| Famous for beach resorts and deserts, Mexico actually has a higher percentage of forested land than either Canada or the United States (FAO 2007). These forests help support the variety of biological organisms that ranks Mexico as one of the 12 most biodiverse countries in the world. Mexico’s people also depend on their forest resources; forests are the foundation for the social and cultural traditions of many of Mexico’s indigenous people and provide all of Mexico’s nearly 110 million people with products and services that include supplying wood, food and medicinal products, maintaining watersheds and countering soil erosion that would lower agricultural productivity.
However, these valuable forests have been disappearing at an alarming rate; the Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations (FAO) reported that Mexico had the 6th highest area deforested annually during the 1990s (FAO 2001). Mexico has recognized that reversing that trend is critical to the long-term sustainable development of the country and to its national security. The vision that currently guides the development of policies and programs in Mexico is to seek a future with forests for all that are managed sustainably with the participation of society and the honest and effective work of the Mexican authorities (SEMARNAT 2001; CONAFOR 2001).
Extent and Characteristics
Mexico’s forests are shaped by the country’s varied geography and climate (Perry 1991; CONAFOR, 2001; ARD, 2003). Two north-south mountain ranges, the Sierra Madre Occidental and the Sierra Madre Oriental, rise above the deserts of northern Mexico to capture moisture that supports the extensive pine-oak forests in this region. The mountains of the Sierra Madre Oriental in the east climb to higher than 4000 m as they move closer to the Gulf of Mexico coast.
In the state of Veracruz the mountains create a catchment above a narrow coastal plain where annual rainfall can reach 4000 mm and a diverse mix of tropical evergreen, tropical deciduous and cloud forests characterize the region. The northern mountains and the arid central plain between them merge with a chain of volcanic peaks that transverse the country east to west with peaks reaching 5700 m near the Tropic of Cancer. Moving south and east the mountains continue as the Sierra Madre Sur through the states of Guerrero, Oaxaca and Chiapas. The forests of these southern mountain ranges are also very diverse, with areas of pine-oak forest, tropical deciduous and evergreen forests, and cloud forests in the high elevations. There are also areas of tropical thorn forests along the Pacific coast of Oaxaca.
The mountains almost disappear as they pass through the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, an area that has been covered by the sea at times in its history. Some cloud and conifer forests are found there but it is the tropical evergreen forest that dominates this region, known as the Chimalapas. Continuing to Chiapas, the terrain rises again to form the coastal range and the highlands of Chiapas. Here again, areas of pine-oak forests mix with tropical deciduous and tropical evergreen forests, and cloud forests along the ridge tops that form the protected areas of El Triunfo and La Sepultura.
The land flattens as one moves east beyond Chiapas to the Yucatan Peninsula, a peninsula that was once part of a shallow sea. The region, particularly in the Lacandon and Calakmul that are some of the largest intact regions remaining of the Selva Maya that once covered much of Central America, is evergreen, semi-deciduous and deciduous tropical forest.
Two biogeographical regions, nearctic and neotropical, meet in Mexico. The integration of these two biotas combines with the country’s rugged geography to create countless microclimatic and isolated areas that have shaped Mexico’s impressive biological diversity. The 1994 inventory reported about 140 million ha of forest and wildland in Mexico, or about 72% of the territory (World Bank 1995). This total includes scrubland, grasslands, deserts, wetlands (including mangroves) and 22 million ha of degraded forest areas. The area of Mexico’s forest is usually given as between 55 and 57 million ha, of which approximately 53% is classified temperate. Mexico’s 2005 report to the FAO’s Global Forest Resource Assessment reported that the country had 32.8 million ha of intact natural forest and 30.3 million ha of modified natural forest for a total of approximately 63 million ha of natural forest (CONAFOR 2005a). Differences in these figures reflect differences in how forests were classified.
