PM) at the Lory Student Center Theater at Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado. Tickets will be sold at the door only for a donation of $5 to Village Earth. Call 970-491-5754 for more information on the Fort Collins showing. The Fort Collins screening is sponsored by Be Local Northern Colorado

The second screening will be on March 2 at 5:30PM in Fort Lauderdale. Join us at the Courtyard of the Cinema Paradiso to celebrate the culture of the Peruvian Amazon with arts and crafts on exhibition. Kristina Pearson will be doing a short presentation about her work with the Peruvian Rainforest Support Network, a project of Village Earth. There will also be samples of Peruvian food for sale. "Crude" will begin at 7:00PM. Cinema Paradiso, 503 SE 6th Street, Fort Lauderdale, Florida.

Protecting Indigenous Land in the Amazon

During the Village Earth Peru Project Coordinator’s last trip to Peru, the Shipibo leaders we were working with asked Village Earth to let the world know about the complex political situation with regard to land rights in the Peruvian Amazon.

Oil Development

According to our indigenous partners, the Peruvian government is currently in the process of a major land-grab. In fact, many suggest that Peru is violating ILO Convention 169 as well as the U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, resolutions to which Peru is a signatory and which require free, prior and informed consent for all development projects on indigenous territories. During the past three months, PeruPetro (the state hydrocarbon licensing agency) and PetroVietnam (the state run Vietnamese oil company that recently leased the rights to extract oil in the Shipibo territory) were holding “informational” meetings for indigenous leaders in an obvious attempt to bypass their representative indigenous organizations. Importantly, the meetings are held months and even years after the Peruvian government has already leased indigenous people’s lands to oil companies, which means that indigenous people have no real opportunity to oppose development project on their lands. In reality, they hold the meetings only to inform the communities that oil exploration and later extraction will take place.

According to one Shipibo leader who attended one of these informational meetings, PeruPetro said “The contract has been signed, and there is nothing the communities can do about it.” The leader then commented “where was the consultation BEFORE they sold our lands? How can you sell someone’s lands and then only consult with them afterwards?” Another Shipibo leader likened this practice to someone entering your house and knocking after they are already inside and says “oh by the way, we’re going to be working inside your house.”

Another strategy of PeruPetro to appear that they have approval from indigenous communities is to ask indigenous leaders to sign paperwork. According to our sources, some of the leaders signed PeruPetro’s paperwork without even knowing what they were signing. There have been other reports of underhanded dealings by extractive industry representatives of getting indigenous leaders to sign blank pieces of paper and then attaching some type of contract that gives them permission to enter an indigenous community.

According to Shipibo leaders, they specifically asked PetroVietnam how the communities are going to benefit from oil development. One of PetroVietnam’s expressed goals in the material they passed out to indigenous leaders is to “enrich the quality of life in the communities and protect the environment”. Yet, at the meetings PetroVietnam never answered the question. Although Shipibo leaders are skeptical of oil development, if it is going to come anyway, they would at least like to be able to secure employment with the company. And when they asked if this was going to happen, the industry reps replied “Yes, but only those with the proper requisites and papers.” None of the indigenous leaders have any idea what that the proper requisites or papers were.

In response to these community concerns, Village Earth and our community partners have developed a “hydrocarbon awareness” workshop for Shipibo communities that receive very little information about oil development that will ultimately affect them. The workshop consists of giving communities information about the oil lot that they are located in and the company to whom the lot has been leased. This is followed by a video about the environmental contamination and devastation in the Rio Corrientes River Basin caused by oil exploitation, then followed by a discussion about the community’s rights and the problems associated with oil development. This workshop was developed as a defense against the flood of government and oil company propaganda, which claim that oil development will bring jobs to indigenous communities (oil companies generally hire very few indigenous workers) and that oil extraction technology has improved so much that they don't contaminate anymore (in fact, it is impossible to extract oil without contamination). We would finally end with a community strategic planning session to determine the priorities and sustainable development projects that communities would like to do as opposed to oil development. For example, one community decided they would like to carry out sustainable agro-forestry projects combined with reforestation to sell agricultural products for income generation without destroying the forest.

