Back to Search Start Over

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

Authors :
Keles, Derya
Delacote, Philippe
Pfaff, Alexander
Qin, Siyu
Mascia, Michael B.
Source :
Ecological Economics. Oct2020, Vol. 176, pN.PAG-N.PAG. 1p.
Publication Year :
2020

Abstract

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. • We assess how factors in agencies' payoffs have affected PA size reductions across the Brazilian Amazon from 2006 to 2015. • We examine events in PADDDtracker.org Data Release Version 1.1 using relevant measures of both land and PA characteristics. • Our results suggest size reductions have development and conservation influences, rather than being only development driven. • Size reductions are more common nearer to cities, where PAs have more environmental gains, reflecting development objectives. • Size reductions are more likely given deforestation in PAs (often farther from cities), reflecting conservation objectives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
09218009
Volume :
176
Database :
Academic Search Index
Journal :
Ecological Economics
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
144892296
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2020.106733