Land privatization and deforestation in a commodity production frontier

Abstract

Conservation policies often promote land privatization to reduce incentives for deforestation. However, empirical evidence on the relationship between land‐tenure form and forest conservation outcomes is inconclusive. We combined key informant mapping and geospatial analyses to test the association between the area under tenure and the area deforested by extra‐local private and local nonprivate agents in the Argentine Dry Chaco over four decades (1976–2016). The study area is a typical commodity production frontier within a global deforestation hotspot. We found a strong spatial and temporal coupling between the area under tenure and the area deforested by extra‐local private agents from 1987 to 2006, when a 59% increase in the former was accompanied by a 508% increase in the latter. Local private agents maintained high levels of forest cover, similarly to local nonprivate agents. Our findings have implications for the adaptive design of the Forest Law in the Argentine Dry Chaco.

Transformative governance for linking forest and landscape restoration to human well-being in Latin America

“…However, external pressures, including tree planting, have triggered the appropriation and privatization of indigenous and local peoples´ lands (Ceddia et al 2015(Ceddia et al , 2019Brancalion et al 2020), posing a threat to local livelihoods. For example, the Cerrado in Brazil and the Chaco in Argentina are experiencing increasing rates of large-scale agriculture-driven deforestation associated with the privatization of forest and savanna lands formerly occupied by indigenous and local communities (Faingerch et al 2021;Jepson et al 2010). Other examples are those areas of low agricultural suitability or abandoned where the natural regeneration of forests can be the most costeffective strategy for increasing forest cover (Chazdon and Guariguata 2016).…”

Impacto de la ley nacional de bosques nativos sobre su conservación

“…A diferencia de los procesos previos de expansión agrícola que habían sido en gran parte planificados y destinados a colonias de pequeños productores (Barsky & Gelman, 2001), la expansión de los últimos 30 años se dio con bajo o nulo planeamiento y control estatal, tanto nacional como provincial y promovido por establecimientos de grandes y medianos productores Faingerch, Vallejos, Texeira, & Mastrangelo, 2021). Esta ausencia del Estado y la falta de planificación, en una zona donde la tenencia de la tierra muchas veces es endeble o se carece de títulos de propiedad (Costantino, 2016;Goldfarb & Van der Haar, 2016), trajo aparejado un aumento de la conflictividad social (De Dios, 2006;Aguiar, Texeira, Paruelo, & Román, 2016), llegando en algunos casos a la expulsión de pequeños productores y comunidades aborígenes (Seghezzo, y otros, 2011;Seghezzo, Venencia, Buliubasich, Iribarnegaray, & Volante, 2017).…”