Participatory extension as basis for the work of rural extension services

in the Amazon

Benno Pokorny, Guilhermina Cayres and Westphalen NunesCentre for International Forestory Research, Regional Office in Belem, Belem, Brazil

Accepted in revised form January 3, 2004

Abstract. Public extension services play a key role in the implementation of strategies for rural development based onthe sustainable management of natural resources. However, the sector suffers from restricted financial and humanresources. Using experiences from participatory action research, a strategy for rural extension in the Amazon wasdefined to increase the efficiency and the relevance of external support for local resource users. This strategy consideredactivities initiated and coordinated by local people. Short-term facilitation visits provided continuous external supportfor the purpose of establishing locally based planning and learning mechanisms. In collaboration with the municipalityof Muana in the Eastern Amazon, the strategy was tested in two traditional communities –Monte Moriat and BoaEsperanca. Both communities recognized as most important the need to reduce their dependence on acaı (Euterpeoleracea Mart.), the principal source of food and income. This forest resource has been overexploited, seriouslyaffecting acaı stands and diminishing the forest benefits fundamental for survival. Two local groups decided toraise chickens as a way to reduce nutritional problems and as an alternative source of income. Supported bymonthly, short-term planning and evaluation visits, the groups managed to achieve significant progress in theirendeavor. The groups identified (1) the control of decision-making and information, and (2) the absence ofexternal obligations to be the greatest advantages of the development initiative. The study confirmed thepotential of participatory strategies for public extension in the Amazon. Special attention was given to realis-tically define the role of forests for local development. However, drastic measures are necessary to smooth theway for real participation in governmental and non-governmental organizations acting in the Brazilian Amazon.

Key words: Brazilian Amazon, Forest resources, Participatory extension, Rural development

Benno Pokorny studied forest science at the University of Freiburg. In his PhD dissertation he evaluated the tech-nical and economic possibilities of transforming second-growth Nothofagus forests in Chile into managed stands.Since 1998, he has been working in the regional office of the Centre for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) inBelem, Brazil, researching opportunities for sustainable forest management in the Amazon. Still associated withCIFOR, since 2003 he has been assistant lecturer at the Faculty of Forest and Environmental Sciences at theUniversity of Freiburg in Germany. His research interests include developing and implementing promisingapproaches for the sustainable development of tropical forests.

Guilhermina Cayres is an agriculturalist working on her PhD in Development in the Humid Tropics at the Nucleo deAltos Estudios Amazonicos (NAEA) at the Federal University of Para (UFPA) in Brazil. She has been working as aconsultant in the area of socio-environmental development of smallholder communities in the Amazon. Her workingexperience includes rural development, participatory approaches, gender issues, and criteria and indicators forassessing sustainability.

Westphalen Luiz Lobato Nunes is a forest scientist who graduated from the Federal University for Rural Amazon inBrazil (UFRA, formerly FCAP). His MSc thesis explored the commercial potential of forest products for riversidecommunities on the island of Marajo through the application of Action Research. From 1992 to 2000, he worked onparticipatory and collaborative approaches with several governmental and non-governmental organizations. In 2001,he coordinated the budget line for environmental projects in the Amazon at the Brazilian Ministry for Environment(MMA). Since 2004, he has been the technical director of Assessoria Comunitaria e Ambiental (ARCA), whichsupports communities in environmental based development.

Agriculture and Human Values (2005) 22: 435–450 � Springer 2005DOI 10.1007/s10460-005-3398-4

Background

Alarmed by the ongoing destruction of the Amazonianforests through cattle ranching, mining, timbering, andsmall-scale farming (Pfaff, 1999), the Earth Summit inRio 1992 identified the concept of sustainable manage-ment of natural resources as the most promising strategyto realize the economic potential of Amazonian resourceswhile, at the same time, maintaining their social, eco-nomic, and ecological functions (UNCED, 1992).Research and development organizations investedstrongly in this strategy. With financial support from theleading industrialized countries, a program for the pro-tection of the Amazonian forests (PPG7) was created andexecuted by the Brazilian Ministry of Environment. Thisprogram, as well as other internationally- and nationally-funded projects, focused on strengthening the organiza-tional basis of sustainable development by promoting: (1)the collaboration between governmental and non-governmental organizations (NGO); (2) the introductionof participatory planning processes; and (3) the estab-lishment of regional planning committees and localassociations. Although these activities in some parts ofthe Amazon region significantly improved the quality ofand capacity for development and conservation activities(Scholz, 2002), there is a general lack of knowledge andmethodology to translate the results of the discussionsand planning processes at the organizational level to theday-to-day reality of the rural population.

Local mechanisms for technical assistance and exten-sion play a key role in linking the political and organi-zational levels with local realities, but financial andhuman resources are extremely restricted. To compensatefor the existing deficits in the public sector and to satisfythe huge demand for effective fieldwork, many NGOshave become involved in rural projects. But their well-intentioned work suffers from financial dependence onshort-term projects, cost-intensive approaches, andcomplex project logistics.

Worldwide studies with participatory methodologies(Ho, 1992; World Bank, 1996; AGRITEX, 1998; Hag-mann et al., 2002) and adaptive and collaborativeapproaches (Holling, 1978; Senge, 1990; Colfer andByron, 2001; Colfer 2004, etc.), as well as the pioneeringeducation and development approaches of Freire andMorais (see Carmen, 1996), have provided interestinginsights into how to efficiently work on developmentissues at the local level. This knowledge was used todefine a model for participatory extension in the Brazil-ian Amazon, taking into account the existing limitationsof human and financial resources of the public sector aswell as those concerns endemic to the region. This paperreports on the use of this model in a research projectcarried out in collaboration with the municipality ofMuana on the Isle of Marajo with two remote traditional

communities living on the banks of the river Guajara(Figure 1). To provide a better understanding of thecontext in which the model was developed and to enablean adequate evaluation of the model for praxis, a shorthistorical summary of public extension in the BrazilianAmazon is given below.

Public extension in the Brazilian Amazon

Before designing practical extension strategies, it is offundamental importance to understand the underlyingreasons why the extension sector in the Amazon is in aprecarious situation. In the 1950s, Brazil’s central gov-ernment began systematically occupying the Amazonregion to explore its resources. The government providedaggressive financial support and fiscal initiatives forestablishing industries in the region, but ‘‘OperationAmazon’’ failed (Kohlhepp, 1991).1 In the beginningof the 1970s, the government switched to a conceptdesigned to provide southern industries with Amazonianresources to increase their markets. With internationalsupport, enormous investments were made in the con-struction of roads and other infrastructure. In addition,extensive settlement programs were initiated to pacify theincreasing social conflicts caused by the inequitabletenure situation, especially in northeastern Brazil, byoffering land titles to poor rural farmers. When thegovernment became aware that their immense invest-ments were trickling away in the gigantic dimensions ofthe Amazon, it changed its strategy again. Publicinvestments were now concentrated only in economicallypromising regions (Moran, 1983).