Forests and People
Mexico’s forests are an important part of the country’s rural society and economy. It is estimated that 12 million people inhabit Mexico’s forested lands (World Bank 1995; Segura 2000; CONAFOR 2001). Eighty percent of Mexico’s forest land is community owned, 15% is owned privately and only 5% of the land is federally owned (Bray et al. 2005; CONAFOR 2001). Communities gained the right to manage the land in the 1917 Constitution and today Mexico is second in the world in the percent of its forested land under community management (Bray et al. 2006). Two types of community ownership have developed: indigenous communities, which were granted management over land that they had historically held; and ejidos, which are communities formed by people, often coming from widely different parts of Mexico who have agreed to manage land in common. The land distribution system was heavily biased to occupation of land for agriculture and in some cases conversion of forest land was part of the terms of the land grant. Forest land was largely granted for informal community use and in many cases the boundaries of forests were not even demarcated (World Bank 1995; Segura 2000).
Estimates of the number of communities with forest resources today are between 7000 and 9000. When based on legal logging permits, it appears that well less than 10% of those community properties officially produce timber (Bray et al. 2005). The average area held by communities that sell timber is 5300 ha and only a few communities have more than 100,000 ha of land (Bray et al. 2006). Regulatory and leadership changes such as lifting of logging bans and the development of the Dirección General de Desarrollo Forestal (DGDF) in the 1970s helped encourage a greater number of stronger and better organized community forestry operations that are financially successful. Even with this progress, many challenges remain that prevent more communities from capturing the economic advantages from sustainable management of their forest resources (World Bank 1995; Segura 2000; PEF 2001; Bray and Merino-Perez 2002; Forster et al. 2005).
Mexico’s Forests, Biodiversity and Threats
Mexico is one of 12 countries recognized as megadiverse and is ranked 4th most biodiverse in the world after Brazil, Colombia and Indonesia (World Bank 1995; ARD 2003). Mexico’s forests are a critical component of this diversity, housing some 80% of Mexico’s over 25,000 vascular plants and 75% of its 1350 vertebrates (Bray and Merino-Perez 2002). Diversity is higher in the southern, tropical regions; however, endemism is higher in the northern temperate zones (World Bank 1995). One pertinent example of this biological diversity is Mexico’s populations of pines and oaks. Mexico is the center of diversity and distribution for these two tree genera (more than 50 species of pine and 130 species of oak have been identified) and over 70% of these species are endemic to Mexico (Perry 1991; World Bank 1995).
In addition to being a leader in biodiversity Mexico has one of the highest deforestation rates in the world. Estimations of deforestation since the late 1980’s have ranged widely from less than 100,000 ha to almost 2 million ha annually (World Bank 1995; ARD 2003). The recent data from the Mexican Forest Commission’s (CONAFOR) newly implemented inventory process has defined an annual rate for deforestation between 2000 and 2004 of 314,000 ha and has lowered the averages for the 1990s as well (CONAFOR 2005a; CONAFOR 2005b). The variation in rates has occurred because the objectives for and processes of conducting the forest inventories done since the 1980s have differed making comparisons between inventories unreliable. One of the commitments made by the Mexican Government as part of the creation of CONAFOR in 2001 was to develop a consistent and transparent process that could be used by all those who need to make decisions about forest resources (SEMARNAT 2001; CONAFOR 2001).
In addition to the deforestation, Mexico reportedly had more than 25 million ha of degraded forest land according to its 2000 inventory (SEMARNAT 2001). Combined deforestation and degradation is estimated to be almost three-fold higher in tropical zones than in temperate forests and only about 10% of the tall tropical rainforest (trees over 30 meters) remains of the original forest in Mexico; these forests are primarily in the Lacandon forest of Chiapas and the Chimalapas of Oaxaca (Bray and Merino-Perez 2002). Two other highly endangered forest systems are the cloud forests that crown the ridges of Mexico high, tropical mountain ranges and the dry thorn forests that occur in a limited area along the coast of Oaxaca and Chiapas.
Many factors account for the loss of forest land in Mexico (World Bank 1995; SEMARNAT 2001; ARD 2003). Natural agents such as disease and insect infestation take a toll each year. Fire has been a major agent for change, especially in the tropical zones. Disturbances such as the frequent hurricanes, which impact both the eastern and western sides of Mexico, increase the country’s vulnerability to fire and disease.
