Abstract

Tropical forests, and more concretely, the Amazon Basin and the Chocó-Darién, are highly affected by deforestation activities. Households are the main land-use decision-makers and are key agents for forest conservation and deforestation. Understanding the determinants of deforestation at the household level is critical for conservation policies and sustainable development. We explore the drivers of household deforestation decisions, focusing on the quality of the forest resources (timber volume potential) and the institutional environment (conservation strategies, titling, and governmental grants). Both aspects are hypothesized to influence deforestation, but there is little empirical evidence. We address the following questions: (i) Does timber availability attract more deforestation? (ii) Do conservation strategies (incentive-based programs in the Central Amazon and protected areas in the Chocó-Darién) influence deforestation decisions in household located outside the areas under conservation? (iii) Does the absence of titling increase the odds of a household to deforest? (iv) Can governmental grants for poverty alleviation help in the fight against deforestation? We estimated a logit model, where the dependent variable reflects whether or not a household cleared forest within the farm. As predictors, we included the above variables and controlled by household-specific characteristics. This study was conducted in the Central Amazon and the Chocó-Darién of Ecuador, two major deforestation fronts in the country. We found that timber volume potential is associated with a higher odds of deforesting in the Central Amazon, but with a lower odds in the Chocó-Darién. Although conservation strategies can influence household decisions, the effects are context-dependent. Households near the incentive-based program (Central Amazon) have a lower odds of deforesting, whereas households near a protected area (Chocó-Darién) showed the opposite effect. Titling is also important for deforestation reduction; more attention is needed in the Chocó-Darién where numerous households are living in untitled lands. Finally, governmental grants for poverty alleviation showed the potential to generate positive environmental outcomes.

Highlights

  • The world’s forest area declined from 4128 M ha in the 1990s to 3999 M ha in 2015 [1], with an annual net forest loss of 4.7 M ha between 2010 and 2020 [2]

  • We address the following questions: (i) Does timber availability attract more deforestation? (ii) Do conservation strategies (SBP and protected areas (PAs)) influence deforestation decisions in households located outside the areas under conservation? (iii) Does the absence of titling increase the odds of deforestation at the farm level? (iv) Can governmental grants for poverty alleviation help in the fight against deforestation? We estimated a logit model, where the dependent variable indicates whether or not forest was cleared by a household in the farm

  • We focus on three policies within the institutional environment: (i) forest conservation strategies including the incentive-based program Socio Bosque program (SBP) and a command and control policy such as PAs; (ii) property rights measured through titling; and (iii) governmental grants for poverty alleviation

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The world’s forest area declined from 4128 M ha in the 1990s to 3999 M ha in 2015 [1], with an annual net forest loss of 4.7 M ha between 2010 and 2020 [2]. Within South America, the Amazon Basin and the Chocó-Darién are two important ecoregions due to their role in sustaining biodiversity, supplying local and global ecosystem services, and supporting local livelihoods [3,4,5,6]. Both regions are, highly threatened by deforestation activities. The Chocó-Darién is highly deforested on the Ecuadorian side [13,14] and has the highest deforestation rate in both the entire ecoregion and within South America [7,15]. Compared with the Chocó-Darién, the Central Amazon demonstrates low deforestation rates [7], yet it is experiencing a gradual forest decline

Methods
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call