From the beginning, development strategies focusedon modern, capital-intensive technologies for rural pro-duction, such as large-scale cattle ranching, agro-indus-trial land uses, and mining (Hecht and Cockburn, 1990).In the 1990s, timber harvesting became more prominent.The demands of small-scale subsistence farmers, whodominated the regions, were ignored.

Until 1990, extension services were coordinated by theEmpresa Brasileira de Assistencia Tecnica e ExtensaoRural (EMBRATER) at the national level, and by theEmpresas Estaduais de Assistencia Tecnica e ExtensaoRural (EMATER) at the state level. In 1990, EMBRATERwas closed and its responsibilities transferred to the Em-presa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuaria (GovernmentalResearch Organization for Agriculture (EMBRAPA)).But as EMBRAPA previously had little success insuch matters, state governments started to depend on theEMATERS, which increased the organizational andlogistical demands on the extension sector.

Technical assistance and extension in the Amazonhave always depended on publicly-funded credit lines

436 Benno Pokorny et al.

established to promote the development of the region.Until the 1980s, these credit lines were exclusivelydedicated to the improvement of infrastructure, explora-tion of minerals, and big agricultural projects in ‘‘GreenRevolution’’ style. Because the initiatives did not ade-quately consider the specific ecological and culturalcharacteristics of the Amazon region, the results were notvery satisfactory. Often the projects provoked environ-mental degradation with negative social and economicimpacts for the local population. Alarmed by this failure,national and international organizations, as well as localmovements, started to stress the importance of smallfarmers for rural development (Tura, 2000; Mattei,2001). Eventually, these farmers became a target groupfor public investments. In 1991, the Brazilian govern-ment established the Fundos Constitucionais de Finan-ciamento do Norte (Constitutional Funds for Financingthe North (FNO)) to provide public credits to fund var-ious programs and credit lines for local farmers in thepoorer states of northern Brazil.2 Administered by re-gional banks like the Banco da Amazonia (BASA) orBanco do Estado do Para (BANPARA), agricultureproduction activities of small farmers were supported in

order to increase their incomes (Mattei, 2001; Monteiro,2001).

Although an increasing number of NGOs and evensome district governments started to explore moreparticipatory and locally adapted models for technicalassistance and extension,3 the work of public extensionservices in the Amazon is still based on two premises:(1) the environmental uniformity of the Amazon(i.e., ignoring the huge heterogeneity of Amazonianecosystems); and (2) top-down transfer of expertknowledge.4 Although some attempts to adjust thesector to the changing social and political reality havetaken place (Silva, 2002), there is still a strong pref-erence for capital intensive and mechanized land usesystems. Traditional knowledge and integrative pro-duction systems as well as environmental and socialimpacts are widely ignored. Small farmers have enor-mous difficulties securing the existing credit lines, be-cause they access lack to information and encountervarious legal or logistical burdens. The fact that tech-nical assistance is restricted to successful credit bor-rowers leads to a quasi exclusion of the majority ofthe local population. Limited human and financial

Figure 1. Location of the two partner communities, Boa Esperanca and Monte Moriat, in the Amazonas region near Belem, thecapital of Para state.

Public extension services 437

resources make this situation even worse. In the year2002, only 463 EMATER field technicians in Para statewere responsible for an area of over 1.25 million km2,which assigns each technician with more than3000 km2 (EMATER, 2002). Their working conditionsare poor and even simple transport is difficult. Almostnone of the technicians are adequately qualified towork and communicate with small farmers. Addition-ally, the fact that local governmental agencies arestaffed by only very few persons restricts the possi-bility for constructive exchange and discussion. Effec-tive collaboration with other local organizations is anexception (Toni and Kaimowitz, 2003).

There is no doubt that the public sector is not satis-fying the increasing demand for extension and technicalassistance in the Amazon. The existing concepts fordevelopment do not reflect the ecological, economic, andethnic diversity. Initiatives for development are oftenlimited to the establishment of formal community asso-ciations. Public extension suffers from serious limitationsof financial and human resources and a lack of qualifiedtechnicians and extension agents. Finally, there is nomethodological concept adequately responding to localcapacities and demands.

The principles of the model for participatoryextension

Over the last decades, participation, empowerment, andcollaboration became leading principles of development

initiatives. But very few examples can be given for thesuccessful utilization of these principles by the organi-zations responsible for extension and technical assistanceservices in the Amazon. Utilizing positive developmentexperiences based on the active involvement of localstakeholders (Freire, 1980; Arnold, 1997; Chambers,1997; Guijt, 1998; Carmen and Sobrado, 2000), we de-signed a concept for participatory extension in theAmazon characterized by the following features:

Local projects, not projects for locals

In general, communities do not participate in the plan-ning of development projects. In contrast, outsidersdominate these projects from the beginning (Uphoff,1985; Amaral, 2002; Pokorny et al., 2004). Often, theircontent and time frame reflect the ambitious goals ofexternal organizations, and local communities findthemselves executing projects for others. Normally, theseprojects break down when the external input stops. Toavoid this, local residents have to define their projects,working plans, and rhythms based on their interests andpossibilities, which may differ significantly from theimages of outsiders (Figure 2). Instead of participating inexternally-defined projects with high external, financial,and human input requirements, communities should de-fine their own projects in accordance with their financialand logistical situations. Outsiders should abandon theirhabit of dominating bilateral processes and restrict theircontributions to facilitating and supporting these localinitiatives.

Figure 2. A small farmer transports a used television satellite dish from the town to his home. Typically, such a need is not part ofthe outsider’s understanding of sustainable development.

438 Benno Pokorny et al.

Continuous, but low intensity support

Continuity of external support is an important feature forsupporting successful development (IIED, 2003). A lotof promising initiatives fail because of too short projecttime frames. We find that only publicly-financed, localorganizations are able to ensure continuity. NGOs, al-though often better equipped and more efficient, dependtoo heavily on temporary and short-term funding(BOND, 2002) and tend to establish parallel, often onlytemporary, organizational structures. To overcome theexisting restrictions of the public sector caused by scarcehuman and financial resources, extension has to be ex-tremely time efficient. Thus, external support in the fieldcannot go beyond short-term visits for the supervisionand facilitation of initiatives realized by locals.

