Cambio de uso del suelo en paisajes agrícolas-forestales: análisis espacial en cinco comunidades Kichwas de la Región Amazónica Ecuatoriana

  • Bolier Torres Docente Investigador, Facultad de Ciencias de la Vida, Universidad Estatal Amazónica, Ecuador Programa de Economía de Recursos Naturales y Desarrollo Empresarial, UEA, Ecuador
  • Lucy Andrade Ingeniera Ambiental, graduada en la Universidad Estatal Amazónica, Ecuador
  • Alexandra Torres Docente Investigador, Facultad de Ciencias de la Tierra, Universidad Estatal Amazónica, Ecuador Programa de Economía de Recursos Naturales y Desarrollo Empresarial, UEA, Ecuador
  • Cristian Vasco Docente Investigador, Universidad Central del Ecuador
  • Marco Robles The Nature Conservancy, Ecuador
Palabras clave: Tasas de deforestación, comunidades indígenas



La presente investigación se realizó en la zona sur de la provincia de Napo, cantón Tena, a las riberas del río Napo en las parroquias: Puerto Misahualli, Chonta Punta y Ahuano, en un área de importancia global por formar parte de las zonas de transición de las reservas de biosfera Sumaco y Yasuní. Se seleccionaron cinco comunidades mediante muestreo intencional con la finalidad de cumplir con los siguientes parámetros: ubicación de la comunidad respecto al camino transitado (cerca o lejos), grupo étnico (kichwas), tamaño de la comunidad (grande mayor de 40 hogares y pequeña menor a 40 hogares) y disponibilidad de proveer información. La metodología también usó cinco categorías de uso del suelo: bosque que se refiere a bosque nativo y secundario, sistemas agroforestales (SAF) que incluyen las áreas de realces, y la categoría
de pastos y cultivos de ciclo corto. Los resultados muestran tasas de deforestación promedio anual de entre 1,17% a 3,67% a nivel comunitario, cifras relativamente altas considerando la tasa de deforestación anual reportadas por la autoridad forestal nacional en Ecuador. Los resultados también muestran que fincas mayores a 2 hectáreas poseen áreas de bosques entre el 20% y el 84% dependiendo del tamaño. El documento finaliza con algunas recomendaciones para un mejor manejo forestal a nivel comunitario.



This research work was conducted in the south of the province of Napo, canton Tena. On the banks of the Napo River, specifically in the parishes: Puerto Misahualli, Chonta Punta and Ahuano. This is an area of global significance for being part of the transitional areas of the Sumaco Biosphere Reserves and Yasuni. Five communities were selected by means of intentional sampling in order to comply with the following parameters: i) Location of the community with regard to the path traveled (near or far); ii) Ethnic group
(Kichwa), size of the community (large: greater than 40 homes /small: less than 40 households) and availability to provide information. The methodology also uses five categories for land use: forest, which refers to native and secondary forest and agroforestry system (SAF), which includes the areas of enhancements, and the category of grasses and short-cycle crops. The results show average annual deforestation rates between 1.17% and 3.67% at the community level, relatively high figures considering the annual deforestation
rate reported by the national forestry authority in Ecuador. The results also show that farms larger than two hectares have forest areas between 20% and 84% depending on the size. The paper concludes with some recommendations for better forest management at the community level.


Arnold, M., Powell, B., Shanley, P., Sunderland, T.C.H.

Editorial: forests, biodiversity and food

security. Int. For. Rev. 13 (3, SI), 259–264.

Gray, C.L.; Bilsborrow, R.E.; Bremner, J.L.; Lu, F.

Indigenous land use in the Ecuadorian

Amazon: A cross-cultural and multilevel analysis.

Hum. Ecol. 36, 97–109.

Bravo, C., Benítez, D., Vargas-Burgos, J. C., Alemán,

R., Torres, B., & Marín, H. 2015. Socio- Environmental

Characterization of Agricultural Production

Units in the Ecuadorian Amazon Region, Subjects

Pastaza and Napo. Revista Amazónica Ciencia y

Tecnología. 4 (1): 3-31.

Boserup, E. 1965. The conditions of agricultural

growth: The economics of agrarian change under

population pressure. New Brunswick, USA:

Transaction Publishers.

