Gestion communautaire des forêts et agroécologie

The report argues that community forest management (CFM) and agroecology are complementary systems based on shared principles of territorial control, traditional knowledge, and gender autonomy. It contends that these community-led approaches are more effective at preserving biodiversity and ensuring food security than top-down 'green economy' solutions, such as REDD+ or industrial monoculture plantations. The document specifically critiques the FAO's definition of forests for excluding social and cultural dimensions, which it argues facilitates deforestation and the displacement of local populations. It advocates for the recognition of collective land rights and the promotion of local markets to support sustainable, non-anthropocentric relationships with nature.

• Community forest management (CFM) and agroecology share several core pillars, including the recognition of territorial control for local communities, the autonomy of women, the promotion of social and solidarity economies, and a non-anthropocentric spiritual perspective.
• Market-based 'false solutions' like REDD+ and Payments for Environmental Services (PES) threaten traditional cultures by replacing protective use-values with subjective monetary prices, potentially leading to the erosion of ancestral knowledge and the migration of populations to urban areas.
• The FAO's official definition of a forest is criticized for being purely biological and excluding social, cultural, or spiritual dimensions, which the document argues facilitates the replacement of diverse forests with industrial monocultures that increase hunger and poverty.
• Industrial intensive agriculture is identified as a primary driver of deforestation rather than a solution to hunger, with commercial agriculture responsible for approximately 40% of deforestation in tropical and subtropical zones and nearly 70% in Latin America.
• Evidence suggests that territories under community forest management often maintain higher biodiversity and lower deforestation rates than official protected areas; one comparative analysis showed deforestation rates of 0.24% in CFM areas versus 1.47% in absolute protection zones.
• The document highlights a gender gap in land rights, noting that 'green economy' projects often treat nature as capital requiring a 'proprietor', which typically defaults to men, thereby increasing the vulnerability and dependence of women.
• Specialization in the production of a single product, often encouraged by governments or NGOs, has led to food crises among indigenous groups, such as the Sateré-Mawe in the Amazon, who ceased producing food crops to focus on guarana and plant fibers.

APA

Calle, D. C. (2017). Gestion communautaire des forêts et agroécologie. Friends of the Earth International. https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/foei-cfm-agroecology-FR-WEB.pdf

Chicago

Calle, Diego Cardona. Gestion communautaire des forêts et agroécologie. Friends of the Earth International, 2017. https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/foei-cfm-agroecology-FR-WEB.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Calle |first1=Diego Cardona |title=Gestion communautaire des forêts et agroécologie |publisher=Friends of the Earth International |date=October 2017 |url=https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/foei-cfm-agroecology-FR-WEB.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{calle2017gestion, author = {Calle, Diego Cardona}, title = {{Gestion communautaire des forêts et agroécologie}}, institution = {Friends of the Earth International}, year = {2017}, month = oct, url = {https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/foei-cfm-agroecology-FR-WEB.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }