Study: Land Return to Mapuche in Chile Did Not Boost Native

The restitution of over 217,000 hectares of land to Mapuche communities in southern Chile did not lead to gains in natural forest cover, carbon sequestration, or biodiversity. A study published in Nature Sustainability found the process resulted in a shift to grasslands and a decline in non-native tree plantations, but no significant improvement in key environmental metrics.

Researchers from the University of California Santa Barbara and other institutions analyzed satellite and administrative data from 1,577 properties across 36 communities. They compared land use before and after restitution under Chile's Indigenous Land and Water Fund (FTAI), which transferred land between 1994 and 2022. The primary goal of the FTAI, established by a 1993 law, is to address historical dispossession, not conservation.

Shifts in Land Use After Restitution

The study found that after receiving land, Mapuche communities expanded grasslands for livestock and reduced areas of commercial pine and eucalyptus plantations. The land returned was often already degraded from decades of intensive agriculture and forestry. Very little native forest remained on the restituted properties.

Verónica Figueroa Huencho, a Mapuche academic at the University of Chile not involved in the study, explained the context via email. "Most communities usually receive fragmented, degraded or plantation-covered lands," she said. "Recovering ownership does not mean immediately restoring a native forest."

Challenging a Romanticized Narrative

The findings complicate a common assumption that Indigenous self-determination automatically leads to environmental restoration. Study co-author Robert Heilmayr told Mongabay that conservation advocates have sometimes held "romanticized views" of what self-determination means. He argued true self-determination allows communities to define land uses aligned with their own needs and values.

The research emphasizes that restitution's core objectives are historical justice and Indigenous self-determination, not conservation performance. Huencho warned against conditioning land return on environmental outcomes defined by outsiders. "The lands are not returned because a community captures more carbon, but because there was dispossession," she stated.

Historical Context and Practical Constraints

Mapuche lands were densely forested before the Spanish introduced livestock in the 16th century. Military campaigns in the late 19th century stripped the Mapuche of over 90% of their territory, with remaining reservations rapidly deforested for wheat and industrial plantations.

Several factors influence post-restitution land use. These include the degraded condition of the land, the distance of restituted parcels from community reservations, and a lack of strong institutions for managing collective lands due to historical disruption. Huencho noted that achieving specific environmental outcomes, if communities choose them, requires time, financial resources, and technical assistance.

The study's authors stress their findings are specific to the Mapuche in southern Chile and that impacts of land restitution vary case by case. The land titling process itself, managed by the National Corporation for Indigenous Development (CONADI), has been criticized as slow, with some claims taking 25 years. A 2023 commission estimated it could take between 80 and 162 years to clear the existing backlog of claims.