In this Section we undertake two tasks. First, we present a discussion on the concepts of sustainable human development and second, we offer a basic description of the population, geography, natural resource and environmental context in which human develop-ment takes place in Guyana. The discussion on sustainable human development traces briefly the evolution of this concept in the annual Human Development Reports. This lays the foundation for elaborations on the human development index, which seek to capture the specific, national circumstances of Guyana.
Despite some misgivings, the concepts of GDP and GNP per capita were, up to the end of the 1980s, virtually unchallenged as practical measures of the level of economic well being, economic progress, and the development of a country and its peoples. Those misgivings which were expressed centred on their almost exclusive reliance on monetary and market transactions as their basis for measuring national material wealth and income.
It later became evident that GDP and GNP measures basically ignored the roles of social structure and habitat (environment and natural resources) in producing economic well being and development in a society. This occurs because for different reasons, neither of these two fundamental dimensions of society is "valued" in the market place.
The first Human Development report, introduced the concept of human development. This concept stressed that the purpose of economic development was to create an environment where people's choices are enlarged and where they can exercise these to enjoy long, healthy, and creative lives.
In order to quantify this idea of economic progress, the first Report introduced the human development index (HDI) as a superior measure of economic progress than either the GDP or GNP per capita.
The HDI seeks to measure the uses of wealth and for these purposes combines three sets of indicators:
In subsequent Reports both the concept of human development and the measurement of the HDI have been further developed. The second Human Development Report (1991) extended the concept by introducing four key ratios, which sought to highlight Government spending priorities. These are:
The 1992 Report, added an international dimension to the analysis, by focussing on the global market place. This Report pointed out the importance of human resource development in making a country and its people competitive internationally. It simultaneously stressed the imperatives to dismantle barriers to trade and to reform the major international institutions, (including the United Nations and the Bretton Woods twins: the IMF and World Bank), if human development were to take place across all regions and all countries.
The 1993 Report further expanded the analysis of human development by introducing what it termed as the "five new pillars of a people centred World Order" (UNDP, 1993, p.2). These pillars were defined as: human security; the sustainability of human development; a partnership between state and markets; democratic patterns of national and global governance; and international cooperation.
The 1994 Report developed these dimensions further, especially the concept of human security. It also drafted a six-point agenda for the World Summit for Social Development which was held in Copenhagen, in the following year, March 1995. That agenda called for:
Like the 1994 Report, the publication of the 1995 Report also preceded a major event in the international calendar on develop-ment: The Fourth World Conference on Women which was held in Beijing in September 1995. That Report argued the view that "human development must be engendered" (UNDP, 1995, p.iii). It introduced two new indicators:
In the most recent Human Development Report (1996), a new index was introduced to provide a multidimensional measure of human deprivation. This was termed the capability poverty measure (CPM). Its measurement is based on the lack of three capabilities:
The emphasis on women in the third indicator, reinforces the UNDP's concerns about the situation of women in the context of human development.
Along with this the Report examined in some detail the relationship between economic growth and human development. While observing that there is no "automatic link between economic growth and human development," it did conclude that they can be "mutually reinforcing" when the right policies are in place.
Sustainable Human Development
As these developments have occurred, the UNDP has in a number of other documents developed and crystallized these and other ideas in the form of the concept of sustainable human development (SHD). It has also paid attention to new ways of analysis which aid our understanding of underdevelopment and its treatment. One such idea is its emphasis on the concept of social capital.
The UNDP has described SHD as:
"... development that not only generates economic growth but distributes its benefits equitably; that regenerates the environment rather than destroying it; that empowers people rather than marginalizing them. It is development that gives priority to the poor, enlarging their choices and opportunities and providing for their participation in decisions that affect their lives. It is development that is pro-people, pro-nature, pro-jobs and pro-women" (UNDP Report, 1994, p.iii).