Establishment of routines for local learning

According to evolutionary economics (Nelson and Win-ter, 1982; Giddens, 1984; Ruttan, 1997), decisions inpraxis do not result exclusively from a systematic,rational analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of acertain option as suggested by classical economics. In-stead, the responses to daily challenges result fromreflexive adoptions of routines, which are patterns ofbehavior established by social groups based on theirpractical knowledge and skills. Considering the fact thatinflexibility in adapting to new circumstances is afrequent reason for the failure of development pro-jects (Holling, 1978; Walters, 1986; Utting, 1993), theestablishment of such routines for local learning isfundamental to effectively improving and adapting man-agement systems to change. The approach presented inthis paper builds capacity by actively engaging in com-plex, productive activity that teaches local actors how tobecome organizationally and entrepreneurially literate.

Locales of research

Since 1999, CIFOR has been conducting AdaptiveCollaborative Management (ACM)-related research in theregion of Muana, located on the Isle of Marajo about100 km northwest of Belem, the capital of Para state(Nunes, 2001; Pokorny et al., 2003a, b) (Figure 1).Besides providing logistical support, the municipalityassigned two public employees to evaluate the practicalrelevance of the methodology. Together with themunicipality, two communities –Monte Moriat and BoaEsperanca –were selected as potential collaborators in thesomewhat remote region of the Alto Rio Guajara. Bothcommunities are inhabited by the Ribeirinhos, who livealong the riversides in the Brazilian Amazon (Table 1).

The region is characterized by an equatorial humidclimate with two seasons – a rainy winter season from theend of December until June, and a drier summer seasonfrom July to December. The landscape is stronglyinfluenced by small rivers (igarapes). The economy ofboth communities is based on subsistence activities,mainly the cultivation of manioc and the extraction offorest products, while fishing, due to a low fish densityespecially during the rainy season, plays a minor role.Hunting is an important source for animal protein, but thelow density of game makes it a time-consuming activity.

The economy of both communities depends stronglyon the acaı palm (Euterpe oleracea Mart.). The acaı fruitprovides a synergy of monounsaturated (healthy) fats,dietary fiber, and phytosterols as well as an almost perfectessential amino acid complex in conjunction with valu-able trace minerals like phosphorus and iron and signifi-cant amounts of vitamins, especially B1, B2, and C.During the dry summer, collection of this fruit is the mainactivity to ensure the daily diet as well as income. Duringthe winter, the cutting of palm-hearts for local marketsbecomes important. The resulting income is used to buyfood needed to compensate for the lack of acaı (Anderson,1988; Rogez, 2000). As a result of the dependency on theseasonality of acaı and the lack of alternative food sour-ces, serious nutritional problems arise during the rainyseason. Consequently, the communities increase palmheart cutting to insure their daily diet. This has seriouseffects on the quality of the acaı stands and diminishes theavailability of fruits during the next season. This, in turn,increases the conversion of the remaining forests intotemporary farmland. Thus, it becomes increasingly diffi-cult for families to satisfy their multiple demands withforest products and services.

In the community of Monte Moriat, collaborationamong families on community issues was low. Thecommunity leader had a good relationship with themunicipality. In 1998, the municipality built a house forthe production of manioc flower, but only five familiesmade use of this opportunity. An association was in theprocess of being formed.

The community of Boa Esperanca, located in themunicipality of Sao Sebastiao da Boa Vista, has a school,a satellite telephone, and a health station, which was notfunctioning. Also in Boa Esperanca, the municipalitybuilt a casa de farinha, which had never been used be-cause the construction showed enormous deficits. Since1990, about 25 people formed an association to execute aproject for the management of acaı stands. In addition, agroup of six people regularly exchanged labor, mainly toclean their acaı stands and prepare fields.

Based on the principles of our participatory extensionmodel described above, we defined a field strategy char-acterized by two phases. The first phase, or mobilizationphase, was designed to inform community members

Public extension services 439

about our proposal and to sensitize them to local issues.This phase identified local demands, opportunities, andinterests as a basis for proposing options for development.The second phase was designed to facilitate the work oflocal groups committed to planning and executing theselected option. This phase was characterized by thedefinition and regular evaluation of short-term plansshowing well-defined activities and responsibilities inaccordance with the specific possibilities and interests ofgroup members. In addition, extension visits to thecommunity were used to inform residents about existingmarket or financial opportunities or to present learningmodules on locally-relevant issues, such as health, envi-ronmental services, rubbish management, etc.

The fieldwork started in August 2002. Between Au-gust and November 2002, we made four, short-term sitevisits. The first visit concentrated on mobilizing the

community and establishing working groups. The otherthree visits were evaluation and planning meetings. Thelast visit also was used to discuss the results of the studyand experiences with the communities and municipality.

Mobilization

In both communities we first met with the leaders topresent our working proposal and ask for support andcollaboration. With the permission of the leaders, wevisited the community members to explain our pro-posal and invite them to a general meeting. Throughpersonal contact, we expected to mobilize even thosepeople and families who were reluctant to participate.These informal talks were also important for confi-dence building, and they increased our understanding

Table 1. Key characteristics of the communities and local groups of Monte Moriat and Boa Esperanca in the region of Alto RioGuajara.

Criteria Monte Moriat Boa Esperanca

Key characteristics of communitiesMunicipality Muana Sao Sebastiao da Boa Vista

Settle type Traditional communities ofso-called Ribeirinhos,who are typical inhabitants of riversides

Population ca. 145 people in 27 families ca. 160 people in 32 familiesReligion mainly Protestant (Assembleia de Deus) mainly CatholicBiophysical

environment

Less degraded floodplains forests with

some farms nearbyNatural acaı stands (Euterpe oleracea Mart.)

Main economicactivities

Extraction of forest products, mainly fruitand palm heart of acaı, subsistence, slash and burn

for manioc production, hunting and fishingLiving conditions Low level of education, low family

income, no schools or medical facilities,

malaria rampant, difficult access to localmarkets

Poor conditions, but basic school andsatellite telephone located in the village

Key characteristics of local groups

Numberof participants

Started with eight women, and variousmen as supportersThe group never achieved constancy.

At the evaluation meeting in Novembercommunity members expressed theircommitment

Started with a group of 6 men. After theSeptember visit their wives joined the group

Objective Chicken production Started with fish production, but changed

during the first month to chicken productionLeadership No leadership. In the second month the

community leader defined a male

coordinator, who started to document thegroup activities and participation. No clearrules were defined

Strong and experienced group leader. Earlydefinition of strict rules

Main problems Demobilization by the communityleader; irregular participation; time availability

Time availability; preoccupation withfinancial resources

440 Benno Pokorny et al.

of the situation of the families, their activities, andproblems.

