From fried fish to frozen chicken: changes in sociocultural habits of Amazonian riverside populations

The expansion of urban development over the past decades is driving socio-economical, cultural and behavioural transitions in populations living in remote areas. This is true for many regions in North America, Africa and Asia^{1, 2}. For obvious reasons I will focus on the Amazon region in Brazil, which has been changing rapidly, and is likely to see increasing development in the future³.

Similar to most people living in big cities of the North of Brazil, I have relatives living in remote villages in the Amazon. We used to travel about 90 km either by boat or by dirt roads to spend time with a multitude of family members during school holidays. Everything was a strange mixture of adventure and peace. We fished piranhas for dinner, swam in the river and even had our canoe over-turned by a “friendly” pink dolphin that thought it would be fun! We would wake up and go to bed at the same time as the chickens, because there was no electricity. The entertainment after dinner was to listen to my uncles tell stories, mostly scary ones about ghosts, or big animals visiting, and funny jokes about other relatives or neighbours. Evenings didn't last long, though, because the day had started early and we knew the following one would too.

Rio Negro river near Manaus meeting the Solimões river

I was yet to form strong opinions about sustainability, but I was already amazed by how in tune with the forests my relatives were. They would eat mostly fish, chicken (and eggs) from their own farm, and, sometimes hunt some wild animal, such as pacas (Agouti paca or Cuniculus paca). Vegetables and herbs would always come from what they cultivated. From the manioc they would prepared the flour which was our staple, much like bread or rice in other cultures. Fruit would come from their orchard or simply from the forest, such as mangoes, avocado, and açaí berry. Bringing fruit to the kitchen table was a fun activity for the kids, but we would start eating while we were still hanging in the trees.

These populations grew without having to worry too much with their trash, because it was mostly biodegradable or reusable. The few industrialized products they consumed were cooking oil, coffee, salt, rice, and pasta. They would re-use the packaging for other purposes, and usually bury or burn the unwanted trash. Sanitary facilities were made further from the house and from the river to avoid contamination. They could use water from the river or groundwater reserves without worrying about contamination.

Village in the middle of the Amazon accessed only by boat

Nowadays, almost twenty years later, things are very different. The Amazon region has developed rapidly thanks to road systems and better fluvial transportation, which has improved the communication between remote villages and the main cities. Social policies⁴ have increased access to industrialised goods. Now the riverside inhabitants or ribeirinhos, as we say in Portuguese, have more financial resources to acquire goods, and are thus more likely to buy something than to exchange or produce their own⁵. Better trade and access to electricity have improved the quality of life. However, these changes, coupled with access to TV (almost everybody has one!) have propagated the concept of modern lifestyle and consumerism. Consequently, large changes in food and social habits are happening, which ultimately impact human and environmental health as never before⁶.

Though this rural development is obviously important, there are several adverse effects. The main one is that ribeirinhos are opting for harmful diets and lifestyles⁷. These poor choices can be explained by a lack of access to education, by restricted market options, and by a lack of government support.  First, instead of having to fish, hunt or grow, now food can be bought from the nearest small markets⁶, but they mostly offer frozen and canned items. The main source of meat is frozen chicken⁵ or canned beef, which is readily accessible (better than having to kill the animal yourself). Second, with the advent of electricity, TV has become the main source of entertainment. Congregating to tell each other stories, village parties and football games are all losing out to the much catchier drama in Brazilian soap operas (which, to be sincere, I also love!). This reflects the new sedentary lifestyle of the ribeirinhos. Third, the behaviour of taking responsibility for your own garbage has disappeared, while there is increasing waste production and few options for waste collection. Large amounts of plastic accumulate on the shores of the rivers.

In my view, although there is more “development” now, that is, greater urbanisation and access to technology, the truth is that people now eat less nutritious food^5,6,7, have more sedentary habits and degrade nature to a higher extent. Of course, the problem is much more complex and there is no one-way solution or approach. I am also not saying that old times were better because everybody was happier and in communion with the forest. They were difficult times for sure, and that is why it is so easy to change habits as soon as people are given the chance.

All this makes me wonder how to best balance development with human and environmental health. The ribeirinhos' bad food habits are partly due to the low education level and lack of policies to control the nutritional content of industrialised food. However, even though there was very little education in the past, people re-used packaging when possible or organised their own landfill to avoid water and soil contamination. I think they had a clear notion of their dependence on nature. Now, because food comes from markets, it is harder to make the connections with the manufacturing processes and supply chains. All this serves to highlight the key role that education has to play in raising awareness of these issues and imposing personal responsibility over personal waste. Education would also help to understand the detrimental effects of bad waste management. Clearly, if we are able to flood these remote areas with industrial goods, we should also be able to organise access to public waste collection services. Because there has been little or no improvement in waste collection in these localities, there is an urgent need for public governance to provide better conditions.