It also argues that: "SHD brings to the development agenda the need for special attention to social capital" (Banuri, et al, 1995, p.6). Social capital in turn is described thus:
"a society's total capital can be divided into different categories. Apart from natural capital (arable land, mineral resources, and others), we have financial capital, that can be used to consume or invest. We have directly productive capital - machinery and equipment, and so on - and we also have infrastructural capital, and human capital. Finally, we have norms, institutions, networks, organisations, traditions and attitudes which together constitute a society's social capital. It is a society's accumulation of social capital that is typically the key to a more human and sustain-able form of development. To be rich in social capital can be seen as an end in itself - such a society is, by all criteria, more pleasant to live in than a society where the social capital is weak, or eroding. It is also good for economic growth" (de Vylder, 1995, p.14).
UNDP-HDI Indicators: Guyana
At this stage, it would be useful to review the performance of Guyana in the UNDP's annual reports.
The Human Development Report 1996 gave Guyana an HDI of 0.633 on a scale from 0-1 based on 1993 data. This resulted in a ranking of 103, from a list of 174 countries world-wide. Its real GDP per capita (PPP$) ranking was lower than its HDI rank, showing that the human development level was higher in Guyana than the GDP level would indicate. Indeed Guyana's HDI ranking was above that of 17 other countries, which had higher per capita GDP (PPP$). These countries are found in several regions: Central and South America (Bolivia, Nicaragua and Guatemala); Africa (Namibia and Gabon) and Asia (China and Pakistan).
Compared to the other 13 countries in CARICOM, Guyana came in the lowest in the HDI rankings (see Box 1:1).
For the Gender-related Development Index (GDI) Guyana obtained 0.604 on a scale from 0-1, and ranked 78 out of a list of 137 countries, for which data were available. Its HDI rank, minus its GDI rank, based on the same list was 3, showing a small improvement on HDI performance.
Data in the 1995 Report show that between 1970 and 1992 Guyana fell in rank by 20 places. This was the largest drop in the entire sample of 79 countries, used in that year, although Guyana's GDI value had risen from 0.490 in 1970 to 0.584 in 1995.
For the Gender Empowerment Measure (GEM) Guyana obtained 0.465 in the 1996 Report on a scale of 0-1 and ranked 32 on a world-wide sample of 104 countries. This GEM index was above that of several developed economies like France, Greece and Japan as well as newly industrializing countries (NICs) like Singapore and Malaysia.
Guyana-specific SHD Indicators
Clearly all the issues raised so far are, in one way or another, of importance in our understanding of sustainable human development in Guyana. It is therefore recommended that work should continue to proceed along these lines. Additionally, though, we feel that the indicators listed below merit further discussion and hopefully some form of national consultation with a view to adding them to the existing indicators as Guyana-specific indicators of SHD.
In the sub-Section below we provide an introductory description of the population, geography, natural resource and environmental context in Guyana.
The people of a country form the most critical component in the promotion of human development. It is the people, along with their skills, capacities and knowledge, who combine with their habitat and natural resources within a given social structure to produce and distribute both individually and collectively, all that is available to the particular society. We begin therefore with an analysis of the broad characteristics of Guyana's population structure and growth.
Compared to its present land area (215,000 km2) the population of Guyana is small, estimated at only 770,000 persons at mid-1996, i.e., a population density of only 3 persons per km2. After a century of continuous growth (1881-1980) in which the population trebled, the data since 1980 have shown an absolute decline in numbers, brought about largely by the outward migration rate which has exceeded the rate of natural increase.
The increase in the population between 1881 and 1980 was in large measure due to immigration into Guyana. First, during the period of indentured immigration which followed after slavery was abolished in 1834 and lasted up to 1916, when the sugar planters imported labour from a number of countries, chiefly India. After World War II immigration resumed again, this time voluntarily and from the rest of the Caribbean. Population growth after 1946 peaked at 2.86 percent per annum.
