!"#$%"$"&'()"*'$%+'$%,-""$('.,(/01.$2('$34'$,1/$)"1%("56$$$

!"#$%"$"&'()"*'$%+'$%,-""$

('.,(/01.$2('$34'$,1/$)"1%("56$$

$

!

"#$%$&!'()*&%!+',-./0!"12-.3.0!4526!! '(78)9:(;<=!>?!2(@9A!+'(@<&;B89($;&!*&!C:AD9;&0!38;$<60!>?!'8##&%%$!+512460!! E?!>&;;&$;8!+"#F;8G860!H?!58B&I8@9&<!+4>3.60!1?J?!3$K&LM!+'$;8*60!3?!2(##&%!+'$;8*6! !

7,(8)09,%"(:$*'%+"/"5".0'4$%"$('&',5$;,(*'($

*"8&,8"14$,1/$/04)344$2('$9"50)0'4$01$,1$,/&,1)'/$

;("18'($";$%+'$<(,=050,1$>*,="1!!

('.,(/01.$2('$34'$,1/$)"1%("56$$

Aragao  and   Shimabukuro  J  (2010)   Sc ie nc e  

Although  deforestaTon  has  strongly  

decreased  in  the  Brazilian  Amazon,  

forest  degradaTon  has  increased  in  

strong  part  due  to  fire.    

In  2010,  60%  of  pixels  with  decreased  

deforestaTon  rates  had  increase  in  fire  

The  criTcal  importance  of  fire  in  the  Amazon  

In  the  Brazilian  Amazon,  600  

thousand  families  have  livelihoods  

which  depends  on  swidden  

agriculture  (Homma,  2012).  

• 

Confusion  between  accidental  fires  and  swidden  fires,  

oversimplificaTon  which  leads  to  negaTve  discourse…    

• 

Leads  to  prohibiTon  policies,  to  close  discussion  spaces,  or  

simply  to  ignore  fire  risk,  such  as  for  REDD+  (Barlow  et  al.  

2012)  

_:M!*$*!Z&!I&9!$@9&;&<9&*!$@!9:$<!$<<)&`!!

•

! 38;8I(#$@8<=!.!F8@!(@!V;&!S(;!8!J;&&@!1)@$R$G8%$9M!+OPQQ6!

•

! aPPP!S8#$%M!S8;#&;<!<T%%!*&G&@*!(@!V;&!

•

! ,@!8!;);8%!8GG;8$<8%!Z&!R8;;$&*!()9!$@!OPQO0!V;&!Z8<!$*&@TV&*!

FM!S8;#&;<!8<!9:&!@)#F&;!(@&!G;(F%&#!

!

,@!8!;);8%!8GG;8$<8%!Z&!R8;;$&*!()9!$@!OPQO0!V;&!Z8<!$*&@TV&*!

1(*$<!C&;;8b-8G$*!-&<G(@<&!7!5(B&#F&;!OPQa!+,53"0!OPQW6!

What  does  literature  on  fire  say?  

Type  of  knowledge  

Related  policies  

Limits  in  policy  

applica8on  

Ecological  point  

of  view   Impact  of  fire  on  ecosystems  (degradaTon,   emissions)  =>  considered   as  devastaTng  

ProhibiTon  policies  (1987,   1998)  

Increase  enforcement  on   private  properTes  

DifficulTes  in  enforcement   Only  consider  igniTon   sources,  not  landscape   context  (Sorrensen,  2009)   Lack  legiTmacy  (Mistry,   1998)  

Agronomical  

point  of  view   DegradaTon  of  soils  and  producTvity  (MarTns  et  al.,   1991)  =>  research  of  

alternaTves  to  use  of  fire  

DemonstraTon  units  (Kato   et  al.,  1999)  

Tractor  patrols  

Costly  investment  (Börner,   2007)  

LiLle  insTtuTonal  support   (Villemaine,  2009)  

Not  an  individual  choice   (Pollini,  2009)  

Social  sciences  

point  of  view   Exploratory  studies,  few  case  studies   Focus  on  how  fire  risk   (Mendonça  et  al.,  2004)   Very  liLle  on  collecTve   rules  (Simmons  et  al,  2011)  

Best  pracTces  (Carvalho  et   al,  2007)  

CommunicaTon  campaigns   (Costa,  2006)  

Presume  that  fire   management  is  

inappropriate  (Carmenta,   2013)  

Farmers  have  different  ways   of  assessing  loss,  damage   and  risk  

H$@K<!(S!9:&!98F((!R:8$@!

>(R)<!(@!@&I8TB&!

$#G8R9<!(S!V;&!

>(R)<!(@!@&I8TB&!

$#G8R9<!(S!V;&!

,@*$B$*)8%$U8T(@!(S!

9;8@<$T(@!

,@*$B$*)8%$U8T(@!(S!

>&Z!R8<&!<9)*$&<!(@!