Government Settlement Schemes

Another challenge faced by indigenous communities in Peru's Amazon basin is the illegal colonization of their lands. Each day, thousands of acres of indigenous territories are cleared for settlement while the government turns a blind-eye. It is believed this is just an extension of the government’s broader agenda to privatize indigenous territories. In fact, low-level government bureaucrats within the Ministry of Agriculture have been caught selling 30-100 hectare parcels of indigenous territories to non-indigenous colonists. This is partly the result of a land titling process that is, according to the Shipibo and other indigenous peoples, utterly chaotic. However, through Village Earth’s mapping and surveying work we have been able to shed light on this problem.

In one community where we have been working for many years, the small walking trail that used to run through the far end of the community has now been widened and improved by the government in order to make it easier to travel between the district capital and a large pristine lake that many indigenous communities rely on for water and fishing. Non-indigenous fisherman are now overfishing the lake, oil companies are said to have discovered oil in this area, and of course with the expansion of roads comes loggers and more colonists. Along this particular road, over 80 allotments inside one indigenous community have already been sold to outsiders. Of course all of this is illegal under Peruvian law, but indigenous communities have little legal or political recourse in order to stop it. Village Earth is supporting grassroots community-organizing efforts precisely to stop these illegal settlements.

Bureaucratic Nightmare

While surveying territories and formalizing titles are clear strategies that indigenous communities can take to protect their lands, they face an uphill battle when dealing with government bureaucracy. In fact, the same government agencies that are supposed to title indigenous lands and small farm holders, the Ministry of Agriculture and the Commission to Formalize Informal Property (COFOPRI), are the source of many of the problems they are supposed to be solving. We have noted several examples of these agencies providing titles that overlap existing titles causing major problems between neighboring indigenous communities and also between indigenous and non-indigenous small farmers and communities. The indigenous communities we have been working with decided that visible demarcation of their territory (with signs notifying people when they enter community territory) and a committee within the community to constantly monitor their lands are the best ways to protect their lands. But oftentimes these communities’ borders are ambiguous because of the poor original titling process and overlapping titles. Yet, in a meeting with the Ministry of Agriculture and COFOPRI, COFOPRI stated that they are trying to stay out of these “social problems” by not being involved in the demarcation process of indigenous communities. So, it appears they have adopted an out-of-sight, out-of-mind policy. It is clear that this inaction on the part of COFOPRI will only make the situation worse.

At least from this whole experience Village Earth and the indigenous communities we work with are learning a lot about the political and legal process of protecting indigenous lands in the Peruvian Amazon. Slowly but surely, by working with indigenous rights organizations, other allies, and colonist settlers, we are hoping to mitigate the problems and find solutions that work for both parties. Through mapping and continued monitoring of indigenous lands, we will be able to take a proactive role in this process before it’s too late.

Although we have a long struggle ahead, the indigenous communities nor Village Earth have given up hope that it is possible for indigenous communities to determine their own futures without the presence extractive industries on indigenous territories.

Shipibo Radio Network

Photo: Participants in the 4-day hands-on community-based radio workshop with their handmade antennas, radio transmitters, and all the parts necessary for 4 complete radio stations throughout the Central Peruvian Amazon.

Village Earth has spent the past three months preparing for and implementing four community-based radio stations throughout the Ucayali Region of the Peruvian Amazon. In a strategic planning session with Village Earth in 2007, the Shipibo community leaders decided that the creation of their own radio stations to improve communication in the region is an important part of their vision for the future of the Shipibo Nation.

Photo: Building the Radio Transmitters.