Table 1.1 shows the available census data since 1946 with an estimate of
the population size in 1996. Between 1970 and 1980 the population grew at
0.4 percent per annum, and since 1980 it has been declining at an annual
average rate of about 0.1 percent.
Table 1.1: Population Census Data |
|
Census Year |
Amount ('000) |
1946 |
375.7 |
1960 |
560.3 |
1970 |
701.7 |
1980 |
759.6 |
1991 |
723.8 |
1996 (estimate) |
770.1 |
Source: Bureau of Statistics.
In mid-1996, the urban/rural distribution of the population was estimated at 36:64. The percentage distribution by administrative region in the 1991 census is shown in Table 1.2 below:
| Table 1.2: Regional Distribution of the Population (1991) | ||
| Region | % of Total | |
| 1 | 2.6 | |
| 2 | 6.0 | |
| 3 | 12.7 | |
| 4 | 41.4 | |
| 5 | 6.9 | |
| 6 | 19.1 | |
| 7 | 2.1 | |
| 8 | 0.8 | |
| 9 | 2.1 | |
| 10 | 5.5 | |
Source: Bureau of Statistics.
The sex distribution of the population shows slightly more females than males. Over the five census dates reported in Table 1.1 the percentage of females ranged from 50.3 to 50.9.
The ethnic distribution of the population shows that East Indians form the largest group (48 percent) but do not constitute a majority. Next are the Afro-Guyanese (33 percent), followed by Mixed (12 percent), and Amerindians, (six percent). These data are shown in Table 1.3.
| Table 1.3: Population by Ethnicity (1991) | ||
| Ethnic Group | % of Total | |
| East Indians | 48.3 | |
| Afro-Guyanese | 32.7 | |
| Mixed | 12.2 | |
| Amerindians | 6.3 | |
| Others | 0.5 | |
Source: Bureau of Statistics.
Finally the age distribution of the population is shown in Table 1.4. The median age of the population has been rising, reaching 21.7 years in 1991, up from 17 in 1966. While the population aged 0-14 years was still the largest category in 1991 (35 percent) this figure was considerably down from the censuses of 1970 and 1980 which gave this category 47 percent.
| Table 1.4: Population by Age Group (1991) | ||
| Age Group (years) | % of Total | |
| 0-14 | 34.8 | |
| 15-24 | 22.0 | |
| 25-34 | 17.2 | |
| 35-44 | 11.1 | |
| 45-54 | 6.6 | |
| 55-64 | 4.2 | |
| 65+ | 4.1 | |
Source: Bureau of Statistics.
The population characteristics of Guyana are clearly not those typical of a developing country. Moreover several of these characteristics give cause for concern, particularly as they relate to the overall size, regional distribution and age distribution of the population. Also while the ethnic distribution reflects the diversity and great cultural potential of Guyana, this unfortunate-ly provides a basis in numbers for concerns over ethnic security and the successful advancement of Guyanese nationalism as well. However, the characteristic which is perhaps the most compelling testimony in regard to the situation of SHD in Guyana is that which indicates a declining population since 1980. While most of this decline has been due to net outward migration, other features of the population's dynamics are also worthy of note. One is that while the crude death rate had declined from 9.7 in 1960 to 6.9 in 1970, it had increased to 8 by the time of the 1991 census. However, it declined again to 7.3 in 1996. Another feature of concern is that fertility rates have been declining. The fertility rate in the 1991 census was 2.6 children per woman of child bearing age, down from 6.1 in 1960. Significantly also, while the period of prime child bearing remains in the 20-24 age group, early (teenage) pregnancies have been on the rise, and with it increases in abortions. It is felt that this is a major social problem in Guyana today (Benjamin, 1994).
The majority of migrants leaving Guyana appear to do so "illegally," that is, in the sense that they are not accorded residency/citizenship status in the countries to which they travel. Both push and pull factors play a role in this exodus. In recent months, countries to which these Guyanese go have taken to actively deporting them if they are found there illegally. Also if they are there legally, their residency rights are revoked if they commit serious crimes (See Box 1.2). There is also reported to be an extensive ring of illegal operatives involved in arranging migration for a fee.