In Boa Esperanca about two-thirds of the familiesattended the meeting, while in Monte Moriat nearly allthe families were represented. In the meetings, we usedeasily understandable posters to present our proposal.The presentation showed local residents the opportu-nities and advantages of using their own initiative toimprove living conditions, instead of waiting forexternal support. From the beginning, we emphasizedthat no financial benefits were to be expected. Weoffered to support those people who were interested inour proposal during four, one-day visits over a periodof four months and pointed out that our study wouldend in November with a general evaluation. Thiswould provide an opportunity to discuss the need forcontinued external support with representatives of themunicipality.

The absence of direct, financial inputs provokedskepticism and strong discussion. Some of the partici-pants doubted the usefulness of participating andspending time in such a ‘‘crazy’’ project. In Boa Espe-ranca, doubts about the working proposal were so strongthat we left the meeting for a while to allow a free ex-change of opinions. In the end, most of the participants inthe two communities decided to remain at the meeting.

With the remaining participants, we started a dis-cussion exercise. Men and women were separated intotwo groups and asked to draw two maps – one showingthe community of today, a second showing the com-munity in 10 years. The methodology of participatorymapping was chosen as a way to discuss and visualizeproblems and opportunities for development (Pokornyand Steinbrenner, 2000).5 The possibility for womento express their often-neglected views provided anexcellent starting point for a more profound and livelydiscussion (Colfer et al., 1999; Agarwal, 2000). Asboth communities tended to focus their discussions onthe innovative development of non-forest options, thefacilitator drew special attention to forests and envi-ronmental issues in the mapping process. The groupsfinished the exercise in about 45 min, and each grouppresented their maps.

The dynamics, discussion, and results in the twocommunities were very similar. In both meetings, themen were extremely surprised by the detail and quality ofthe maps presented by the women. The women in BoaEsperanca focused on the improvement of infrastructure.They identified duck- and chicken-raising enterprises, aswell as the manufacturing of traditional art, as promisingopportunities to enhance the quality of life. However,they had considerable difficulty exploring these optionsand determining their adequacy. In contrast, women inMonte Moriat were strongly committed to productionissues and they articulated distinct and clear visions

about future prospects (Figure 3). They suggestedintensifying the traditional production of acaı, manioc,banana, and fish, as well as those vegetables recognizedas important sources of vitamins, and substituting live-stock (mainly chickens and pigs) for traditional hunting.The group disregarded cattle ranching as a land-use op-tion, due to lack of space. The groups’ suggestions re-flected an interest in improving the nutritional situation,something women felt directly responsible for, as well asin creating an opportunity for commercial livestock.

Both men’s groups visualized four zones of land-use intheir maps: (a) acaı stands near the river for fruit col-lection; (b) a small agricultural strip, mainly for manioc;(c) acaı stands for palm heart extraction; and (d) forests.The groups expected that the acaı stands would stay moreor less the same, while the agricultural area would grow(as a result of the growing population) to the detriment ofthe forests.

The lively discussions in the plenary meetings con-firmed that the principal problem was a lack of nutritionalalternatives. Participants recognized their extremedependence on acaı not only for their daily diet but alsofor their primary source of income. They pointed out thatin years of low fruit supplies and during the fruitlessrainy season, their nutritional situation regularly becameprecarious. Forests, other than acaı forests, weren’t per-ceived as important. None of the groups were preoccu-pied by the expected conversion of forests intoagricultural land, even though they used a huge variety offorest products in their day-to-day life. Apart from themanagement of acaı, local interest was fixed on agri-culture and the improvement of transportation, health,and education facilities. Both communities were con-vinced that in the next ten years their situations wouldimprove significantly. Only the men’s group of Boa Es-peranca noted that acaı might become scarce as a resultof the increasing population.

Based on the discussions, we asked about promisingpossibilities for improvement and who would beinterested in working on them. The women of MonteMoriat identified chicken and fish raising endeavorsand the cultivation of vegetables as the most promisingoptions to overcome the food problem. The MonteMoriat men did not reach a consensus. They promisedto support the women, however, when physical laborwas needed. In Boa Esperanca, a wide variety ofpossibilities were discussed, but in a very confusedway. Even the men, who showed a clear preference forcreating a fish enterprise, did not present their ideaconvincingly at the plenary. A few weeks later, a groupdiscussion revealed that the whole group had felt quitelost during this first meeting. Their skepticism aboutthe approach and the lack of clear statements by theirleaders, who themselves were uncertain and, thus,hadn’t been ready to take responsibility, were the

Public extension services 441

cause. As the groups did not manage to define a clearpreference, we stopped the meeting. We pointed out theimportance of a clear, positive group statement forcontinuing and suggested that we reconsider the topicin our next visit. The next day, after discussions thatmust have continued through half the night, the sixpeople already collaborating in the management ofacaı informed us that they had decided to start with afish-raising project. Motivated by their experiences ingroup work and under the guidance of a strong and

experienced leader, the group acknowledged that theapproach had few risks and, thus, was worth exploring.

Local groups’ activities

With immense skepticism, a number of interestedcommunity members met after the general meetings toform local working groups. At the end of these meet-ings, we presented, in detail, the working methodology

Figure 3. Maps created by the women’s group of Monte Moriat showing their view of the community then and 10 years into thefuture. The group was strongly committed to production.

442 Benno Pokorny et al.

characterized by four activities: thinking, planning,doing, and evaluating. We suggested that we couldsupport the group in defining short-term plans and inthe provision of technical information. We would leavethe responsibility for executing the planned activitieswith the group, and we explained that our four visitswould help them to evaluate the results andexperiences as a basis for the planning of the nextperiod.

After this explanation, the local groups developed theirfirst working plan for the period August–September bydefining objectives, activities, and responsibilities. Thenext visits were used to evaluate the execution of theplans and to develop a plan for the next period. Table 2gives an overview of the principal activities of the twogroups from August until November 2002.

The dynamics of the two local groups were quitedifferent. The Monte Moriat group was initially quitepromising. Eight women had a clear vision, but hadimmense difficulties justifying their ideas and activitiesto the rest of this Protestant community.6 Obviously, themen and even most of the women in the community haddifficulties accepting a group of women activists whobecame active outside their traditional family roles. Inaddition, the community leader was unsupportive, fear-ing his loss of control and power. The difficulties of thegroup were compounded by the fact that the womendepended on physical help from the men, who weren’tfully behind the initiative. The systematic criticism andlack of support demobilized the group. However, moti-vated by visits to another, more experienced, women’sgroup in a neighboring community and by positive newsfrom the Boa Esperanca group, the women continued.They decided to appoint a coordinator to improve theirperformance. But instead of electing the most appropriateperson, they consulted the community leader, whoselected a person in accordance to his own interests.Supported by some of their husbands, the group startedthe construction of the chicken house. But the con-struction was faulty and this discouraged even the moreinterested women. As a consequence, the meetings thatfollowed were poorly attended, and the coordinator didnot manage to mobilize the people again.