By far the greatest loss of forest cover has come from conversion of forest to agricultural use, either through the establishment of extensive cultivated fields and pastures or through periodically preparing fields by slash-and-burn. Fire has been a common tool in implementing these land uses. In general, fire is a rare natural event in the wet tropics and it is estimated that over 90% of these fires in Mexico each year are human-caused; the greatest proportion of those are agricultural fires (SEMARNAT 2001).
Poor silvicultural practices have also contributed to the degradation of forest resources (SEMARNAT 2001; Torres 2004). A central problem for implementing good management is illegal harvesting that usually involves high-grading forests with no attention to the long-term productivity of the resource. In 1994, illegal production of sawn timber reportedly exceeded legal harvesting by almost 80%. Inadequately planned autoconsumption of wood, especially for local construction and firewood, also contributes significantly to the net loss of forests each year (World Bank 1995; SEMARNAT 2001; CONAFOR 2001).
Even legal logging can be a problem. Mexico’s diverse forests types require diverse forest management protocols, but silvicultural methodologies have changed little over time and in some cases are insufficient to sustain the long-term health and diversity of the forest (Torres 2004; Forster et al. 2005). Harvesting in the tropics continues to focus on two main species, Spanish cedar and mahogany. Difficulties in regeneration of these species are contributing to a decline in the supply and quality of tropical hardwood timber being sold in the international market. Across Mexico it has been estimated that there is net over-exploitation of forests; in 1994 it was estimated that removal of biomass exceeded regrowth by 30% (SEMARNAT 2001).
The combination of conversion for agriculture, fire, disease and poor forestry practices has contributed to the loss of more than 50% of Mexico’s original forest cover and the forests that remain are mostly changed from their original natural state (World Bank 1995). Underlying these different pressures that are causing the decline of Mexico’s forests is that the forests is the undervaluation of forests that results in inadequate incentives to protect and manage them.
Forestry and the Economy
Despite the large number of people who live in and depend on forests, Mexico's rural economy is dominated by agriculture (World Bank 1995). Agriculture grew vigorously in Mexico until the 1960s when it represented 16% of the GDP. In the latter part of the 20th century agriculture dropped to less than 5% of the GDP. The contribution of the forestry sector to Mexico’s economy has frequently been included in the agricultural figures and has followed the same pattern of decline so that in the late 1900s, forestry was contributing well less than 2% of GDP. In 2003 forestry was reported to be about 1.4% if the pulp and paper industry was included and less than 1% when only timber was considered (Forster et al. 2005).
Although about 38% of Mexico’s forested land could be managed for commercial value, only about 15% is actually under technical management (World Bank 1995; SEMARNAT 2001; Forster et al. 2005). Pine timber is the most common type of wood produced (over 75% of the total) with nearly 50% of production concentrated in Durango and Chihuahua. Other leading timber states include Michoacán, Oaxaca, Jalisco and Guerrero. Temperate hardwoods make a very limited contribution to the timber produced and much of that wood is converted to charcoal. Tropical woods, primarily the precious hardwoods Spanish cedar and mahogany, represent around 6% of volume produced with the states of Quintana Roo and Campeche accounting for the major part of that production. Only one state, Oaxaca, has substantial production of both temperate and tropical woods.
Concession forestry was outlawed by the 1986 Forestry Law; however, the majority of communities still use some type of outside contractor to log their land (World Bank 1995; Segura 2000; Bray et al. 2006). In 2002, more than 50% of the communities sold their timber as standing, approximately 35% of communities sold logs and only 11% sold sawn wood. The forest industry is mostly small scale processing and is heavily concentrated in the states of Durango, Chihuahua and Michoacán. In 1994, around 2600 industrial forestry installations were recorded in Mexico, the majority being saw mills. The total installed capacity was also not well matched to the local production; Chihuahua had a processing capacity that exceeded its harvest by about 75% whereas Durango and Oaxaca had installed processing capacity that was much less than their annual yields.