Geography
The geographical context in which these population characteristics are located is presented below.
As indicated earlier, Guyana occupies a total land mass of approximately 215,000 km2 (83,000 mls2) its coastline is approximately 434 km (270 mls) long, while the depth inland is about 724 km (450 mls). It is located on the north-eastern coast of the continent of South America, Guyana is bounded on the north by the Atlantic Ocean, on the east by Suriname, on the south and south-west by Brazil and by Venezuela to the west. About 35 percent of Guyana lies within the Amazon Basin. In spite of its location on the South American continent, Guyana is regarded as an integral part of the English-speaking Caribbean, because of similarities in its past colonial affiliation (British), culture and peoples. It is a member of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM), whose headquarters is located in Guyana.
The country's three main rivers, the Essequibo, Demerara and Berbice drain into the Atlantic Ocean and are the dividers of the three counties, Essequibo, Demerara and Berbice. There are four (4) natural geographic regions:-
To accommodate the political administration of the country, Guyana has however, been divided into ten administrative regions.
The Coastal Plain is a low-lying narrow piece of land situated along the northern coast, varying in width from 16 km (10 mls) in the West to as much as 64 km (40 mls) in the East. This Plain constitutes about 10 percent of Guyana's total land mass, with much of the area lying about 2.4 m (8 ft) below the high tide sea level mark. This area is the most important part of Guyana for agricultural purposes, as about 80 percent of its cultivated land is located here.
The fact that the Coastal Plain lies below sea level has made it necessary for the construction and maintenance of a complex sea-defence system which includes sea walls which stretch for approx-imately 240 km (150 mls) along the coast. An intricate network of drainage and irrigation canals is also characteristic of the physical features of this area.
The level of economic activity on the coastal plain, the location of educational facilities and the transportation network are all contributing factors to this being the most populous natural region as approximately 85 percent of the total population live here. Of the ten administrative regions in the country referred to above, part of Region 1 and all of Regions 2-6 are located in the Coastal Plain.
The pattern of settlement is predominantly linear following the main roadways with clusters of villages and little townships. Five (5) of Guyana's six (6) municipalities are located on the Coast. Georgetown, the capital city and the largest municipality, is also located here on the eastern bank of the mouth of the Demerara River. The population of greater Georgetown and its environs, is now approximately 200,000 people.
The Hilly Sand and Clay Area lies immediately south of the coastal plain covering approximately 20 percent of the country. It is an undulating expanse of hardwood forests and hills varying in height from 30 m (100 ft) to 122 m (400 ft). This area also includes the intermediate savannahs (See Box 1.3). The hardwood and other timber found in this region are a valuable natural resource and are a source of fuelwood, charcoal and timber for construction purposes. Bauxite, which has been up to the late eighties, a significant foreign exchange earner can be found in large deposits in the hilly sand and clay area. The region is also rich in other minerals.
Relative to the Coastal Plain, the population distribution is sparse with a density of about 6-25 persons per km2. There are a few villages and Amerindian settlements along the banks of the Demerara and other rivers located in this region. The largest settlement is Linden, a conglomeration of three communities (Wismar, MacKenzie and Christianburg) which developed as a result of the activities of the bauxite industry along the Upper Demerara River banks. Linden is the other municipality in Guyana.
The Highland Region, occupying almost 60 percent of Guyana is characterised by its dense rainforest situated on mountainous land with peaks varying from 275 m (900 ft) to 1,100 m (3,600 ft) and even higher in some places. Here can be found the valuable deposits of gold and diamonds as well as interesting resources of wildlife, birds, orchids and other plants. This highland region has become in recent times the target for mining and timber extraction, both by Guyanese living on the coastal belt and overseas entrepreneurs. Trading of its resources (including wildlife) is done both legally and illegally. This is the most sparsely populated area where in some areas population density below 1 per km2 is found. Guyana's indigenous peoples, the Amerindians, occupy settlements in this region.