I;()G!R(@9;(%!8@*!

%(R8%!;)%&<!

[(Z!9(!&YG%(;&!#(;&!8*8G9&*!G(%$R$&<`!

•

! _:89!$<!9:&!S8;#&;<!G($@9!(S!B$&Z!(@!V;&`!

•

! _:89!8;&!9:&$;!#(TB8T(@<!$@!)<$@I!8@*!

ParTcipatory  methods  to  overcome  

the  taboo  of  fire  

Q-­‐methodology  

Forum  theater  

Role  playing  games  

Informal  interviews  

1/  Fire  is  a  problem  for  farmers  but  

this  doesn’t  mean  they  see  it  as  

something  wrong    

• 

Farmers  are  the  first  to  lose  from  fire:  70%  of  

interviewees  lost  more  than  2000  R$  because  of  

fire  

• 

Games:  “Why  don’t  you  plant  perenial  crops?”  

“Because  it’s  not  possible  with  the  fire”  

• 

Q  method:  although  most  interviewees  condemn  

“bad  neighbours”,  they  do  not  condemn  fire  use  

• 

Theatre:  the  soluTon  is  not  tractors  and  stopping  

2/  Farmers  do  adapt,  creaTng  new  

pracTces,  combining  fire  and  “modern”  

equipment      

• 

Informal  interviews:  Use  of  tractor  to  bring  

down  trees  (derruba)  and  then  burn  

• 

_{Game:  when  available,  tractors  aren’t  used  for}  

mechanizing  parcels  but  to  make  large  fire  

breaks  around  the  property  

• 

Fire  is  seen  by  farmers  as  having  a  place  in  

“modern”  systems,  although  they  do  see  it  as  

arduous  work  

3/  Farmers  do  believe  in  group  acTon  

but  they  also  want  more  external  

enforcement  and  sancTons  

• 

_{70%  of  farmers  say  that  they  talk  about  fire}  

during  meeTngs  

• 

_{More  than  60%  of  farmers  have  followed  a}  

training  in  fire  control  

• 

_{Theatre:  the  soluTons  proposed  are}  

combaTng  together  and  calling  external  

inspectors  

• 

_{Q  method:  all  the  respondents  consider  that}  

government  enforcement  is  highly  desirable  

4/  There  are  successful  experiences  of  

group  control  but  they  are  increasingly  

annihilated  by  large-­‐scale  wild  fires  

• 

Informal  interviews:  exclusion  of  farmers  who  

had  lev  fire  escape,      

• 

Nearly  60%  of  farmers  have  been  damaged  by  

wild  fires  

• 

Q  method:  non  of  the  farmers  feels  protected  

against  risk  of  wild  fires  

• 

PerspecTves  from  experimental  economics:  

Increasing  large  scale  fire  risk  jeopardize  

community  based  approaches  

Insight  for  policies  

• 

Need  more  focus  more  on  how  to  support  fire  control  

and  not  just  on  how  to  suppress  fire  use  

• 

Not  just  training  on  individual  fire  control  but  a  

reflexion  on  changing  condiTons  and  implicaTons  for  

farmers  and  for  the  communiTes  

• 

Consider  how  to  protect  family  farmers  from  wild  fires  

(and  not  just  seeing  them  as  potenTal  wild  fire  

“seLers”)  

– 

PrevenTve  geographical  barriers  (open  space,  dense  

forests)  and  avoiding  propagaTon  (abandonned  lots)  

– 

Using  monitoring  differently:  instead  of  individualizing  fire,  

idenTfy  global  risk  of  large-­‐scale  fire  and  communicaTng  

to  organize  fire  combat  by  local  populaTons  

• 

Change  the  way  of  carrying  out  enforcement:  how  to  

2;&8K$@I!9:&!98F((!R:8$@]!

N&&$@I!V;&!8<!G8;9!(S!

9:&!8I;$R)%9);8%!

G;8RTR&<!

N&&$@I!V;&!8<!G8;9!(S!

9:&!8I;$R)%9);8%!

"@R();8I$@I!I;()G!

R(@9;(%!FM!<)GG(;T@I!

9:&$;!&@S(;R&#&@9!

9:&!8I;$R)%9);8%!

G;8RTR&<!

4@*&;<98@*$@I!$@!Z:89!

R(@*$T(@<!V;&!R8@!

F;$@I!F8%8@R&!

l8%)$@I!%(R8%!K@(Z%&*I&!(@!V;&]!

F&S(;&!$9!I&9<!%(<9]!

>$@*$@I!Z8M<!S(;!9:&!

*$p&;&@9!9MG&<!(S!

K@(Z%&*I&!9(!

*$8%(I)&!

3%8@@$@I!R(%%&RTB&%M!V;&!

R(@9;(%&*!%8@<R8G&<!

C:8@K!M()!

&#$%$&?R()*&%yR$;8*?S;

!

!