At the last meeting in November, frustration over theirown incompetence culminated in serious and harsh dis-cussions about responsibility, commitment, and reliabil-ity. The group started to discuss their individualexpectations and limitations, especially with regard totime availability. Finally, clearly defined rules wereestablished and more than 20 people decided to continuethe initiative.

For the Boa Esperanca group, it was much easier toact, because there were fewer community interferences.Being less constrained by religious regulations andmore accustomed to outsiders via the basic school and

satellite telephone, the community was much moretolerant and open-minded. In addition, the group wascomprised of men and guided by a strong experiencedleader, who established strict rules about participationand responsibility from the beginning. Thus, while inBoa Esperanca the project was difficult to start and thewhole community was very skeptical about the pro-posal, attitudes changed dramatically within the firstmonth. The group decided not to create a fish enter-prise but chose to focus on a chicken enterprise andset out a well-defined working agenda. They startedconstructing a chicken house even before our next visit(Figure 4). The experience of building the chickenhouse with their own hands and using products fromtheir own forests without external technical or financialsupport increased their self-confidence. The wholecommunity became excited about the group’s work andthe idea of self-initiated development. At the Novem-ber meeting, the 12 members of the group conductedtheir own research aimed at reducing investment risk.The research considered two varieties of chicken andfour varieties of chicken feed, ranging from foodavailable in the market to the exclusive use of cheap,local food from forests and agricultural production.The group preferred to finance this research experimentwith their own resources instead of using externalfunding, because it required fewer obligations andallowed greater independence.

Although economically and geographically quitesimilar, the two riverside communities experienced dif-ferent project trajectories mainly due to differences inreligion, gender, and the charisma of the group leaders.However, both communities found their own wayto achieve their goals. Obviously, our participatoryapproach offered sufficient flexibility to the specificinstitutions and rhythms of the communities.

Evaluation

During the November visit, the local groups and com-munities evaluated their experiences. To systematize theevaluation process, we asked the two local groups toprepare posters about (1) the undertaken activities andexperiences, (2) the expected long term results, and (3)the advantages and disadvantages of the methodology ofparticipatory extension in relation to their experienceswith conventional development projects.

The evaluation meeting was held with both commu-nities and was attended by about 40 people. After wesummarized project objectives and the approach of par-ticipatory extension, the local groups presented theirposters. Both local groups stressed the importance ofregular visits not only for facilitation, but also for con-fidence building and as motivation for fulfilling their

Public extension services 443

individual tasks. The local group from Boa Esperancasaid that ‘‘the regular visits made us believe in the pos-sibilities and seriousness of participatory extension.’’ Thegroups expressed the desire that these visits continue, butcommented that a frequency of two to three monthswould be sufficient. They were optimistic about over-coming possible problems, including investments.

The groups demonstrated the impacts of their activitieson community development by using the symbol of atree (Figure 5). This figure presented the creation of achicken enterprise as a starting point for various otheractivities. Beyond the initial goal of increased foodavailability, the groups identified a variety of otherpositive effects on health, income, and general livingconditions. For both groups, the most important resultwas the experience of unity.

This positive evaluation was confirmed by compar-ing the participatory extension project with other, moreconventional development initiatives. Although therewere significant differences in the specific performanceof the two groups, their experience with the method-ology of participatory extension and with conventionaldevelopment projects provoked strong similarities in

their evaluations. As shown in Table 3, both groupspointed out that participatory extension in contrast toconventional development initiatives does not providemoney, but does provide information. However, theyregarded this positively, as they acknowledged thatworking with their own resources on their own facil-ities avoided dependence on outsiders and supportedwell-suited initiatives. They recognized, again posi-tively, that participatory extension leaves the respon-sibility and control in the hands of the communities,with no external obligations. For them, participatoryextension may result in a slow but continuous growth,while no real positive impacts were seen from con-ventional projects. However, most important for bothcommunities was the increased solidarity, which wasnever experienced during other externally-driven pro-jects. The provision of significant material inputs fromconventional development projects does not compen-sate for the obligation to repay the investment or theexternal dominance that is poorly-adapted to localneeds. Even the skeptical community leader of MonteMoriat accepted these advantages and admitted thevalue of starting locally adopted initiatives.

Figure 4. The local group from Boa Esperanca in front of ‘‘their’’ self-constructed chicken house. It was built totally withmaterials from their forests and with their labor. The value of the construction was estimated at nearly US$500.

444 Benno Pokorny et al.

The evaluation by the local technicians who partic-ipated in the project was also positive. During ameeting with representatives of the municipality, theyexpressed enthusiastically the advantages of the testedmethodology. For them, it was most important that theresponsibility for, and interest in, the project stay inthe hands of community members, because thisdiminished the pressure on them and opened up thepossibility for constructive collaboration. The repre-sentative of the municipality was impressed by thepossible increase in the number of families served byextension, if the communities were actively collabo-rating. He understood this also as an opportunity tostrengthen his political position and his chance for re-election. The chief of the department of agriculturebecame interested in how far this methodology couldbe extended to diminish the immense problems alreadycaused by development initiatives based on conven-tional extension approaches. Finally, the possibility oftransforming technical assistance and extension ser-vices in the municipality in accordance with the prin-ciples of participatory extension was discussed.

Discussion and conclusion

The experiences gained during four months’ work withtwo Amazonian communities and local technicians con-firmed the potential of locally-driven development ap-proaches, known as participatory extension. The test ofan extension model based on the mobilization of localgroups and their continuous support through short-termvisits was promising. The elaboration of short-termplans, which clearly defined activities and responsibilitiesfor each group member, was easy and effective in facil-itating constructive work and discussion. From ourexperience, the frequency of the facilitated planning andevaluation meetings should vary between three weeks (atthe beginning) to three months, when the local groupsbecome more experienced. Our expectations with regardto empowerment were met. Group members developedwell-founded opinions about their initiatives, which theyarticulated self-confidently and even used to challengetechnicians and other outsiders. The groups were con-vinced that they could manage future problems and feltable to continue even without external support. Local

Figure 5. The ‘‘Impact Tree’’ prepared by the local group from Boa Esperanca for the last planning and evaluation meeting. Theexperiences gained during the study were seen as a starting point for various other activities. Most important was the experience ofunity as a base for successful self-initiatives.

Public extension services 445

Table 2. Execution and evaluation of activities planned by the local groups in Monte Moriat and Boa Esperanca, August–November 2002.