The Interior Savannahs situated in the south-west of Guyana occupy approximately 15,540 km2 (6,000 mls2) of the country. The flat terrain is predominantly grassland interspersed with palm trees, aligning lakes, streams and rivers. The Rupununi Savannah region is suited for cattle rearing. Balata bleeding and small-scale agriculture also form part of the agricultural activity in this area. Deposits of petroleum have also been found (not exploited) in this region. Several ethnic groups can be found in the savannahs. However, Amerindians predominate in the sparse population in this area.
Land Use
Of the 215,000 km2 (83,000 mls2) of Guyana's landmass, an estimated 5,000 km2 are arable and suitable for cropping, with the Coastal Plain being the area where the soils most suited for agriculture are located. It is estimated that 10 percent of the arable land on this Plain (220,000 ha) is cultivated (Earle, 1995), including 50,000 ha under sugar cane; about 50,000 ha under irrigated rice; 20,000 ha under other crops and fruits. The remaining land is occupied by housing and infrastructure, undeveloped cattle ranges, conservancies and undeveloped lowlands.
The other natural regions are virtually underdeveloped with less than 1 percent utilised for housing; approximately 0.5 percent for agricultural purposes (cash crops) and the remainder consisting of forests, waterways and large mineral deposits.
Guyana has a unique history relating to land administration and ownership, which reflects the several periods of European colonial control of the country which has given rise to several forms of ownership or occupation of land today. After Columbus' arrival in 1492, the Spanish, the Dutch and the English followed laying claim to the territory. By the 17th and 18th centuries, in order to accommodate plantation agriculture, property rights were provided to private investors by the various European governments which controlled the territory at that time.
At the time of Independence in 1966, the British Government handed over all Guyana's lands which were not already sold or otherwise disposed of to the Government of Guyana (GOG). These lands formerly known as "Crown lands" then became known as State Lands in the post-Independence period. `Crown or State Lands' today constitute over 90 percent of the country's total land resources (Earle, 1995). The remaining 10 percent of the country's land resources is held privately (freehold property).
The overall responsibility for the management of state lands is borne by the Lands and Surveys Department of the Ministry of Agriculture with sections responsible for:-
The detailed responsibilities for these sections are complex and flawed with cross-cutting of duties and powers of the officers-in-charge.
In the early part of the 20th century, recession caused the retrenchment of many sugar workers in the predominantly sugar exporting economy. This, coupled with the need to provide out-of-crop employment for sugar workers employed in the estates led the colonial government to acquire private estates for the establishment of land development schemes for small cultivators. Several schemes were set up on the coastal Crown Lands which later became government lands (State Lands) upon the country's assumption of Republican status in February 1970. They are:
Three other Land Development Schemes were established on State Lands, i.e., Black Bush Polder Land Development Scheme (Region 6) Soesdyke/Linden Highway Land Development Scheme (Region 4) and the Wauna Land Development Scheme (Region 1).
These Land Development Schemes were under the management of the Lands and Surveys Department, Ministry of Agriculture, until 1982 when decentralisation of these schemes took place and they were placed under the control of various Regional Democratic Councils within which boundaries they were located. The lands within these schemes are laid out in parcels for agriculture, except in the case of Black Bush Polder where homesteads of 1 ha (2.5 acs) were provided. Residential lots (for homes) are laid out with an average size of 0.04 ha (0.1 ac) and allocated to farmers cultivating agricultural lands within these land development schemes.
The Environment and Natural Resources
The direct relationship which exist between the requirements of environmental protection and conservation on one hand, and the major contribution which natural resource utilization makes to Guyana's GDP is a crucial consideration to the promotion of SHD. At present the majority of the country's employment and income is based in sectors that rely on natural resources, some of which are renewable, e.g., agriculture, fisheries and forestry and some of which are not e.g., bauxite and gold.