Daniel Coq-Huelva, Bolier Torres, Carlos Bueno. 2017.

Indigenous worldviews and Western conventions:

Sumak Kausay and cocoa production in Ecuadorian

Amazonia. Agriculture and Human Values pp 1-17.

Davidson, E. A., A. C. de Araujo, P. Artaxo, J. K. Balch,

I. F. Brown, C. B. MM, M. T. Coe, R. S. DeFries,

M. Keller, M. Longo, J. W. Munger, W. Schroeder,

B. S. Soares-Filho, C. M. Souza, Jr. & S. C. Wofsy

(2012). The Amazon basin in transition. Nature,

, 321-8.

Hickey, G.M., Poiliot, M., Smith-Hall, C., Wunder, S.,

Nielsen, M.R., 2016. Quantifying

the economic contribution of wild food harvests to rural

livelihoods: a global comparative

analysis. Food Policy 62, 122–132.

Ickowitz, A., Powell, B., Salim, M.A., Sunderland,

T.C.H., 2014. Dietary quality and tree cover in

Africa. Glob. Environ. Chang. 24, 287–294.

Kaimowitz, D., & Angelsen, A. 1998. Economic

models of tropical deforestation: A Review. Center

for International Forestry Research CIFOR. 139 pp.

Lambin, E. F., Turner, B. L., Geist, H., Agbola, S.,

Angelsen, A., Bruce, J. W., . . . Xu, J. (2001). The

causes of land-use and -cover change: Moving

beyond the myths. Global Environmental Change,

, 261-269.

Le Queré, C.; Al, E. Global carbon budget 2017. Earth

Syst. Sci. Data 2018, 10, 405–448.

López, S. & Sierra, R. 2010. Agricultural Change in the

Pastaza River Basin: A Spatially Explicit Model of

Native Amazonian Cultivation.” Applied Geography

, no. 3: 355–369. doi:10.1016/j.apgeog.


Lu, F., Gray, C., Bilsborrow, R.E., Mena, C.F., Erlien,

C.M., Bremner, J., Walsh, S.J., 2010. Contrasting

colonist and indigenous impacts on Amazonian

Forest. Conserv. Biol. 24 (3), 881–885. http://dx.-

Mejía E., Pacheco P., Muzo A., Torres B. 2015. Smallholders

and timber extraction in the Ecuadorian

Amazon: amidst market opportunities and regulatory

constraints. International Forestry Review. 17


Ministerio del Ambiente del Ecuador. 2012. Estimación

de la Tasa de Deforestación del Ecuador Continental,

Quito-Ecuador. 38 pp.

Pingali, P., 2015. Agricultural policy and nutrition

outcomes – getting beyond the preoccupation with

staple grains. Food Sec. 7 (3), 583–591.

Powell, B., Thilsted, S., Ickowitz, A., Termote, C.,

Sunderland, T., Herforth, A., 2015. Improving diets

with wild and cultivated biodiversity from across

the landscape. Food Sec. 7 (3), 535–554.

Powell, B., Salim, M.A., Sunderland, T.C.H., 2014.

Dietary quality and tree cover in Africa. Glob.

Powell, B., Iockowitz, A., Mcmullin, S., Jamnadass, R.,

Padoch, C., Pinedo-Vasque, M., Sunderland, T.,

a. The role of forests, trees and wild biodiversity

for nutritionsensitive food systems and

landscapes. In: Expert Background Paper for the

International Conference on Nutrition (ICN 2).

FAO, Rome.

Rasmussen, Laura., Watkins Cristy, Agrawal Arun.

Forest contribution to livelihoods in

changing agriculture-forest landscapes. Forest

Policy and Economics. 84 (2017), 1–8.

Rudel, T. K., D. Bates & R. Machinguiashi 2002.

Ecologically Noble Amerindians? Cattle ranching

and cash cropping among Shuar and Colonist in

Ecuador. Latin American Research Review. 37(1):


Schwartzman, S., Moreira, A., & Nepstad, D. 2000.

Rethinking Tropical Forest Conservation: Perils in

Parks. Conservation Biology, 14(5), 1351–1357.

Shackleton, S.E., Shackleton, C.M., Netshiluvhi, T.R.,

Geach, B.S., Ballance, A., Fairbanks, D.H.K. 2002.