Monte Moriat Boa Esperanca

First visitStart Both groups were skeptical about the proposed

methodology and our reliability. They werepreoccupied with how to get the needed financialresources and decided to reduce expenses by

using their own labor and materialsmainly from the forests

Planned Activities • Make a list of information needed for final

decision about goals

• Define the definitive group composition

• Become clear about individuals’ expectations • Write a letter to the municipalityto ask for financial support

• Visit a women’s group located in a

nearby community• Identify possible locations for thechicken house

• Initiate the construction• Document activities and participation• Verify the possibility for financial support

from the municipalitySecond visit

Evaluation • Motivated by the visit of the women’s

group, news of the Boa Esperanca group,and our punctual return

• Objective changed to chicken production

• Demobilized because of the skepticism of thecommunity, especially the community leader

• Construction of the chicken house started

• Local people with relevant knowledgecontacted

• Motivated by our punctual return

• Very enthusiastic

Planned activities • Define a coordinator to improve group

performance

• Continue the construction

• Elaborate a definitive list of groupparticipants

• Negotiate with a known local expertabout the costs of an informative visit

• Define the definitive location for thechicken house

• Start construction

Third visitEvaluation • Group increased to 8 women and 9 men • Group activities slowed down because

of the work overload during the harvestseason. Clear priority

given to subsistence activities.• Improved organization through agroup coordinator

• One man left the group, because of toomuch work

• Commitment for one ‘‘group day’’/ week • The wives joined the group(total of 10 people)

• Construction started, but unfortunately in the

wrong direction. Thus the construction stops.

• Other community members became

interested, but the group didn’t acceptthem• Continued demobilization by the community

Planned activities • Fix the construction • Finish the construction• Calculate the investments needed for

starting and maintaining chickenproduction

446 Benno Pokorny et al.

groups as well as participating technicians and observersidentified significant advantages of participatory exten-sion services over conventional development projects.But the study also revealed some difficulties.

A general difficulty of facilitation was drawing the linebetween information and manipulation. There is no doubtthat short term visits can be used to systematically providetechnical knowledge and opportunities for collaboration.

Interested organizations can be invited to present theirapproaches about markets or financing, or to presentlearning modules about locally-relevant issues (i.e.,health, environmental services, and rubbishmanagement).However, it is a challenge to articulate this information,while at the same time avoiding expert decision-making.Facilitators are needed who are socially sensitive andwho have adequate communication skills. They have to

Table 2. Continued.

Monte Moriat Boa Esperanca

Fourth visitEvaluation • Planned activities not executed • Construction finished

• Strong discussion in the group

about responsibility

• Insecurity about what animals and alimentation

• 22 persons renewed their commitment • Ongoing preoccupation about financing• The community leader promised

to support the group

Planned activities • Fix the construction • Plan events for money-making (party,dancing, soccer competition)

• Define individual availability for group

work

• Check own financial resources

• Start vegetable cultivation • Diminish risks and initial costs by institutingan experimental phase to gain information before

making a decision about animal and alimentation(research design defined)

• Continue the project with the

support of participating municipalitytechnicians

• Continue the project with the support of the

participating municipality technicians

Table 3. Comparative advantages and disadvantages of participatory extension in relation to conventional development initiatives,as defined by the local groups of Boa Esperanca and Monte Moriat.

Issue Participatory extension Conventional development initiatives

Money MM* Works without money Works with moneyBE** Does not provide money

or any other resources

Provides resources

Information MM Information received without paying Information paid forBE Provides information Does not provide information

Dependency MM Not dependent on anyone

Local labor powerExpenses in accordance with thepossibilities of the community

Dependent on external financeand related obligations

External workersExpenses exceed the possibilitiesof the community

BE

Freedom/obligation MMBE Local decision making Decisions by externals

No obligations to anybody Must pay what you have to payImpacts/sustainability MM Slow but continuous growth Fast growth, which soon stops

BE May result in production Results in small productionMay improve the financial situation Does not improve the financial situationImproves unification Does not improve unification

*MM–Monte Moriat; **BE –Boa Esperanca.

Public extension services 447

support local groups in finding their own solutions. Thisrequires a high degree of flexibility, the ability to listen,and the ability to bring people and their ideas together. Atthe same time, they should have the authority to guide thegroups in defining and realizing defined tasks andresponsibilities. It was promising that the two munici-pality technicians, experienced only in conservative top-down approaches, showed a high capacity to learn thisnew strategy. During our study, we also asked a localteacher (male, about 30 years old) to join us and moderatesome of the local group meetings. Although armed with aminimum of training, his moderation was effective andaccepted by the local group. This experience indicates thatit is possible to train and qualify local facilitators to suc-cessfully apply the participatory approach.

The question about manipulation also relates to therole of forests in locally-driven development projects.How far should the local management of forests beactively promoted? With respect to local awareness ofenvironmental issues, the experience of the study wasambivalent. On the one hand, both groups cleared moreforest than necessary when constructing their chickenhouses, without thinking about the possible conse-quences. On the other hand, the utilization of forestproducts for construction, and as a substitute for expen-sive chicken feed, may work to valorize forests. But suchawareness-building takes a long time. The application ofdidactical modules to sensitize local stakeholders to theimportance of forests is necessary, especially when, asthe example showed, communities take the multiplebenefits of forests for granted and focus their attentionson the opportunities of intensive agriculture. But care isneeded not to impose objectives and activities which donot reflect the needs and the interests of the communities.

Another problem relates to the fact that not all mem-bers of a community are interested in organizing them-selves into local groups. For them, the family is thedefinitive economic and social unit (Pinedo-Vasquezet al., 2001; Pokorny et al., 2003b). Although collabo-ration among families is common, collaboration amongextra-familial groups is not, even in cases where post-marital residence places biologic siblings in close prox-imity to their former familial group. This is especiallytrue for the type of formalized associations promoted bymany development initiatives and credit programs, be-cause their bureaucratic requirements are completelyinconsistent with the local reality. Also, the possibilitythat some community members may become interestedlater may provoke conflicts and may isolate communitymembers, because groups often have difficulties accept-ing new members into ongoing projects (Anau et al.,2002). To diminish this danger, outside professionalsshould contact all community members and take care toadequately discuss this issue with local groups andexplore opportunities for collaboration.

Difficulties can also be expected when participatorywork affects existing institutional arrangements andpower structures. As people become more empowered,they will start to question well-established local hierar-chies, rules, and regulations. Thus, organized local groupsmay provoke conflicts and destabilize existing socialstructures. As a consequence, and as happened in the caseof Monte Moriat, more powerful community membersmay work against local groups in order to protect theirposition and influence. This is a critical issue because, asthe study revealed, participatory approaches need thesupport of the leaders to be successful. Thus, extensionworkers have to respect existing social structures andactively promote integration and understanding betweendifferent community groups. Regular community meet-ings to present group work and regular discussions ofcollaboration opportunities may reduce such problems.

