AMAZONAS: DIVERSIDAD ECONÓMICA I Amazon region founded in 1832 with a clear influence of the colony in their area, the population census of 2007 had a population of 375 993 inhabitants of which 55.85% live in rural areas of the department , well above the national average bordering on 25%.
These are the figures according to the conventional view of rural / urban. But separating the people who "live the field" and that "lives in the city" the data are more interesting. By 2007 62% of the employed population in the Amazon is in agriculture, forestry and livestock. Ie the population living in the field is much greater even than the conventional number of rural only hints of closeness of houses in a village. This figure also nearly triple the national figure is 23.3%
This life of the field is generally in the department. At provincial level the figures are more pronounced in four of the 7 provinces. In Utcubamba, Luya, Rodríguez de Mendoza and Condorcanqui the figure is 65%, 71.7%, 72.3% and 77.6% of the population is engaged in agriculture, hunting and forestry. While reducing to 42% in Chachapoyas and Bagua and Bongará with 59.5% each.
The second item occupying larger segments of the population is retail trade. At the regional level occupies 7.2% of the population, almost half the national average of 15.5%. But the divergence provincial figure is high: 10% in Chachapoyas, the departmental capital, but only 2.6% in Condorcanqui, the largest province and as we saw shows the highest rate of agricultural employment.
The following productive activity that takes more people is the transport, storage and communications. 3.6% of the population is engaged in the sector, well below the national average. The provinces of Chachapoyas, Bagua, and Utcubamba Bongara figures are above this average, while Luya, Condorcanqui Rodríguez de Mendoza and below.
Construction, which is a very dynamic sector in recent years around the country, Amazon takes 3% of the population, almost half that reported nationally. Chachapoyas is 5.9% of its population working in construction, while Condorcanqui only 1.6% of its population.
Manufacturing activity occupies 2.6% of the population, while in the country it occupies 9.3%, ie 3.5 times.
If we calculate the ratio coefficient Location and activity sharing in the province departmental respect to participation, we noted that Amazon, the context of the country shows high relative specialization in agricultural activities.
shows a much higher ratio of 2.6878 to 1 which is the limit for defining specialization.
Within the department, however, the economic divergence shows that Condorcanqui, Luya, Rodríguez de Mendoza and Utcubamba shows relative specialization in agriculture, while the other three provinces almost did not exceed the 1-Barrea despite having the majority of its population in agriculture. Although Bongara Bagua and are close to 1, shows a departure from Chachapoyas. That show
Chachapoyas relative specialization in 16 of the 19 sectors studied is interesting. This is for the major activity that occurs as the capital of the department probably signal that represents the centralism that occurs within the department.
Another fact is with respect to retail and higher: in 4 provinces shows location coefficient greater than one we would be giving a signal of larger internal market dynamics in these provinces compared to the other. This is a very important for the authorities to direct their efforts in a focused and planned by provinces in the first place to give more support (infrastructure, licenses, permits, etc.) For economic activity so there are conditions that, secondly, to promote productive investment that invigorate the domestic market. Finally
calculating the coefficient of specialization we find that Amazon shows a degree of regional divergence in the high country. Just shows Qr of 0.3977.
A departmental level within the provincial divergence is similar. It shows that the regional economic structure as this masks the problems of the department if an overall analysis. No province resembles the regional aggregate. This is a serious problem if we see it as any province or region seems to not consistent in its economic structure.
In other words we are dealing with a department that while most of the population - as in all provinces - is engaged in agriculture, does not show a geographical unit dynamics shaped by economic issues. What it shows is a department formed from a vision of the colonial-political, administrative and religious - whose economic dynamic has not been able to set a region. In any case, what is clear is that the political-administrative structure in the department would not talk to the economic structure and thus it is difficult for public policy - that depend on the first - Have adequate guidance to address social problems in a forthcoming paper will be presented.
investments in communications infrastructure have been given as the Marginal de la Selva what he did was help a lot to believe that you can set a region, but this should be examined in more detail.
all of this, we have a highly agricultural society, whose development opportunities seem to boil down to finding ways to try and increase farm productivity, to link production to market and add value to production through regional or extra-regional investment. Other activities such as tourism which has great potential this department, not yet emerged as one of the outputs. See more
