What Drives the Erasure of Protected Areas? Evidence from across the Brazilian Amazon

被引:27
作者
Keles, Derya [1 ]
Delacote, Philippe [1 ,2 ]
Pfaff, Alexander [3 ]
Qin, Siyu [4 ,5 ]
Mascia, Michael B. [5 ]
机构
[1] Univ Lorraine, Univ Strasbourg, Bur Econ Theor & Appl BETA, INRAE,AgroParisTech,CNRS, Nancy, France
[2] Climate Econ Chair, Paris, France
[3] Duke Univ, Sanford Sch Publ Policy, Durham, NC USA
[4] Humboldt Univ, Geog Dept, D-12489 Berlin, Germany
[5] Conservat Int, Moore Ctr Sci, Arlington, VA USA
关键词
Land use; Forest; Protected area; Conservation; PADDD; Amazon; Brazil; AVOIDED DEFORESTATION; DEGAZETTEMENT PADDD; LAND-USE; ADVOCACY COALITIONS; CONSERVATION; LOCATION; BIODIVERSITY; PERFORMANCE; GOVERNANCE; IMPACTS;
D O I
10.1016/j.ecolecon.2020.106733
中图分类号
Q14 [生态学(生物生态学)];
学科分类号
071012 ; 0713 ;
摘要
Protected areas (PAs) are a widely used strategy for conserving forests and ecosystem services. When PAs succeed in deterring economic activities that degrade forests, the impacts include more forest yet less economic gain. These economic opportunity costs of conservation lead actors with economic interests to resist new PAs, driving their sites away from profitable market centers and towards areas featuring lower opportunity costs. Further, after PAs are created, economic actors may want PA downgrading, downsizing, and degazettement (collectively PADDD). We examine reductions in PAs' spatial extent - downsizings (partial erasures) and degazettements (complete erasures) - that presumably reduce protection. Using data for the entire Brazilian Amazon from PADDDtracker.org, our empirical analyses explore whether size reductions from 2006 to 2015 resulted from bargaining between development and conservation. We find that the risks of PA size reductions are raised by: lower travel costs (as implied by distances to roads and cities), which affect economic gains and enforcement; greater PA size, which affects enforcement; and more prior internal deforestation, which lowers the impacts of size reductions. These dynamics of protection offer insights on the potentially conflicting factors that lead to PA size reductions, with implications for policymaking to enhance PA effectiveness and permanence.
引用
收藏
页数:15
相关论文
共 80 条
[1]   The Ability to Influence: A Comparative Analysis of the Role of Advocacy Coalitions in Brazilian Climate Politics [J].
Aamodt, Solveig .
REVIEW OF POLICY RESEARCH, 2018, 35 (03) :372-397
[2]   Rule of Law and Avoided Deforestation from Protected Areas [J].
Abman, Ryan .
ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS, 2018, 146 :282-289
[3]   Spatial modeling of extraction and enforcement in developing country protected areas [J].
Albers, H. J. .
RESOURCE AND ENERGY ECONOMICS, 2010, 32 (02) :165-179
[4]   Measuring the effectiveness of protected area networks in reducing deforestation [J].
Andam, Kwaw S. ;
Ferraro, Paul J. ;
Pfaff, Alexander ;
Sanchez-Azofeifa, G. Arturo ;
Robalino, Juan A. .
PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 2008, 105 (42) :16089-16094
[5]   Energy development reveals blind spots for ecosystem conservation in the Amazon Basin [J].
Anderson, Elizabeth P. ;
Osborne, Tracey ;
Maldonado-Ocampo, Javier A. ;
Mills-Novoa, Megan ;
Castello, Leandro ;
Montoya, Mariana ;
Encalada, Andrea C. ;
Jenkins, Clinton N. .
FRONTIERS IN ECOLOGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT, 2019, 17 (09) :521-528
[6]  
Anderson L. O., 2016, Technical report
[7]  
[Anonymous], 2016, The World database on protected areas (WDPA)
[8]  
[Anonymous], 2015, Enterprise Architecture, Document Version 3.08
[9]  
[Anonymous], 2017, PRODES DEF
[10]  
[Anonymous], 2006, WILDF DAT SPEC DISTR