In October 2009, the Shipibo achieved this goal with the help of Village Earth and Project Tupa of Free Radio Berkeley. Project Tupa traveled to Peru for a 4-day radio workshop where participants from four communities learned to build FM radio transmitters by-hand. The hands-on nature of the workshop will lend to the success of the radios because the participants are intimately familiar with every part and component of the radio, this will lead to the sustainability of the radio transmitters. They also learned to use soldering irons to solder small components onto the circuit boards. Project Tupa also taught the participants to scrap old electronics as a cheap way to get replacement parts. If a part were to burn out, the workshop participants would know where to find the parts and how to replace them without waiting for some technical expert or international funding.

Photo: It takes a lot of people working together to build a radio transmitter by hand in 4 days.

Photo: They learned to use soldering irons to solder small parts onto the circuit board of the amplifier.

In many remote regions of the Amazon, radio serves as one of the only means of getting news and information to communities. At the beginning of workshop, indigenous leaders talked about the importance and significance of indigenous-language and bi-lingual radio because the radio stations in the city require a certain amount of Spanish-language programming. Because each of the four radios will be controlled by an elected committee within each community, the communities will decide on the radio programming. Community members have already come up with program ideas such as an environmental education program, local news, and an oil awareness program to discuss oil exploitation in the region.

During the workshop the participants decided to form a radio network called “Red de Radio Emisora de la Amazonia Peruana “Xawanbo” (Radio Transmitter Network of the Peruvian Amazon “Macaw” in English). This radio network will be a point of access to resources for the radio network to share resources and information between the four community-based radio stations. More communities are already interested in joining this network and starting their own community-based radio station.

Photo: They learned to scrap old electronics for parts to build and repair their radio transmitters.

These radios will be an important tool in Shipibo cultural self-determination, defense of their lands and resources, and the development of their communities.

We are hoping to expand both the coverage area through more strategically-placed community-based radio stations, and also to expand the current radios programming capabilities by getting more equipment for field reporting (such as laptop computers and digital voice recorders). We also hope to provide more training in advanced radio programming and to continue to build the capacity of the radio network to be a strong, empowering force for the self-determination of the Shipibo Nation.

Thank you to First Peoples Worldwide for a Keepers of the Earth grant, Project Tupa for donating their time training, and to all of the Village Earth individual donors who helped make this possible!

The following map shows the transmission of the radio stations throughout the region. The four communities who received the radios were elected during a previous Village Earth workshop of indigenous leaders. As you can see there are still some gaps to fill in the region, and more communities in the region are asking to join the radio network.

For more information, on do-it-yourself radio check out: http://www.scribd.com/doc/8336941/Micropower-Broadcasting-Primer

Peru Service Learning Trip

For more information or to fill out the application online check out Isla's website (www.isla-serve.org), 970-372-9515, info@isla-serve.org

The Neoliberal Crusade For Resources on Indigenous Lands in the Peruvian Amazon

Written by Jamie Way
Monday, 19 October 2009
Reposted from Upside Down World

Despite the repeal of Peruvian President Alan Garcia’s controversial executive decrees, it appears as though the Amazon is still very much for sale. Earlier this year, violent demonstrations erupted over Garcia’s decrees that attempted to open Peru to foreign (read: extractive) investment in accordance with its free trade agreement with the U.S. In Bagua, located in the Northern Peruvian Amazon, the official death toll is said to have reached 33, (10 civilians and 23 police officers). Other accounts, however, claim that up to 40 indigenous civilians were killed. Although the violence has resided, at least for the time being, the larger underlying issues are far from resolved. Moreover, the neoliberal tendency of taking advantage of indigenous resources is evolving into more complex and duplicitous forms.

Neoliberalism in the Amazon

Outside of Pucallpa, south of where the violent demonstrations erupted, Shipibo indigenous leaders are finding themselves pressed by the same issues as their Northern counterparts. PeruPetro, the country’s hydrocarbon licensing agency, is pursuing an aggressive policy in the region. While I was working in the Amazon with a U.S.-based NGO, Village Earth, I was told of multiple occasions in which PeruPetro contacted community leaders directly. It does not appear that the indigenous population has the legal grounds on which to contest the decisions of the state agency, but it is clear that PeruPetro is required to at least inform the indigenous population of their intent to explore, and later exploit, the oil-yielding potential of their land. Thus, to maintain the state agency’s thin guise of legitimacy, PeruPetro has made it common practice to solicit indigenous leadership’s approval.