Use patterns and value of savanna resources in

three rural villages in South Africa. Econ. Bot. 56

(2), 130–146.

Sirén, A. H., J. C. Cardenas, and J. D. Machoa. 2006.

The relation between income and hunting in

tropical forests: an economic experiment in the

field. Ecology and Society 11(1): 44.

h t t p : //www. e c o l o g y a n d s o c i e t y. o r g / -


Sirén, A., P. Hambäck, and J. Machoa. 2004. Including

spatial heterogeneity and animal dispersal when

evaluating hunting: a model analysis and an empirical

assessment in an Amazonian community.

Conservation Biology 18(5):1315-1329.

Thorner, D., B. Kerblay and R.E.F. Smith. 1986. A.V.

Chayanov on the Theory of Peasant Economy.

Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.

Torres, B.; Günter, S.; Acevedo-cabra, R.; Knoke, T.

a. Livelihood strategies, ethnicity and rural

income: The case of migrant settlers and indigenous

populations in the Ecuadorian Amazon. For.

Policy Econ., 86, 22–34.


Torres, B., Vasco, C. Günter, S., and Knoke, T. 2018.

Determinants of agricultural diversification in a

hotspots area: evidence from colonist and indigenous

communities in the Sumaco Biosphere Reserve,

Ecuadorian Amazon. In: Sustainability Vol.

(5), 1432.

Torres Bolier, Oswaldo Jadán Maza, Patricia Aguirre,

Leonith Hinojosa and Sven Günter. 2015. The

Contribution of Traditional Agroforestry to Climate Change Adaptation in the Ecuadorian Amazon: The

Chakra System. In: Leal Filho Walter (Ed.),

Handbook of Climate Change Adaptation.

Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg. 1973-1994 pp

Torres, B.; Bilsborrow, R.; Barbieri, A.; Torres, A.

Cambios en las estrategias de ingresos

económicos a nivel de hogares rurales en el norte

de la Amazonía Ecuatoriana. Rev. Amazón. Cienc.

Tecnol., 3, 221–257.

Turner, B. L., and Ali A. M. 1996. Induced Intensification:

Agricultural Change in Bangladesh with

Implications for Malthus and Boserup. Proceedings

of the National Academy of Sciences 93, no. 25:


Vance, C., Geoghegan, J. 2004. Modeling the determinants

of semi-subsistent and commercial land uses

in an agricultural frontier of southern mexico: A

switching regression approach. International

regional science review. 27, 3: 326–347.

Vasco, C., Bilsborrow, R., Torres B., and Griess, V.

Agricultural land use among mestizo colonist

and indigenous populations: Contrasting patterns in

the Amazon. PloS ONE 13(7): e0199518. https://-

Vasco, C.; Tamayo, G.; Griess, V. 2017a. The drivers of

market integration among indigenous peoples:

Evidence from the Ecuadorian Amazon. Soc. Nat.

Resour. 30, 1212–1228.

Vasco, C., Torres, B., Pacheco, P., Griess, V. 2017b. The

socioeconomic determinants of legal and ilegal

smallholder logging: Evidence from the Ecuadorian

Amazon. Forest Policy and Economics Vol.

(2017): 133-140.


Vasco, C., Bilsborrow, R., Torres, B. 2015. Income

diversification of migrant colonists vs. Indigenous

populations: Contrasting strategies in the Amazon.

J. Rural Stud., 42, 1–10.


Vera‑Velez, R., Grijalva J. Cota‑Sanchez, H. 2019.

Cocoa agroforestry and tree diversity in relation to

past land use in the Northern Ecuadorian Amazon.

New Forests. 1-21.

Vera, V.R.R., Cota-Sánchez, J.H.; Grijalva Olmedo,

J.E. 2017. Biodiversity, dynamics and impact of

chakras on the Ecuadorian Amazon. J. Plant Ecol.

-11. doi:10.1093/jpe/rtx060

von Thünen, J. H. (1966). The Isolate State. Oxford:


Wunder, S., Noack F., Angelsen A. 2018. Climate,

crops and forests: a pan-tropical analysis of household

income generation. Environment and Development

Economics 1-19.

Artículos de Investigación