A good example of this tension between resource utilisation and environmental sustainability is revealed in the agricultural sector. Currently this sector employs about 37 percent of the labour force and when inter-sectoral linkages are taken into consideration, its contribution to GDP stands at about 50 percent. Agriculture, however, stands at considerable risk due to problems of land degradation, pollution, etc. It has become very evident that like any other country the future of the sector depends on good soil and water conservation and management, and in Guyana's specific context the maintenance of its sea defences as well.
Currently, none of the above can be considered to be at minimal risk of degradation. The information we have gathered show:
Clearly, the protection of the environment while ensuring optimal use of natural resources, depend on how well managed these resources are. The provisions made by the government for integrated planning are therefore of critical importance. The situation we have found prior to May 1996, when the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was legally established (see Box 1.5), is that while several agencies and Government departments had varying responsibilities in environmental management, there were many instances of overlapping of duties which hindered their effectiveness in the operations of these agencies. Some of the agencies with a brief description of their activities are listed in Table 1.5.
Table 1.5: Agencies with Responsibility for Environmental Management
| Name of Agency | Year Established | Functions |
| 1.Guyana Agency for Health Sciences Education, Environment and Food Policy (Environmental Unit) | 1988 | Development of National Environmental Policy, environmental monitoring, coordination and training. The environmental division contains different sections which focus on: biodiversity, pollution, forestry, environmental education, legislation, coastal zone management, pesticides, mining and EIA. |
| 2.Guyana Natural Resources Agency (GNRA) | 1986 | Manage the development of natural resources. This agency oversees the activities of the Guyana Forestry Commission (GFC), the Geology and Mines Commission (GGMC), The Guyana National Energy Authority (GNEA), The Petroleum Unit and The Hydropower Unit. |
| 3.Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) | 1988 | To ensure that actions taken by one agency or ministry are coordinated with those of other agencies. |
| 4.The Inter-Agency Committee on Environment and Development (IAC) | - | Same as 3 above. However, representatives including Ministers, Permanent Secretaries and other top technical officers comprise the committee. |
| 5.The Ministry of Agriculture | Responsible for wildlife and fisheries management; agro-chemical supply management, sea-defences, agricultural extension, soil conservation, land tenure and distribution. | |
| 6.The Institute of Applied Science and Technology (IAST) | 1980 | Research and development; providing technical assistance (services) in laboratory analyses, electronic end electrical repair and glassblowing. |
| Non-Governmental Organisations | ||
| 1.The Guyana Biodiversity Society | 1991 | To encourage and assist in the sustainable use of biodiversity resources and where this is not possible, to encourage their conservation for future generations |
| 2.The Guyana Environmental Monitoring and Conservation (GEMCO) | 1992 | To influence development policies, (ensuring environmental factors are considered); monitor development projects; review and promulgate environmental legislation; help define the parameters of wildlife trade; develop public awareness. |
| 3.Other NGOs: The Forestry Producers Association, and The Amerindian NGOs. | Various Years | To influence development policies, (ensuring environmental factors are considered); monitor development projects; review and promulgate environmental legislation; help define the parameters of wildlife trade; develop public awareness. |
It is however, anticipated that several problems including the overlapping of duties and responsibilities will be resolved with the passing of the Act. The EPA now has authority over government ministries, boards, agencies, municipalities, local or regional councils to approve any matter in respect of which an environmental authorisation is required. It will undoubtedly take some time before this institution can claim to be operating efficiently. In the interim, several problems relating to the environment however, need to be urgently addressed. These include: mismanagement in the use of agro chemicals. Like in the case of many developing countries, the misuse of agro chemicals is a growing problem. The results from this include chronic health effects, biodiversity declines and reduction in agricultural productivity. Shriar (CIDA, 1993) states that:
"between 1959 and 1964 in Guyana there were 88 cases of insecticide poisoning with 70 deaths, while in 1984 alone there were 26 insecticide-related deaths. In 1987 hospitals saw 123 cases of insecticide poisoning".