Shipibo land, which is located within an oil block with rights belonging to PetroVietnam, is not only threatened by oil extraction. It could also become the focus of a number of other extractive industries. Although it has not yet become a pressing matter for the Shipibo, many of Garcia’s decrees were not only aimed at encouraging oil development in the Amazon, but also pertained to a diverse array of natural resource development, including forestry, water, irrigation and mining.

And it seems as though Garcia’s wish, and perhaps even more significantly the wish of many of his predecessors, is becoming a reality. Big oil is currently big business in the Amazon. Whereas in 2004 only 13% was slated for oil and gas development, in 2006 approximately 73% of the Peruvian Amazon was under contract for either exploration or production purposes. Today it is near 80%. Significantly, 58 of the 64 blocks that have been leased to oil companies are located on lands that are legally titled to indigenous peoples and 14 blocks overlap natural reserves that are inhabited by indigenous peoples living in voluntary isolation. [1]

Proponents of neo-liberal “market” policies, which appear to be on a constant rampage to commodify every last inch of the planet, have happily encouraged the “opening” of the Amazon to foreign capital investment. Peruvian proponents of such policies, including President Garcia, have argued that such investment is the way to “modernize” the Amazon and make it productive. Anyone who impedes such noble “progress” is seen as selfish and a traitor. In fact, as if Garcia’s disdain and disrespect for the Native people of his country were not obvious enough through his classification of them as “second class citizens,” two years ago, Garcia wrote an opinion column in which he compared them to a gardener’s dog. Depicting the population as irrational and selfish, he claimed that, “like a gardener’s dog, they do not only eat from the garden, but they will also prevent others from eating.” [2] Thus, according to Garcia and his allies, indigenous people’s traditional use of their land is an impediment to “progress.”

Evolution of the Discourse

Beyond Garcia’s blatantly racist application of neoliberal policies, a much more clever and well-articulated argument in favor of the crusade for neoliberalism is becoming paramount in national discussions. While Garcia’s lack of sophistication has made his argument easy to pick apart, leading Peruvian economist, Hernando De Soto, has framed his push toward neoliberalism in a much more favorable light. Instead of blatantly embedding his argument in Garcia’s racist discourse, De Soto has cleverly co-opted the language of leftist intellectuals. Instead of focusing on the “backwards” culture of indigenous groups, like Garcia has, De Soto argues that in order to fully allow the native population to participate in the capitalist economy, laws must be applied uniformly to them. While on the surface this argument seems like a logical move toward equality, it is important to note that in the context of many Amazonian tribes, it is perhaps even more dangerous than Garcia’s decrees.

Under a worldview that operates in terms of a “developed-undeveloped” dichotomy, Hernando De Soto has made it his goal to discover why the capitalist system has worked so well in the Western world (an interesting assertion in and of itself), and so poorly in the rest of the world. His work concludes that capital is successfully generated through legally recognized individual land ownership and consequently one’s ability to leverage his or her resources for credit. While his recommendation of legally allotting individual land may be desirable in squatter villages without land titles, it could have dire consequences for native populations, many of which already hold titles to their land. Contrary to De Soto’s vision, however, most indigenous groups hold their land under common title and many even chose to hold and work the land in a communal format. For De Soto, this communal land is unproductive, because individuals are unable to use it to produce more capital without the permission of the entire community. What he so often fails to discuss, however, is that in risking your land for credit, you can potentially lose it. Thus, it becomes evident that with private interests salivating at the chance of getting their hands on a piece of the Amazon, it is likely that communities would be greatly disturbed by even one or two individuals being forced to default on their loans. By individualizing and privatizing indigenous land, extractive industry would be able to apply a new version of their divide-and-conquer tactics, as indigenous groups would have little legal ground to stand on when opposing the sale of the neighbor’s land to an oil company. If even very few individuals in desperate situations could be bought off, the entire community could be at risk of being destroyed through the impacts of the extractive industries.