Sawn wood accounts for 70% of the commercial wood in Mexico (Forster et al. 2005). Since the early 1980s there has been a downward trend in wood production overall but a slight upward trend in production of sawn timber. Exports of sawn timber have decreased in recent years from a high in 1997 of $100 million USD exported to only $21.5 million in 2003. In this same period, the quantity and value of timber imported to Mexico increased markedly; in 2001 21% of wood used in Mexico was imported whereas only 9% was imported in 1996. In 2004, a total of $203 million in sawn timber was imported, with the majority coming from Chile and the US. This shows an almost 10-fold difference between what Mexico exports to all other countries and the amount of timber imported.
Timber production in Mexico is almost entirely from natural forests. In 1998 there were only about 34,000 ha of commercial plantations in the country, although non-commercial plantations aimed at reforestation covered a much greater area (SEMARNAT 2001; Torres 2004). It is estimated that plantations could be established on approximately 8 million ha, which is land currently used for marginal agricultural and grazing activities. Under the 25 year strategy for Mexico’s forestry sector, Plan Estragetico Forestal para México 2025 (PEF), the Mexican government made the expansion of plantations a priority with a goal of 875,000 ha of commercial area to be reached by 2020.
Saving Mexico’s forests, a Common Effort
Saving Mexico’s forests has become a central concern for conservationists and for many advocates of rural development in Mexico; increasingly there has been progress in finding common ground on how to approach these two challenges.
Mexico’s system of protected areas covered about 8.7% of the country in 2001 and the Protected Area Commission (CONANP) is now reporting that more than 11% of Mexico’s land base is under protected status (SEMARNAT 2001; CONANP 2007). There are several different types of protected areas in Mexico, but some of the largest and most valuable regions have been protected through the development of biosphere reserves where the most critical areas are put under strict protection while sustainable uses of resources are developed in the buffer zone areas around the core zones. The vast majority of Mexico’s biologically critical areas are owned and managed by communities; therefore, finding a balance between use and protection is an important way of including those land owners in the implementation of conservation. Sustainable uses of forests that support the continued presence of those forests in the buffer zones of protected areas is one of the best approaches to decreasing negative impacts on those resources by human activities.
One key component of protecting and using Mexico’s forests is recognizing the services that forests provide. Timber production is only one use that communities make of their forest resources; non-timber products and services make a substantial contribution to rural and urban livelihoods. It is estimated that there are over 1000 non-timber products produced and used by communities and the number of plants identified as medicinal measures in the thousands (World Bank 1995; SEMARNAT 2001; Torres 2004). Some products, such as resin, chicle, xate palm and some fibers, have historically been included in the commercial assessment of forestry. Pine resin, for example, is collected from forests that do not have commercial timber potential and is a major source of income in some very marginal forest areas of Mexico. Wildlife and edible plants from Mexico’s forests are also a large part of rural Mexicans' diet and their farm animals forage in forests.
Other services are being recognized and developed for their economic potential to support forest owners and improve rural livelihoods such as the payment for forest services, including carbon sequestration, watershed services and biodiversity (SEMARNAT 2001). Mexico’s innovative efforts to develop payment for these services has made it a leader worldwide with local owners receiving payment for forest service on more than 500,000 ha of land (FAO 2007). Other studies are looking at increasing the participation of forest areas in the tourism economy that is one of Mexico’s most vibrant and growing economic sectors (Torres 2004). The World Bank (1995) concluded that if all the services and products were properly developed the true potential value of the forest sector could well exceed that of agriculture in Mexico.
There is also a great potential increase in forest value from increasing the effectiveness and, thus, the economic viability of Mexico’s timber industry. Poor infrastructure, high costs of operation, lack of capacity in the communities to implement monitoring and other management protocols and large distances to market are key factors limiting the advance of forestry economically in Mexico (SEMARNAT 2001; Torres 2004). There is value to be gained, as well, from more effective processing and development of new products for the national market (Forster et al. 2005). In addition, long-term sustainability could be better ensured if new silvicultural management protocols were to be developed that are optimized for Mexico’s many and varied forest ecosystems (SEMARNAT 2001; Torres 2004).
The role of government in Mexico’s forestry sector has been mixed through-out history. In general, the priority for most of the 20th century was to develop agriculture and policies that often favored conversion of forest land. Beginning in the 1980s, the growing environmental movement brought attention to the need to conserve Mexico’s forests, but it was not until the late 1990s that the role that communities could play was recognized by the creation of several programs aimed specifically to assist forest producers (Segura, 2000; Torres, 2004).