The implementation of participatory extension strate-gies at the municipal level involves a number of chal-lenges. Even considering the fact that few facilitatedplanning and evaluation meetings are required, the de-mand for continuous support normally exceeds publicservices resources and overloads existing organizationalstructures. To compensate for this difficulty, local vol-unteers, teachers, and health agents, for example, shouldbe actively incorporated into the extension team. Alsoeffective collaboration between local governmentalorganizations and NGOs, as well as the establishment ofregional information offices and training courses, will bemost important for the practical viability of participatoryextension services programs.

However, the reality in the Amazon is far from that.Amazonian extension organizations are still closely tiedto traditional, large-scale development approaches basedon credit lines to support the technical achievements ofagricultural research. Even the more innovative NGOstend to forget about local participation in their attempt toachieve the goals of their projects and to satisfy theexpectation of their donors. Drastic measures are neces-sary to smooth the way for real participation into gov-ernmental and non-governmental organizations dealingwith local development in the rural areas of the BrazilianAmazon.

Notes

1. The lack of infrastructure together with the absence of localmarkets and qualified labor have been cited as the mostimportant reasons for failure.

2. PROCERA is the Programa de Credito Especial para osAssentados de Reforma Agraria (Credit Program for Set-tlements Within the Scope of the Agrarian Reform). PRO-DEX is the Programa de Apoio ao Desenvolvimento doExtrativismo (Program to Support the Development of

448 Benno Pokorny et al.

Extractivism). PRONAF is the Programa Nacional deFortalecimento da Agricultura Familiar (National Programto Strengthen Smallholder Agriculture).

3. Initiatives with regional significance are found mainly in theState of Acre, where since 1997 the state government hastried to reform the extension sector in the Flona Tapajos.The PPG-7 subprogram (PROMANEJO) is experimentingwith ways to adequately support rural populations living inpublic forests. In northeastern Para, the Association of RuralWorkers (FETAGRi) is very active in adjusting creditmodels to the demands of local producers.

4. Interviews with extension experts, associations, andlocal farmers were held in the municipalities of Altamira,Braganca, Sao Luiz, Sao Jose dos Mouras, and Brasiliaduring a pre-study for a workshop about extension in theAmazon organized by AMA (PPG7).

5. See CIFOR’s website http://www.cifor.cgiar.org/acm/.6. The number of Protestant communities, in particular those

belonging to the ‘‘Assembleia de deus,’’ is rapidly growingin the rural areas of the Brazilian Amazon. These commu-nities follow the principles of Calvinism, and are character-ized by rigid social regulations, a hierarchical structuredominated by local religious leaders, and a strong commit-ment to their congregation. Typically, there is great pressurefor collective action instead of individual initiatives.

References

Agarwal, B. (2000). ‘‘Conceptualising environmental collec-tive action: Why gender matters.’’ Cambridge Journal ofEconomics 24(3): 283–310.

AGRITEX (Department of Agricultural, Technical and Exten-sion Services of the Government of Zimbabwe) (1998).Learning Together Through Participatory Extension. AGuide to an Approach Developed in Zimbabwe. Harare,Zimbabwe: AGRITEX.

Amaral, N. M. (2002). Manejo florestal comunitario naAmazonia brasileira: analise da participacao e valorizacaode saberes de grupos locais na implementacao de tres pro-jetos pilotos (Community Forestry in the Brazilian Amazon:Analysis of Local Participation and Valorization of LocalKnowledge During the Implementation of three Pilot Pro-jects). MSc thesis. Federal University of Para. Belem, Brazil,UFPA.

Anderson, A. B. (1988). ‘‘Use and management of nativeforests dominated by acaı palm (Euterpe oleracea Mart.) inthe Amazon estuary.’’ Advances in Economic Botany 6: 144–154.

Anau, N., R. Iwan, M. van Heist, G. Limberg, M. Sudana, andE. Wollenberg (2002). Negotiating more than Boundaries:Conflict, Power and Agreement Building in the Demarcationof Village Borders in Malinau. Technical Report. Phase I1997–2001. ITTO Project PD 12/97 Rev.1 (F) Forest, Sci-ence and Sustainability: The Bulungan Model Forest.(pp. 131–156). Bogor, Indonesia, CIFOR.

Arnold, J. E. M. (ed.) (1997). Farms, Trees and Farmers. Re-ponses to agricultural intensification. London, UK: Earth-scan Publications Ltd.

BOND (British Overseas NGOs for Development) (2002).Annual Report 2001/2002. London, UK, BOND.

Carmen, R. (1996). Autonomous Development: Humanising theLandscape – An Excursion into Radical Thinking andPractice. London, UK: Zed Books.

Carmen, R. and M. Sobrado (2000). A Future for the Excluded.Job Creation and Income Generation by the Poor, ClodomirSantos the Morais and the Organization Workshop. London,UK: Zed Books.

Chambers, R. (1997). Whose Reality Counts? London, UK:Institute of Development Studies.

Colfer, C. M. A. Brocklesby C. Diaw P. Etuge M. Gunter E.Harwell C. McDougall N. Porro R. Porro R. Prabhu A.Salim M. Sardjono B. Tchikangwa A. Tiani R. Waldley J.Woelfel and E. Wollenberg (1999). The Bag (BasicAssessment Guide for Human Well-Being) Toolbox Series 5.Bogor. Indonesia: CIFOR.

Colfer, C. and Byron Y. (eds.) (2001). People Managing For-ests: The Link Between Human Well Being and Sustainability.Resources for the Future. Washington DC, Resources for theFuture.

Colfer, C. (ed.) (2004). The Equitable Forest: Diversity, Com-munity and Resource Management. Washington DC: Re-sources for the Future.

EMATER-Para (Empresas Estaduais de Assistencia Tecnica eExtensao Rural) (2002). Relatorio de atividades 2001 (YearlyReport 2001). Belem, Brazil, EMATER.

Freire, P. (1980). Conscientizacao: teoria e pratica da liber-tacao Uma introducao ao pensamento de Paulo Freire(Conscientizacao: theory and practice of liberation. Anintroduction in the thinking of Paulo Freire). 3Sao Paulo,Brazil: MORAES.

Giddens, A. (1984). The Constitution of Society: Outline of theTheory of Structuration. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.

Guijt, I. (1998). Participatory Monitoring and Impact Assess-ment of Sustainable Agriculture Initiatives. S.A.R.L. Dis-cussion Paper No. 1. London, UK: IIED.

Hagmann, J., E. Chuma, K. Muriwira, M. Connolly, and P.Ficarelli (2002). ‘‘Success factors in integrated natural re-source management R&D: Lessons from practice.’’ Conser-vation Ecology 5(2): 29.

Hecht, S. and A. Cockburn (1990). Fate of the Forest: Devel-opersDestroyers, and Defenders of the Amazon. London, UK:Verso.

