RESUMO
Protected areas are a popular policy instrument in the global fight against loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services. However, the effectiveness of protected areas in preventing deforestation, and their impacts on poverty, are not well understood. Recent studies have found that Bolivia's protected-area system, on average, reduced deforestation and poverty. We implement several non-parametric and semi-parametric econometric estimators to characterize the heterogeneity in Bolivia's protected-area impacts on joint deforestation and poverty outcomes across a number of socioeconomic and biophysical moderators. Like previous studies from Costa Rica and Thailand, we find that Bolivia's protected areas are not associated with poverty traps. Our results also indicate that protection did not have a differential impact on indigenous populations. However, results from new multidimensional non-parametric estimators provide evidence that the biophysical characteristics associated with the greatest avoided deforestation are the characteristics associated with the potential for poverty exacerbation from protection. We demonstrate that these results would not be identified using the methods implemented in previous studies. Thus, this study provides valuable practical information on the impacts of Bolivia's protected areas for conservation practitioners and demonstrates methods that are likely to be valuable to researchers interested in better understanding the heterogeneity in conservation impacts.
Assuntos
Conservação dos Recursos Naturais/economia , Pobreza , Animais , Biodiversidade , Bolívia , Cidades , Conservação dos Recursos Naturais/métodos , Conservação dos Recursos Naturais/estatística & dados numéricos , Ecossistema , Humanos , Modelos Lineares , Modelos Econômicos , Grupos Populacionais , Pobreza/estatística & dados numéricos , Mudança Social , Fatores SocioeconômicosRESUMO
Scholars have made great advances in modeling and mapping ecosystem services, and in assigning economic values to these services. This modeling and valuation scholarship is often disconnected from evidence about how actual conservation programs have affected ecosystem services, however. Without a stronger evidence base, decision makers find it difficult to use the insights from modeling and valuation to design effective policies and programs. To strengthen the evidence base, scholars have advanced our understanding of the causal pathways between conservation actions and environmental outcomes, but their studies measure impacts on imperfect proxies for ecosystem services (e.g., avoidance of deforestation). To be useful to decision makers, these impacts must be translated into changes in ecosystem services and values. To illustrate how this translation can be done, we estimated the impacts of protected areas in Brazil, Costa Rica, Indonesia, and Thailand on carbon storage in forests. We found that protected areas in these conservation hotspots have stored at least an additional 1,000 Mt of CO2 in forests and have delivered ecosystem services worth at least $5 billion. This aggregate impact masks important spatial heterogeneity, however. Moreover, the spatial variability of impacts on carbon storage is the not the same as the spatial variability of impacts on avoided deforestation. These findings lead us to describe a research program that extends our framework to study other ecosystem services, to uncover the mechanisms by which ecosystem protection benefits humans, and to tie cost-benefit analyses to conservation planning so that we can obtain the greatest return on scarce conservation funds.
Assuntos
Conservação dos Recursos Naturais/economia , Ecossistema , Pobreza/economia , Brasil , Sequestro de Carbono , Análise Custo-Benefício , Costa Rica , Meio Ambiente , Política Ambiental/economia , Florestas , Humanos , Indonésia , Modelos Econômicos , TailândiaRESUMO
To develop effective environmental policies, we must understand the mechanisms through which the policies affect social and environmental outcomes. Unfortunately, empirical evidence about these mechanisms is limited, and little guidance for quantifying them exists. We develop an approach to quantifying the mechanisms through which protected areas affect poverty. We focus on three mechanisms: changes in tourism and recreational services; changes in infrastructure in the form of road networks, health clinics, and schools; and changes in regulating and provisioning ecosystem services and foregone production activities that arise from land-use restrictions. The contributions of ecotourism and other ecosystem services to poverty alleviation in the context of a real environmental program have not yet been empirically estimated. Nearly two-thirds of the poverty reduction associated with the establishment of Costa Rican protected areas is causally attributable to opportunities afforded by tourism. Although protected areas reduced deforestation and increased regrowth, these land cover changes neither reduced nor exacerbated poverty, on average. Protected areas did not, on average, affect our measures of infrastructure and thus did not contribute to poverty reduction through this mechanism. We attribute the remaining poverty reduction to unobserved dimensions of our mechanisms or to other mechanisms. Our study empirically estimates previously unidentified contributions of ecotourism and other ecosystem services to poverty alleviation in the context of a real environmental program. We demonstrate that, with existing data and appropriate empirical methods, conservation scientists and policymakers can begin to elucidate the mechanisms through which ecosystem conservation programs affect human welfare.
Assuntos
Conservação dos Recursos Naturais/economia , Conservação dos Recursos Naturais/métodos , Ecossistema , Pobreza/prevenção & controle , Avaliação de Programas e Projetos de Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Costa Rica , Humanos , Pobreza/estatística & dados numéricos , Análise de Regressão , Fatores SocioeconômicosRESUMO
Protected areas are the dominant approach to protecting biodiversity and the supply of ecosystem services. Because these protected areas are often placed in regions with widespread poverty and because they can limit agricultural development and exploitation of natural resources, concerns have been raised about their potential to create or reinforce poverty traps. Previous studies suggest that the protected area systems in Costa Rica and Thailand, on average, reduced deforestation and alleviated poverty. We examine these results in more detail by characterizing the heterogeneity of responses to protection conditional on observable characteristics. We find no evidence that protected areas trap historically poorer areas in poverty. In fact, we find that poorer areas at baseline seem to have the greatest levels of poverty reduction as a result of protection. However, we do find that the spatial characteristics associated with the most poverty alleviation are not necessarily the characteristics associated with the most avoided deforestation. We show how an understanding of these spatially heterogeneous responses to protection can be used to generate suitability maps that identify locations in which both environmental and poverty alleviation goals are most likely to be achieved.