Among the mechanisms created under the 1997 Forestry Law were two programs: PRODEPLAN that aimed to support the development of plantations; and PRODEFOR that was designed to help community based forest owners. During this period the government and the World Bank developed a pilot program primarily focused in Oaxaca that was aimed directly at institutional strengthening of community owned forest enterprises, the Programa de Conservación y Manejo Sustentable de Recursos Forestales en México (PROCYMAF).
Among the first activities of Mexico’s president that was elected in 2000 was the recognition of the importance of forests and water to the long-term national security of Mexico (SEMARNAT, 2001; CONAFOR, 2001). The National Forestry Commission (CONAFOR) was created in 2001 as a separate body that was still integrated with the overall Environment Secretariat. A new forestry law was passed in 2003 that recognized the need to include conservation, biodiversity, plantations, and community forestry as important parts of an integrated approach to forest management in Mexico.
Part of the overall commitment of the government under the Plan Nacional Forestal 2000-2006 (PNF) was to increase funding to the existing programs. Programs such as PRODEFOR and PRODEPLAN received substantial budgetary increases over their budget in 2000 and a second phase of PROCYMAF was begun that expanded the program to six states. A Forestry Fund has been designed and is being implemented to spur development of payments for water, biodiversity and carbon services from the forests.
CONAFOR also has worked to increase attention and support for addressing issues of disease and fire. The result in fire work has been increased involvement of local communities in fire management planning and prevention along with strengthened safety and professional standards for fire fighters. The Mexican government’s commitment to transparency has been implemented for the forestry sector by making the results of its programs available through the internet (to see these results, go to www.conafor.gob.mx, then to “portal de transparencia” and to the “Sistema Nacional de Información Forestal (SNIF)”).
These government programs have joined with, learned lessons from, and are helping support the ongoing efforts by national and international non-governmental organizations, institutions and community groups that have been advocating changes in how forests are managed. Work is continuing in areas such as bringing extra value to the communities through improving saw milling efficiencies, more attention to wood classification, and developing better linkages to markets for wood products. There is increased interest in trying to use the vast number of oak species in the communities’ forests that traditionally have been viewed as waste trees because of the difficulties in sawing and drying oak.
Another effort that has been advanced through a combined effort of nongovernment organizations (NGOs) and the government is the certification of forestry operations. One of the stated goals for the Government of Mexico in their forest strategy for 2000-2006 was to increase the area certified. In 1994 there were only three certified forestry operations but in 2006 Mexico reported that there were 792,275 ha being managed by 44 communities that were certified under the Forest Stewardship Council standards (Apaicio 2007). Several of these certified communities are also becoming more vertically integrated by including secondary processing of wood into furniture and other finished wood products in their operations.
Finished wood products such as furniture rose sharply in their export values during the 1990, but have dropped slightly since 2000 (Forster et al. 2005). There are indications the internal market for furniture may be growing. The governor of Oaxaca, who was elected in 2004 has implemented a pledge to buy furniture for the state’s school from local certified wood producers and in 2006 three certified communities in the Sierra Norte joined together to open a certified furniture store in the city of Oaxaca.
Conclusion
Mexico’s forests are at the heart of the cultural and biological diversity that defines the country, and the continuation of Mexico’s rich culture and the conservation of its unique forest ecology are intertwined. The role of Mexico’s forests in housing biodiversity and capturing carbon also make them invaluable to the global community. Mexico has struggled since the commitment in its 1917 Constitution to put management of land in the hands of communities and local people while working to ensure the country’s developmental progress as measured by economic indicators. The policies and practices attempted have frequently added to the problem of resource loss by ignoring or undervaluing forests.
In 1992, Mexico became a signatory to the Rio Accord, thereby putting its recognition and its commitment to conserving its biodiversity on an international stage. It is also a signatory to the Convention on Desertification, the Kyoto Protocol, the Montreal Process and the Convention on International Trade of Endangered Species (CITIES), among other international agreements. A declaration in the early days of the Fox Administration, which was elected in 2000, linked Mexico's forests and water and to the national security, and demonstrated further the growing recognition in Mexico of the important role that the conservation of its natural resources has in it sustained development.