A PAHO/WHO 1994 Report on Health Conditions in the Americas states that:
"Highly and moderately toxic chemicals are being used in the agricultural sector in Guyana. The Ministry of Health's data of admissions to the main hospitals in Regions 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the country, where agricultural activities are concentrated, revealed that between 1986 and 1990 voluntary and non-voluntary poisoning occurred at a rate of 84 cases per 100,000 population living in those coastal regions. In 1989 traces of organochloride pesticides were found in water samples taken in 1989 from artisan wells, fresh water canals and drainage canals of the agricultural fields of Mibicuri, Black Bush Polder, (Region 6). The long term effects of the accumulation of pesticides in the tissues of the Guyanese population have not yet been investigated."
At the time of reporting, more recent statistics relating to insecticide poisoning were not available. There is however, widespread use of chemicals on farms with very little supporting services to advise farmers on their use. The Outreach activities of the Extension Division of the Ministry of Agriculture is limited owing to budgetary and other constraints.
In a recent study, Rutherford (1994) reported that out of a total of 150 farms surveyed, 92 (61 percent) used insecticides, 69 (49 percent) of the farms used weedicides and 101 (67 percent) used inorganic fertilizers. It was also clear that the women who managed these farms had very little knowledge about the use of chemicals and were unaware of the risks of being exposed and the negative side effects of misusing such chemicals. She further stated that:
"out of a total of 150 female respondents, none received training in seed selection and seed production. Two (2) women were trained in the use of fertilizers and pesticides. On the other hand, 31 women would like to receive training in seed selection and seed protection, thirty-five (35) women expressed their desire for training in the use of fertilizers and pesticides" (ibid).
Draft legislation for a Pesticide and Toxic Chemical Act is currently being reviewed. For such legislation to be effective however, there will be a need for much training of both the Ministry's staff and other related agencies, and a massive public awareness programme on the use and control of chemicals. Other support facilities such as laboratory equipment for monitoring and analysis, better storage facilities, and controls on the disposal of expired chemicals will also have to be acquired.
Another significant area of environmental concern is commercial forestry and the maintenance of protected forest areas. With the exception of the cutting of wallaba trees in the Hilly Sand and Clay Region which has been extensively denuded, virtually all forestry in Guyana is and always has been carried out on a selective basis. However, this does not imply that it has been carried out sustainably. For example, the main commercial species Greenheart (Ocotea rodiaei) which provides nearly 70 percent of the volume of exports (Shriar, 1993) is almost certainly over-exhausted and thus may regenerate at rates that will not sustain the industry.
In addition to this there are considerations which derive from the operations of a new forestry extraction company (Barama) and its effects on the environment. Barama's forestry concession covers 1.7 million hectares of land in which five (5) titled Amerindian settlements are located, and many untitled communities and homesteads.
Approximately 80 percent of Guyana's land mass is covered by thick rainforest, the majority of which is still intact. The slow pace of economic activity and the country's relatively sparse population (most of which is concentrated along the coastal plain), may be the reason for the apparently well sustained forests rather than a conscious effort to protect biodiversity. To date, there are two established natural reserves: the Kaieteur National Park and the Iwokrama International Rainforest Programme (See Box 1.6 & Box 1.7). Planning for the preservation and management of both of these areas is still in the preliminary stages. The decision to clearly set out preservation plans, and the demarcation of boundaries of protected areas are of crucial importance since these areas are exposed to degradation and destruction by incompatible activities such as mining, forestry and road building.
In conclusion we should note that it is clear from the preceding discussion that there is cause for much concern over the relationship of environmental sustainability to the promotion of human development in Guyana. The dynamic interaction of people, habitat and natural resources reveal tensions and pressures which question the capacity of existing institutions to promote SHD in Guyana. In addition to the points raised previously we should also note that several other issues need to be addressed. These are listed below in no specific order of importance: