Mixing Carrots and Sticks to Conserve Forests in the Brazilian Amazon: A Spatial Probabilistic Modeling Approach

Börner, Jan; Marinho, Eduardo; Wunder, Sven

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0116846

Cited by 63 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…There is evidence from the Brazilian Amazon that such policy mixes could be cost-effective and probably socially desirable, if designed in a balanced way. Introducing payments for environmental services (PES) as a complement to commandand-control measures could help balance the costs and benefits of conservation for local landholders (Börner et al 2015). This is consistent with findings from a protected area in Rwanda highlighting how PES introduced new motivations, which were linked to perceptions of equity, for local farmers to conserve forest (Martin et al 2014).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 64%

Balancing carrots and sticks in REDD+: implications for social safeguards

Duchelle¹,

Sassi²,

Jagger³

et al. 2017

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Reducing carbon emissions through avoided deforestation and forest degradation and enhancement of carbon stocks (REDD+) is key to mitigating global climate change. The aim of REDD+ social safeguards is to ensure that REDD+ does not harm, and actually benefits, local people. To be eligible for results-based compensation through REDD+, countries should develop nationallevel safeguard information systems to monitor and report on the impacts of REDD+. Although safeguards represent a key step for promoting social responsibility in REDD+, they are challenging to operationalize and monitor. We analyzed the impacts of different types of REDD+ interventions (incentives vs. disincentives) on key safeguard-relevant indicators, i.e., tenure security, participation, and subjective well-being, as well as on reported forest clearing. We used household-level data collected in Brazil, Peru, Cameroon, Tanzania, Indonesia, and Vietnam from approximately 4000 households in 130 villages at two points in time (2010-2012 and 2013-2014). Our findings highlight a decrease in perceived tenure security and overall perceived well-being over time for households exposed to disincentives alone, with the addition of incentives helping to alleviate negative effects on well-being. In Brazil, although disincentives were associated with reduced reported forest clearing by smallholders, they were the intervention that most negatively affected perceived well-being, highlighting a clear trade-off between carbon and noncarbon benefits. Globally, although households exposed to REDD+ interventions were generally aware of local REDD+ initiatives, meaningful participation in initiative design and implementation lagged behind. Our analysis contributes to a relatively small literature that seeks to operationalize REDD+ social safeguards empirically and to evaluate the impacts of REDD+ interventions on local people and forests.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 64%

Balancing carrots and sticks in REDD+: implications for social safeguards

Duchelle¹,

Sassi²,

Jagger³

et al. 2017

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Another policy aimed at reducing GHGs in Brazil is the Forest Code (Law 12651), which mandates that agricultural properties set aside a specific proportion of their property for conservation (80% for forest areas and 35% for savanna areas in the Legal Amazon and 20% in other regions). The Forest Code has been around since 1965, but enforcement was greatly improved in the 2000s through several mechanisms including fines, increased field visits, credit exclusion, and the confiscation of illegally acquired goods or assets [74]. Revisions to the Forest Code in 2012 established a Rural Environmental Registry, which requires farmers to register their property with state environmental agencies and develop a plan to come into compliance with conservation requirements [75].…”

Section: Brazilmentioning

confidence: 99%

Policies for Reintegrating Crop and Livestock Systems: A Comparative Analysis

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The reintegration of crop and livestock systems within the same land area has the potential to improve soil quality and reduce water and air pollution, while maintaining high yields and reducing risk. In this study, we characterize the degree to which federal policies in three major global food production regions that span a range of socioeconomic contexts, Brazil, New Zealand, and the United States, incentivize or disincentivize the use of integrated crop and livestock practices (ICLS). Our analysis indicates that Brazil and New Zealand have the most favorable policy environment for ICLS, while the United States provides the least favorable environment. The balance of policy incentives and disincentives across our three cases studies mirrors current patterns of ICLS usage. Brazil and New Zealand have both undergone a trend toward mixed crop livestock systems in recent years, while the United States has transitioned rapidly toward continuous crop and livestock production. If transitions to ICLS are desired, particularly in the United States, it will be necessary to change agricultural, trade, environmental, biofuels, and food safety policies that currently buffer farmers from risk, provide too few incentives for pollution reduction, and restrict the presence of animals in crop areas. It will also be necessary to invest more in research and development in all countries to identify the most profitable ICLS technologies in each region.

show abstract

“…Further, environmental protection can have high opportunity costs depending on geographic and socioeconomic factors (Börner et al 2015). May et al (2013) analyzed ICMS-E allocations in the northwest of Mato Grosso and compared the ICMS-E revenues from PA creation relative to opportunity cost of conversion to pastures.…”

Section: Cost Effectivenessmentioning

confidence: 99%