Today both Mexico’s people and its government seem to be committed to moving toward common goals and common solutions through advancing local participation and decision-making with the support of central programs. In that effort there is hope that future generations will have an opportunity to experience and use these great and diverse forests.
References
Apaicio Cid. R. 2007. Incrementa México superficie forestal certificada in México. Forestal Revista No. 51 (available at: www.mexicoforestal.gob.mx/numeros_anteriores.php
ARD Inc & Grupo Darum. 2003. Biodiversity and Tropical Forest Conservation, Protection, and Management in Mexico: Assessment and Recommendations. Report to USAID Mexico, 49p (available at www.usaid.gov/locations/latin_america_caribbean/environment/docs/mexico2003.pdf).
Bray, D. B., and L. Merino-Pérez. 2002. The rise of community forestry in Mexico: History, concepts and lessons learned from twenty-five years of community timber production. A report in partial fulfillment of a grant from the Ford Foundation, 132p
Bray, D. B.; L. Merino-Pérez, and D. Barry. 2005. Community Managed in the Strong Send of the Phrase: The Community Forest Enterprises of Mexico. pg 3-26 In The Community Forests of Mexico: Managing for Sustainable Landscapes ed. DB Bray, L. Merino-Pérez and D. Barry, University of Texas Press, Austin 2005.
Bray, D. B., C. Antinori, J. M. Torres Rojo. 2006. The Mexican model of community forest management: The role of agrarian policy, forest policy and entrepreneurial organization. Forest Policy and Economics 8 (2006) 470– 484
CONAFOR. 2001. Programa Nacional Forestal 2001-2006 (PNF), SEMARNAT/CONAFOR, Mexico, 150p. (available at www.conafor.gob.mx).
CONAFOR. 2005a. Mexico: Informe Nacional. 2005. In Global Forest Resources Assessment 2005, FAO, Rome, 68p (available at www.fao.org/forestry/site/fra2005).
CONAFOR. 2005b. Se reduce el indice de deforestation en Méxicode acuerdo al más reciente estudio. México Forestal, Numero 3. (available at www.mexicoforestal.gob.ms/numeros_anteriores)
CONANP. 2007. Que son las ANP. Accessed at www.conanp.gob.mx.
FAO.2001. Global Forest Resources Assessment 2000 –main report. FAO Forestry Paper No. 140, Rome. (available at www.fao.org/forestry/fo/fra/main/index.jsp).
FAO. 2007. State of the World’s Forest 2007: North America. (available at www.fao.org/docrep/009/a0773e/a0773e00.htm).
Forster, R. A., A. Argüelles, N. Aguilar, S. Kaatz.2005. Opciones y Barreras de mercado para madera aserrada de Michoacán, Oaxaca, Guerrero, Campeche y Quintana Roo, Mexico” report for Forest Trends, pp. 75 (available at www.foresttrends.org/resources/publications/publications.php.
Perry, J. P. 1991. The Pines of Mexico and Central America. Timber Press. pp 231.
Seguro, G. 2000. Mexico’s Forest Sector and Policies: A General Perspective. Presented at Eighth Conference of International Association for the Study of Common Property in Bloomington, IN,USA May 31-June 4, 2000.
SEMARNAT. 2001. Plan Estrategico Forestal para México 2025 (PEF), SEMARNAT/CONAFOR, Mexico, 136p. (available at www.conafor.gob.mx).
Torres Rojo,J. M. 2004. Estudio de tendencias y perspectivas del sector forestal en América Latina al año 2020, Informe Nacional México, FAO, Rome, 8p. (available at www.fao.org/docrep/006/j2215s/j2215s00.htm).
World Bank. 1995. Mexico Resource Conservation and Forest Sector Review. Report No. 13114-ME, The World Bank, Washington, D.C., 161p.
Heather Huppe is an international forestry consultant, and worked in forestry and land management for 8 years in Mexico.
Posted 16 August 2007
Updated 8 February 2008
| 