Ironically, one of De Soto’s predominant arguments is that the norms of the wealthy and the poor must be melded and incorporated into law. However, his policy makes no exception or variation in the case of indigenous groups with long histories of engrained societal norms and very distinct cultures. Instead, his one-size-fits-all policy has become a cornerstone for moving the Amazon toward the wonders of the capitalist world. Cleverly framing his suggestions as a move toward affording the indigenous population the rights that the rest of the country already has, he acts as though he is supporting equality. In reality, while his work claims to incorporate indigenous culture, it only does so to the extent that they are able to be successful capitalists. It is vital, then, that the indigenous population moves away from its communal use of land, and instead adopts the rules of the West. This, he argues, will allow them to follow in the foot steps of first world progress. He fails to discuss the effect leveraging a house for credit has had on the U.S. market, and additionally takes no note of the negative historical implications of individualization and privatization of U.S. Native Americans had on their culture. By omitting the horrific historical implications that land privatization and individualization has had on Native Americans, De Soto creates a policy that is unable (or unwilling) to foresee a number of problematic outcomes of his work.

The Academic-Political Connection

All of De Soto’s arguments would be well and fine if they remained sequestered in the academic world. Unfortunately for indigenous groups in the Amazon, this is not the case. De Soto and his organization, the Institute for Liberty and Democracy, have the ear of many a world leader. Garcia is amongst those with which De Soto has developed a relationship. This is only logical. While Garcia and De Soto verbalize a differential amount of respect for indigenous culture, their policies are like opposite sides of the same coin. Garcia’s decrees work to open the Amazon to foreign investment and promote free trade. In Garcia’s mind, this would appear to eliminate the greedy native people of his country. De Soto, on the other hand, shows a bit more compassion (and may in fact be acting with good intentions, be they misdirected). He does not want to eliminate indigenous people; he merely wants to eliminate any aspect of their culture that does not allow them to be successful capitalists. Thus, De Soto’s suggested policies will allow indigenous land to become the tool for deciding the success of each individual indigenous person. If they are successful capitalists, they will be able to maintain their land. If not, they will lose it to the external interests that Garcia supports. It is evident then that their seemingly distinct policies blend nicely together to form (what, upon enacting a similar policy with Native Americans, Theodore Roosevelt called) “a great pulverizing engine to break up the tribal mass.”

So while Shipibo communities and their counterparts sit under a tenuous calm in the Amazon, it is important to note the lurking danger of not just Garcia, but his academic equivalent. Currently, De Soto is sending his researchers into indigenous communities to extract information about their titling system. He has released effective propaganda videos and is clearly positioning himself as central to the Peruvian Amazon debate. Therefore, while his work may appear more benevolent at first glance, it is essential that activist and the indigenous population be cognizant of the fact that his arguments are potentially even more dangerous than the words of Garcia. If unnecessary bloodshed is to be avoided and the fight to protect the Amazon is to be won, it appears that it must be fought on both the academic and political front.

[1] See Finer, Jenkins, Pimm, Keane, and Ross 2008.

[2] “Syndrome of the gardener's dog.” El Comercio. 10 Oct, 2007.

Jamie holds a M.A. in Political Science from Colorado State University. She is currently employed by Village Earth, as well as the Alliance for Global Justice.

A NOTE OF CAUTION REGARDING PARTITIONING (privatization) INDIGENOUS COMMUNAL LANDS – THE EXAMPLE OF THE PINE RIDGE RESERVATION, USA.

