26
extents wheat and rice Pineiro and Trucco, 2010. Hence, when analyzing food security it is imperative to further look at other indicators than production and
explore in depth the factors that may directly or indirectly contribute to a food insecure population.
5.2. The state of food security in the Amazon
Despite the huge wealth of natural resources and of intensive agricultural production, many of its inhabitants are food insecure. In 2004, about ⅓ of the
population living in the Amazon was classified as medium to seriously food-insecure UNEP et al. 2009.
The following maps Figures 7 to 11 show the state of food security in the Amazon basin for different timeframes, depending on the information available. It is
worthwhile mentioning that basin-level data regarding food security is very scarce and outdated. Indicators for food security are usually collected at national level and
they mainly refer to the achievement of the Millennium Development Goal MDG 1, which refers to the eradication of extreme poverty and hunger, but do not
necessarily take into account more specific indicators related to physical and economic access, utilization, political and institutional environment. Regional
representative bodies, such as the ACTO, need to improve data collection and analysis related to food security in the Amazon basin, by strengthening national
survey systems and support them in the compilation of data at lower scales. In 2004, the highest concentration of food-insecure people in the Brazilian Amazon
between 40 and 20 of the population were in the states of Roraima, Maranhao and Acre, whereas in Mato Grosso and Rondonia the percentage of food-insecure
population was somewhat lower 10-20 Figure 7 UNEP et al., 2009.
27
Figure 7. Food insecurity in the Brazilian Amazon in 2004 Source: UNEP, 2009
The Amazonia’s Departments in Peru rank high in terms of food insecurity vulnerability Eguren, 2011. They have very high to moderate levels of food
insecurity vulnerability; i.e., between 0.982 and 0 Figure 8. The Departments with higher levels of food insecurity vulnerability are Huancavelica, Cajamarca,
Apurimac and Amazon MIDIS, 2012. Additionally, the most vulnerable areas are also challenged by extreme poverty, lack of access, availability and limited
consumption of food. However, poverty levels in the Peruvian Amazon declined by 20.6 in the past years; i.e., from 55.8 in 2007 to 35.2 in 2011, and mainly in
rural areas –a decline of 22.2 from 2007 to 2011 and reaching 47 in 2011 MINAG, 2011.
28
Figure 8. Food insecurity vulnerability in Peru 2009 Source: MIMDES, 2010
Low Moderately low
Moderate Moderately high
High
Food Insecurity Vulnerability
29
For Bolivia, at the municipality level, one can observe that some municipalities in the Amazon region, such as Filadelfia, Bello, Bolpebra, Villanueva, San Pedro and a
part of the Benin department, present the highest level of vulnerability food insecurity Figure 9.
Figure 9. Food insecurity vulnerability in Bolivia 2006 Scale: 1 = not vulnerable
to 5 = highly vulnerable Source: PMA and CIEE, 2011
Municipal Food Insecurity
Vulnerability 2006
Level of Food Insecurity
↑Increasing Level of Food Insecurity 2003 to 2006
↓ Decreasing Level of Food Insecurity 2003 to 2006
30
In Colombia, food insecurity at the household level Figure 10, as reported by the Global Food Program and the National Institute for Family Wealth in Colombia,
reveals that the most critical regions in terms of food insecurity are not in the Amazon. However indigenous communities in the Colombian Amazon face many
challenges such as new settlement patterns, changes in consumption due to the external market dependency, the de-culturalization of indigenous ethnic groups,
negative impacts of the paternalistic response of the State’s food assistance framework, the loss of seeds and traditional knowledge related to food production
processes and the lack of integration of the social and cultural aspects of Amazon communities by policy makers Tropenbos, n.d.
Figure 10. Percentage of food insecure households by region in Colombia 2005
Source: ICBF and PMA, 2008
Percentage Food Insecurity
31
The above makes food sovereignty in the Colombian Amazon vulnerable, due to the high dependence on food from other regions of the country and neighboring
countries such as Ecuador, Peru and Brazil. Researchs in the Department of Amazonas shows that households spend 83.3 of total income on food such as
cassava, plantain, fish, cassava flour, sugar, candy, cookies and soft drinks, which do not preserve indigenous food habits of the region. Hence, market integration of
these people is demand- rather than supply-driven Ruiz et al., 2007. The Departments situated in the Amazon basin of Ecuador have the highest
number of food-insecure households Figure 11 Calero León, 2010.
Figure 11. Percentage of food insecure households in Ecuador Source: Calero,
2010
Percentage of Households in Food Insecurity
32
Figure 12 shows the food insecurity hotspots in the Amazon basin, based on national statistics and secondary literature. There were
above 40 food-insecure people in Roraima northern Brazil, Acre western Brazil and Maranhao eastern
Brazil about in the mid of the last decade UNEP, 2009. In Peru, food insecurity
vulnerability was very high 0.828, on a 0-1 scale in the Department of Amazonas third in country’s 2009 ranking, high in the Department of Loreto 0.688, above
the national average 0.475 in San Martín and Ucayali both at 0.563, and slightly below this average in Madre de Dios Eguren, 2011. In Bolivia, food insecurity
vulnerability was also high in the Departments of Pando and Beni Zeballos et al., 2011, while the percentage of people living under food insecurity in Colombia’ and
Ecuador’s Amazon ranged between 25 and 30 in the past five years
ICBF and PMA, 2008;
Calero León, 2010.
Figure 12. Amazon food insecurity hotspots
33
6. THREATS TO FOOD SECURITY IN THE AMAZON
