No evidence of local deforestation leakage from protected areas establishment in Brazil's Amazon and Atlantic Forest

Barros, Luizmar de Assis; Venter, Michelle; Delgado, Juan Pablo Ramirez; Coelho, Marcondes Geraldo; Venter, Oscar

doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2022.109695

Cited by 8 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Protected area spillover can influence deforestation patterns in the landscape. Evidence shows that in the case of South America, the effect of blockage can be more prevalent than that of leakage (De Assis Barros et al., 2022; Fuller et al., 2019). Additionally, a recent study done in Colombia found that deforestation increased both inside and in the surroundings of PAs after the peace agreement with FARC, but it was higher inside PAs (Clerici et al., 2020).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We also explored a more extreme case—attributing a percentage of 25%, 50%, 75% and 100% leakage to the proposed PAs under the risk‐prevention approach only, for each species target, while maintaining a hypothetical 0% leakage for the risk‐avoidance approach. Potential blockage, where the unprotected surroundings of PAs experience less land‐use change than would have otherwise occurred due to a positive spillover effect (leakage) (De Assis Barros et al., 2022; Fuller et al., 2019), was not modeled as this would only increase the effect that we reported in the main analysis.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Conservation planning for retention, not just protection

Negret,

Venegas,

Sonter

et al. 2024

Global Change Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most protected area (PA) planning aims to improve biota representation within the PA system, but this does not necessarily achieve the best outcomes for biota retention across regions when we also consider habitat loss in areas outside the PA system. Here, we assess the implications that different PA expansion strategies can have on the retention of species habitat across an entire region. Using retention of forest habitat for Colombia's 550 forest‐dependent bird species as our outcome variable, we found that when a minimum of 30% of each species' habitat was included in the PA system, a pattern of PA expansion targeting areas at highest deforestation risk (risk‐prevention) led to the retention, on average, of 7.2% more forest habitat per species by 2050 than did a pattern that targeted areas at lowest risk (risk‐avoidance). The risk‐prevention approach cost more per km2 of land conserved, but it was more cost‐effective in retaining habitat in the landscape (50%–69% lower cost per km2 of avoided deforestation). To have the same effectiveness preventing habitat loss in Colombia, the risk‐avoidance approach would require more than twice as much protected area, costing three times more in the process. Protected area expansion should focus on the contributions of PAs to outcomes not only within PA systems themselves, but across entire regions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conservation planning for retention, not just protection

Negret,

Venegas,

Sonter

et al. 2024

Global Change Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the Amazon, more than 12,000 square kilometers of vegetation burned in 2021, impacting fauna, flora, and human health [44]. Conservation units face high deforestation rates due to human actions such as invasion, pasture opening, and logging [45,46]. Deforestation in conservation units in the Amazon is increasing, causing environmental, social, and economic impacts [47].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Limits and Possibilities of Vegetable Extraction in Extractive Reserves in the Amazon

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Vegetable extraction has been considered a new paradigm of adequate development for the Amazon Region by ecological movements, international organizations, and foreign governments. This study evaluates whether the supply of extractive products transformed into economic value can ensure the livelihood of families and prevent deforestation. The study was conducted at the extractive reserves Alto Juruá, Rio Ouro Preto, and Rio Cajari during two periods: January to March 2017 and January to March 2019. A total of 384 interviews were conducted—234 in 2017 and 150 in 2019. The field results show that low returns, low land productivity, and lack of labor point to the economic infeasibility of vegetable extraction in the extractive reserves of Alto Juruá, Rio Ouro, and Rio Cajari. As a priority, extractivism should be considered a cultural institution and an economic model that can promote sustainability. A strategy capable of valuing products derived from extractivism should be developed, and an approximation of the markets that remediates the efforts of forest conservationists should be considered.

show abstract

“…However, although PAs in Brazil have proven effective in curbing deforestation, and part of the protection is partially extended to the buffer zone (Barros et al, 2022;Gonçalves-Souza et al, 2021), their effectiveness in conserving freshwater ecosystem biodiversity is expected to be lower.…”

Section: Protection Of Rivers Within Protected Areasmentioning

confidence: 99%

Looking upstream: analyzing the protection of the drainage area of Amazon rivers

Cavalcante,

Fleischmann,

PONTES

2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the Amazon, aquatic ecosystems provide essential ecosystem services, including transportation, food, and livelihoods for millions of species. Land use changes and management impact these ecosystem services and these impacts are not limited to the specific areas where they occur but propagate downstream along the drainage network. However, assessment of the accumulated human footprint upstream of Amazonian rivers has been largely overlooked. Here, we provide explicit spatial information on accumulated deforestation, mining, and protection across the river network. We aim to indicate the most impacted rivers and where the consideration of the watershed concept could improve the security of Conservation Units and Indigenous Lands in the Amazon. Our results show that 50% of the Amazonian rivers are pristine (less than 1% deforestation upstream), and 5% have some upstream mining area. However, almost half of the rivers in protected areas are, in truth, unprotected because the delimitation of the protected area does not cover its upstream drainage areas. Finally, our analyses identify hotspots of accumulated deforestation and mining and highlight the potential vulnerability of the rivers within protected areas due to upstream deforestation, allowing decision-makers to rethink the conservation status of the Amazonian aquatic ecosystems.

show abstract

No evidence of local deforestation leakage from protected areas establishment in Brazil's Amazon and Atlantic Forest

Cited by 8 publications

References 56 publications

Conservation planning for retention, not just protection

Conservation planning for retention, not just protection

Limits and Possibilities of Vegetable Extraction in Extractive Reserves in the Amazon

Looking upstream: analyzing the protection of the drainage area of Amazon rivers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About