A few of us, at Village Earth, recently watched Hernand de Soto’s video, titled “El misterio del capital de los indígenas amazónicas.” Village Earth is a non-profit organization that is currently working with Shipibo communities in the Ucayali River Basin and, consequently, we are interested in any proposals that might improve the livelihoods of indigenous peoples in the region. In this case We feel a certain urgency to respond given that de Soto uses examples of Native Americans from the U.S. state of Alaska. While we are not intimately familiar with the situation of Alaskan indigenous peoples, we have been working with the Lakota people from Pine Ridge Indian Reservation (in South Dakota) for more than ten years. And given that indigenous territory is such an important issue in Peru, we are not sure that the Alaskan case is the most appropriate example. Whatever the case, we would like to share our perspective on the experience of partitioning, essentially privatizing, land on Pine Ridge Reservation.

First, a few important facts about indigenous peoples (Native Americans) in the US:

Approximately 24.5 percent of Native Americans, an estimated 800,000 people, are living in poverty at or below the national poverty level in the United States. Despite this dire economic situation, Native Americans own a great deal of land, approximately 112,637.29 square miles, second only to the federal government. 

 

Above: Map of indigenous lands in the United States

Yet, many Native American's have not been able to fully benefit from these vast resourcesbecause of various contradictions in the Federal land tenure policy for Indian lands. In particular, the obstacles created by the General Allotment Act (GAA) signed in to law in 1887, which along with the Burke Act in 1906, led to a “de facto” privatization of indigenous lands. Most importantly, these laws broke apart communally owned lands into individual parcels, which enabled private non-indigenous interests to control the vast majority (and most productive) lands on Pine Ridge Reservation. Today, the Lakota are still struggling to get these lands back in their control 

Above: Map of allotments created as a result of the General Allotment Act of 1887.

 

Above: Map of indigenous lands lost through tax forfeit, predatory lending, or sale as a result of privatization.

Village Earth became intimately aware of the impacts of Partitioning (privatizing) Reservation lands through our work with families on the Pine Ridge Reservation who are struggling today to reverse the effects of a policy implemented over 120 years ago. Today, nearly 60% of lands allotted to Lakota families during 1887 General Allotment Act are being leased out, often to non-tribal private interests for a fraction of the fair market value. This has had a devastating impact on the people on Pine Ridge. According to the USDA 2007 Census of Agriculture for U.S. Indian Reservations, the market value of agriculture commodities produced on the Pine Ridge Reservation in 2007 totaled $54,541,000. Yet, less than 1/3 ($17,835,000) of that income went to Native American producers. How did the GAA contribute to this dire situation today?

After the period of European settlement in North America between 1492-1887, Native Americans were left with reservations consisting of only 150 million acres. Recognized through treaties as sovereign nations, these lands were largely unpartitioned and communally managed, a practice considered by the U.S. Government to be a non-productive and irrational use of resources. The Government's solution was the General Allotment Act (GAA) of 1887, also known as the Dawes Severalty Act. The act partitioned reservation lands into 160 acre parcels for each head of family, 80 acre parcels to orphans, and 40 acres parcels to each child. After all the allotments were issued, the remaining reservation lands in the West was transferred to the Government who then made it available to white settlers free of charge as part of the Homestead Act. This amounted to a loss of over 60,000,000 acres, nearly 2/3rds of all Indian lands. Beyond the significant loss of lands, the GAA also created several challenges for the use and inheritance of the remaining lands that would have profound implications for future generations of Native Americans.