Ho, W. (1992). The Process of Participatory Rural Extension.Network Paper 14d Rural Development Forestry Network.London, UK: ODI.

Holling, C. S. (ed.) (1978). Adaptive Environmental Assessmentand Management. New York, New York: John Wiley.

IIED (International Institute for Environment and Develop-ment) (2003). Annual Report 2002. London, UK: Earthprint.

Kohlhepp, G. (1991). ‘‘The destruction of the tropical rainforests in the Amazon region of Brazil. An analysis of thecauses and the current situation.’’ Applied Geography andDevelopment 38: 87–109.

Mattei, L. (2001). ‘‘Programa Nacional de Fortalecimento daAgricultura Familiar (PRONAF): Concepcao, abrangencia elimites observados’’ (National program to strengthen small-holder agriculture: conception, scope and limitations).Proceedings of the IV Encontro da Sociedade Brasileira

Public extension services 449

de Sistemas de Producao. March 19–23, 2001. Belem, Brazil.Accessed on November 24, 2002 at http:// gipaf.cnptia.embrapa.br/itens/publ/lauromattei/trabalhossbsp.doc.

Monteiro, R. (2001). Contextualizacao e perspectivas doPRODEX (Contextualization and perspectives of PRODEX).Brasilia, Brazil: MMA/SCA/CEX.

Moran E. F. (ed.) (1983). The Dilemma of Amazonian Devel-opment. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press.

Nelson, R. R. and S. G. Winter (1982). An Evolutionary Theoryof Economic Change. London, UK: Belknap Press.

Nunes, W. (2001). Potencial florestal e suas restricoes de usocomercial: o caso das comunidades ribeirinhas do alto rioAtua, Muana/Marajo/Para (Potential and Restrictions forCommercializing Forest Products: The Case of the RiversideCommunities Located at Upstream Atua River, Muana/Mar-ajo/Para). MSc thesis. Faculdade de Ciencias Agrarias doPara. Belem, Brazil, FCAP.

Pfaff, A. S. (1999). ‘‘What drives deforestation in the BrazilianAmazon? Evidence from satellite and socioeconomic data.’’Journal of Environmental Economics and Management37(1): 26–43.

Pinedo-Vasquez, M., J. D. Zarin, K. Coffey, C. Padoch,F. Rabelo (2001). ‘‘Post-boom logging in Amazonia.’’Human Ecology 29(2): 219–239.

Pokorny, B. and M. Steinbrenner (2000). Estudo sobre o uso decriterios de sustentabilidade para organizacao e analisede informacoes para Zoneamento (Study about the use ofSustainability Criteria for the Organization and Analysis ofInformation Related to Economic-Ecological Zoning). FinalReport. Belem, Brazil: GTZ/SECTAM.

Pokorny, B., G. Cayres, W. Nunes, D. Segebart, and R. Drude(2003a). ‘‘Pilot experiences with the implementation ofadaptive co-management in Para.’’ In C. Sabogaland J. N. M.Silva (ed.), Integrated Management of Neotropical RainForests by Industries and Communities (pp. 258–280).Embrapa/CIFOR: Belem, Brazil.

Pokorny, B., G. Cayres, and W. Nunes (2003b). ‘‘Participatoryanalysis of heterogeneity, an approach to consolidate col-laborative initiatives at community level.’’ Forests, Trees andLivelihoods 13(2): 161–175.

Pokorny, B., G. Cayres, and W. Nunes (2004). ‘‘Improvingcollaboration between outsiders and communities in theAmazon.’’ In C. Colfer (ed.), The Equitable Forest: Diversity,Community and Resource Management (pp. 229–241).Washington DC: Resources for the Future.

Rogez, H. (2000). Acaı: preparo, composicao e melhoramentoda conservacao (Acaı Palm: Preparation, Composition andImprovement of Conservation). Belem, Brazil: UFPA.

Ruttan, V. W. (1997). ‘‘Induced innovation. Evolutionarytheory and path dependence. Sources of technical change.’’The Economic Journal 107(444): 1520–1529.

Scholz, I. (2002). O Desenvolvimento de Instituicoes dePolıtica Ambiental na Amazonia a partir de 1992: acontribuicao do PPG7 (The development of institutions forenvironmental policy in the Amazon since 1992: a contri-bution to PPG7). Braslia, Brazil: Ministerio do MeioAmbiente.

Senge, M. P. (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art & Practiceof the Learning Organization. New York, New York: Cur-rency Doubleday.

Silva R. (2002). Autodiagnostico, planejamento local e ex-tensao rural (Self-analysis, local planning and rural exten-sion). In Secretaria Executiva de Agricultura do Para (SEAP)/Prorenda Rural (ed.), Planejando o Desenvolvimento Local:Conceitos, Metodologias e Experiencias (Planning of LocalDevelopment: Concepts, Methods And Experiences) (pp. 81–85). Belem, Brazil: SEAP.

Toni, F. and D. Kaimowitz (2003). Municıpios e Gestao Flor-estal na Amazonia (Governance of forest resources bymunicipalities in the Amazon). NatalBrazil: A. S. Editores.

Tura, L. R. (2000). ‘‘Notas introdutorias sobre os fundosconstitucionais de financiamento e sua configuracao na regiaonorte’’ (Introductory Notes about Constitutional Funds forFinancing the North and its Configuration).’’ In L. R. Turaand F. A. Costa (ed.), Campesinato e Estado an Amazonia(Smallholders in the Amazonas State) (pp. 29–45). BrasıliaJurıdica: Brasilia, Brazil.

UNCED (United Nations Conference on Environment andDevelopment) (1992). ‘‘Agenda 21: Deforestation.’’ In FinalReport of the UNCED June 3–14, 1992. Rio de Janeiro,Brazil. New York, New York: United Nations.

Uphoff, N. (1985). ‘‘Fitting projects to people.’’ In M. Cernea(ed.), Putting People First. Sociological Variables in RuralDevelopment (pp. 447–506). Oxford, UK: Oxford UniversityPress.

Utting, P. (1993). Trees, People and Power: Social Dimensionsof Deforestation and Forest Protection in Central America.London, UK: Earthscan Publications.

Walters, C. (1986). Adaptive Management of RenewableResources. New York, New York: McMillan PublishingCompany.

World Bank (1996). The World Bank Participation Sourcebook.Washington DC: World Bank.

Address for correspondence: Benno Pokorny, University ofFreiburg, Faculty of Forest and Environmental Sciences,Institute of Silviculture, Tennenbacherstrasse 4, 79106 Frei-burg, GermanyPhone: +49-761-203-3680; Fax: +49-761-203-3781;E-mail: benno.pokorny@waldbau.uni-freiburg.de; bpokorny@cgiar.org

450 Benno Pokorny et al.