346 Agricultural Revolutions and Change
systems (Houghton et al, 2000). Much data have been gathered on the effects of
tropical deforestation on above-ground biodiversity (Whitmore and Sayer, 1992;
Heywood, 1995) and watershed hydrology (Bruijnzeel, 1990; Tinker et al, 1996),
but with limited specificity to slash-and-burn agriculture. There were only a few
studies on below-ground biodiversity (Lavelle and Pashanasi, 1989).
The anthropological aspects of shifting cultivation have been described exten-
sively (Conklin, 1954, 1963; Cowgill, 1962; Padoch and de Jong, 1987; Thrupp
et al, 1997), with more recent studies focusing on migrants practising slash-and-
burn agriculture (Moran, 1981; Colfer et al, 1988; Rhoades and Bidegaray, 1987;
Fujisaka et al, 1991). There have been several studies about the economics and
policies of deforestation and slash-and-burn practices, focused primarily on Brazil
(Mahar, 1988; Binswanger, 1991; Brown and Pearce, 1994; Mahar and Schneider,
1994).
What this incomplete literature review showed was an almost total absence of
multidisciplinary work. Social and biophysical scientists have seldom worked
together on slash-and-burn issues. There was no tradition of joint research and
collaboration between economic groups and the environmental community deal-
ing with this issue (Repetto and Gillis, 1988), or between the agricultural, eco-
nomic and environmental communities. The ASB consortium was established to
link the diverse research disciplines and the development community to address
jointly the problems of deforestation, unsustainable land use and rural poverty at
the humid forest margins.
Inception
A United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)-sponsored workshop was
held in Porto Velho, Rondônia, Brazil, 16–21 February 1992, attended by 26
environmental policy makers and research leaders from eight tropical countries,
five NGOS, six international agricultural research centres, three regional research
organizations and six donor agencies (ASB, 1992). Participants concluded that a
global effort was needed because the problem and impacts were global and that
cross-site comparisons of causes and solutions could provide insights not possible
from isolated studies. The participants created the ASB consortium, set the broad
basis for collaboration, selected three initial benchmark sites, and formed a govern-
ing body to guide the intricate linkages and processes.
Two key recommendations of the Rio Earth Summit that was held later in 1992
provided international legitimacy to the ASB consortium. They appear in chap-
ter 11, ‘Combating Deforestation’, of Agenda 21, as follows (Keating, 1993):
Limit and aim to halt destructive shifting cultivation by addressing the underlying social
and ecological causes.
Reduce damage to forests by promoting sustainable management of areas adjacent
to the forests.