• It broke apart communally managed lands into individually owned parcels, destroying the ability of many communities to be self sufficient on already limited and marginal lands.
• It disrupted traditional residency patterns, forcing people to live on allotments sometimes far from their relatives, eroding traditional kinship practices across many reservations.
• It destroyed communal control of lands, making it easier for private and government interests to gain access to the vast coal, oil, natural gas, agricultural, and grazing resources on Native American Reservations.
• The GAA  never established an adequate system for how lands would be transfered from generation to generation. Since the practice of creating a Last Will and Testament before death was not common and in some cases was outright offensive to the traditional inheritance practices of some Native American cultures, these lands passed from one generation to the next without clear divisions of who owned what. Today, lands have become so fractionated that it is common to have several hundred or even thousands of landowners on one piece land. This has created a severe obstacle today for individuals and families wanting to utilize their lands as they need to get permission from the other land owners on decisions related to the land. With limited resources to deal with this situation, the only option for most families is to lease their undivided fractionated lands out – often times to non-natives.
• Forced Fee Patenting, introduced with the 1906 Burke Act, amended the GAA to give the secretary of the interior the power to issue Indian Allottees determined to be “competent,” fee patents making their lands subject to taxation and sale. In other words, the government privatized indigenous lands. It as widely understood by government officials that lands, privatized under the Burke Act, would soon be liquidated. In 1922 the Government superintendent of the Pine Ride Reservation noted: “Careful observation of the results on the Pine Ridge reservation show that less than five percent of the Indians who receive patents retain their lands.” According to the Indian Land Tenure Foundation, between 1997 and 1934, nearly 27,000,000 acres of land was lost as a result of privatization.
• Indian Allottees determined to be “incompetent, ” under the Burke Act, were not allowed to live on or utilize their allotment, instead it was leased out by the Federal Government to oil, timber, mineral, and grazing interests. In many cases, Allottees did not even receive the income from the leases. This practice was so widespread that a 1915 Department of the Interior, Annual Report of the Pine Ridge Agency, nearly 56% of its residents were deemed “incompetent.” The longterm affect of this practice was how it physically and psychologically alienated Indian Allottees from their lands. For example many families today own land but have never lived on it, used it, or oftentimes, even know where it is located.

The various economic, social, and cultural disruptions created by the these acts over the last century is an underlying cause of poverty on many Native American Reservations today, negatively impacting housing construction, economic development, residency patterns, family and community cohesion, ecological health, cultural self-determination, and political sovereignty.

While we understand that this case, just as De Soto’s Alaskan case, is different in many ways than the case of indigenous peoples from the Peruvian Amazon, we belief that privatizing indigenous lands is dangerous. Indigenous people from Pine Ridge reservation are still struggling from political decisions that led essentially to the de-collectivization of their lands. It is also interesting to note that, in the case of Pine Ridge, as other Native American Reservations in the US, indigenous peoples have NOT been able to keep those resources (mineral, oil, etc.) that the government or private interests find profitable.

An Alternative Vision for the Peruvian Amazon

Photo: A traditional Shipibo song to open the Symposium of Village Leaders.

Village Earth was asked by the Regional Institute for Development of Native Communities (IRDECON for its Spanish acronym), a program of the regional government, to facilitate a strategic planning session for indigenous leaders in the Ucayali Region. They asked Village Earth to facilitate this meeting because they like Village Earth's methodology that has been used in previous workshops and gatherings of indigenous leaders in the region.


Photo: The President of ORAU speaking at the Symposium of Village Leaders.


Photo: The planning began with a participatory discussion about Shipibo values, which included: love, friendliness, to live united, solidarity, reciprocity, honesty, humility, respect, sincerity, cultural identity, songs and dances, shamanism.


The Symposium of Leaders of Native Communities was an event hosted by IRDECON to really listen to the representatives of indigenous communities. As they said, many times development decisions are made in the government offices with no regard for the needs or priorities of the communities. Based on the outcomes of the Village Earth strategic planning session, IRDECON will use these development priorities to develop their 2010 organizational plan and budget. Village Earth was honored to be invited to this event.


Above Photos: Kristina and Jamie of Village Earth facilitated a "visioning" workshop for community leaders to determine the future of their communities and the region. Richard Soria, President of IRDECON, helped with the Shipibo translations.


Photo: The vision for the region included ideas about reforestation projects, cultural revival, creating small business within communities, creating communal forest reserves, fish farms, and more.


Photo: Discussion between indigenous leaders about the priorities of the region.


Photo: Limber Gomez, event organizer and past Village Earth-trainee, facilitates a discussion on prioritizing the different themes of the indigenous leaders' visions, so that IRDECON can best facilitate a bottom-up approach to sustainable development