Overall, I believe that the key hope for improvement relies on better education and public services, which together may ensure that development can occur without costly negative consequences on human health and the environment.

7 - Piperata, B. A. (2007). Nutritional status of Ribeirinhos in Brazil and the nutrition transition. American journal of physical anthropology, 133(2), 868-878.

The big gap between people and nature

In the last few conservation meetings I attended, the apathy of the general public for nature was a hot topic. This distance between people and nature contributes strongly to the lack of empathy towards nature loss and degradation. Thinking carefully, we only care about things we value; and we only value things we know. There is very little space to get to know nature in our modern lives. For most people, the only opportunities to be close to nature are occasional visits to parks, natural reserves or to the beach. However, most people fail to realize our interdependence with natural resources – specially urban residents. This ignorance is responsible for the big gap between people and nature, for the denial of our dependence on natural resources and ecosystem services.

As someone coming from the Amazon, it is hard for me to imagine that some people never had the opportunity of a close contact to nature. I remember my childhood climbing in trees and running barefoot; eating fruits directly from the trees and swimming in rivers. There were so many stories about animals we would always find in backyards and gardens! Once, we came back home and there was a big green iguana in the garden. We struggled, but finally caught it and released it in the forest. Everyday, little blue birds came to feed from the fruit on the kitchen table and in the end of the afternoon we could see macaws flying across the sky to reach a cozy spot in a big tree nearby. 

Humming bird in the front garden

Macaws finding shelter in a tree at about 40 m height

I wonder how many children born in cities nowadays can still have these experiences. It is rare to see kids playing on the ground without worrying about getting dirty or making their parents terrified. These kids will turn into adults who will feel apathetic about nature and the environment. Unfortunately, this is true of the majority of the population, even those living in Manaus – located in the middle of the Amazon forest!

View of Manaus, Brazil  photo credit: www.samicultura.com.br

The lack of value attributed to the environment arises not only from a scarcity of contact with nature, but also from ignorance of the source of raw materials, supply chains and of market forces. Tropical forests are the ecosystems most threatened by our greedy demand for goods and raw materials. To put this situation in perspective, forests produce more than 90% of the world’s terrestrial biomass, of which tropical forests make up two thirds (Pan et al. 2013). The main commodities driving deforestation in tropical forests are beef, palm oil, soybean, timber and pulp (Forest Trends 2014). Demand for these items is ubiquitous, especially by the food, construction and paper industry. A considerable portion of the items we get from the shelves of supermarkets is either directly made from one of these items, or has consumed one these items as part of its production. However, as consumers, we are often unaware of the environmental cost of our choices. Thinking carefully about the products we consume is a simple and highly effective way to temper the destruction of tropical forests.

Many people say they care about environmental issues, but they do not understand the problem requires much more than just recycling. Often, we shift the responsibility to governments. Of course, governments have a part to play in the sense that regulations help to ensure people follow the rules. Nevertheless, the need for government action does not absolve the individual from responsibility. It can be hard to admit that we are all part of the same problem and that we should take some action, but there is no other choice. Real change will only happen when we, collectively, understand that we rely entirely on the remaining natural resources, and that we have to make the best use of these from now on.

The good news is that governments are starting to understand that materials sources and consumption as well as our well-being are related to the status of natural resources and that one of the best choices (we still have) is to keep our forests safe. A few weeks ago, in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change -- COP 21 Paris -- more than 195 countries finally signed the climate change agreement for reducing CO₂ emissions to avoid further increases in temperature and other climatic problems. Actions will involve reducing pollution and deforestation and improving the use of natural resources. However, there is still a long road ahead of us. It is now time for us all, as individuals, to take responsibility and work towards a better future. I believe that a profound change in attitude is possible, although it will not be easy. In addition to the governments’ top down measures, we need to build our changes locally as the only way to get significant results. It is in our hands, so let's think positive and do our best!

REFERENCES

Forest Trends. “Consumer Goods and Deforestation: An Analysis of the Extent and Nature of Illegality in Forest Conversation for Agriculture and Timber Plantations.” September 2014.

Pan, Y., Birdsey, R. A., Phillips, O. L., & Jackson, R. B. (2013). The structure, distribution, and biomass of the world's forests. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 44, 593-622.