IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0203545.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Are government incentives effective for avoided deforestation in the tropical Andean forest?

Author

Listed:
  • Pablo Cuenca
  • Juan Robalino
  • Rodrigo Arriagada
  • Cristian Echeverría

Abstract

In order to ensure the provision of goods and services from forests, many governments have promoted less-traditional conservation initiatives such as programs of payments for ecosystem services called, more broadly, direct payments for conservation. The Socio Bosque Program (SBP) is a governmental program in Ecuador that directly provides economic incentives to rural families and local and indigenous communities who have voluntarily agreed to comply with some conservation activities. An impact evaluation method (matching) was used to assess the impact of the SBP between 2008 and 2014. This study revealed that on average, the SBP reduced deforestation by 1.5% in those forests that received the SBP’s direct payment. These forests would have been deforested if the SBP had not been implemented. Assessment of the impact of the SBP on individual and collective contracts, using the matching method, revealed that 3.4% and roughly 1% of the forest would have been deforested in the absence of the program, respectively. In other words, the protected area in the collective SBP was 1,247,500 ha and, if the SBP had not been implemented, an area of 11,227 ha would have been lost between 2008 and 2014. The 165,700 ha protected by the individual SBP, it was estimated that 5,733 ha were not deforested due to the implementation of the conservation program. Conventional estimates of the impact of the SBP tend to overestimate avoided deforestation because they do not control for observable covariates that correlate with or affect both SBP participation and deforestation. The conclusions are robust, even given potential hidden biases. The present study demonstrated that the SBP serves to mitigate the effects of climate change, especially with those contracts that are intended for individual owners.

Suggested Citation

  • Pablo Cuenca & Juan Robalino & Rodrigo Arriagada & Cristian Echeverría, 2018. "Are government incentives effective for avoided deforestation in the tropical Andean forest?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(9), pages 1-14, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0203545
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0203545
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0203545
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0203545&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0203545?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bray, David Barton & Antinori, Camille & Torres-Rojo, Juan Manuel, 2006. "The Mexican model of community forest management: The role of agrarian policy, forest policy and entrepreneurial organization," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 470-484, June.
    2. Cuenca, Pablo & Arriagada, Rodrigo & Echeverría, Cristian, 2016. "How much deforestation do protected areas avoid in tropical Andean landscapes?," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 56-66.
    3. Daniela A. Miteva & Subhrendu K. Pattanayak & Paul J. Ferraro, 2012. "Evaluation of biodiversity policy instruments: what works and what doesn’t?," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 28(1), pages 69-92, Spring.
    4. Abadie, Alberto & Imbens, Guido W., 2011. "Bias-Corrected Matching Estimators for Average Treatment Effects," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 29(1), pages 1-11.
    5. Bennett, Michael T., 2008. "China's sloping land conversion program: Institutional innovation or business as usual?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 699-711, May.
    6. Hayes, Tanya & Murtinho, Felipe & Wolff, Hendrik, 2015. "An institutional analysis of Payment for Environmental Services on collectively managed lands in Ecuador," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 81-89.
    7. Echeverria, Cristian & Coomes, David A. & Hall, Myrna & Newton, Adrian C., 2008. "Spatially explicit models to analyze forest loss and fragmentation between 1976 and 2020 in southern Chile," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 212(3), pages 439-449.
    8. Ho, Daniel E. & Imai, Kosuke & King, Gary & Stuart, Elizabeth A., 2007. "Matching as Nonparametric Preprocessing for Reducing Model Dependence in Parametric Causal Inference," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(3), pages 199-236, July.
    9. Norman Myers & Russell A. Mittermeier & Cristina G. Mittermeier & Gustavo A. B. da Fonseca & Jennifer Kent, 2000. "Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities," Nature, Nature, vol. 403(6772), pages 853-858, February.
    10. Muñoz-Piña, Carlos & Guevara, Alejandro & Torres, Juan Manuel & Braña, Josefina, 2008. "Paying for the hydrological services of Mexico's forests: Analysis, negotiations and results," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 725-736, May.
    11. Kemkes, Robin J. & Farley, Joshua & Koliba, Christopher J., 2010. "Determining when payments are an effective policy approach to ecosystem service provision," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 2069-2074, September.
    12. Juan Robalino & Alexander Pfaff, 2013. "Ecopayments and Deforestation in Costa Rica: A Nationwide Analysis of PSA’s Initial Years," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 89(3), pages 432-448.
    13. Pfaff, Alexander & Robalino, Juan & Lima, Eirivelthon & Sandoval, Catalina & Herrera, Luis Diego, 2014. "Governance, Location and Avoided Deforestation from Protected Areas: Greater Restrictions Can Have Lower Impact, Due to Differences in Location," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 7-20.
    14. Pfaff Alexander & Robalino Juan & Sanchez-Azofeifa G. Arturo & Andam Kwaw S & Ferraro Paul J, 2009. "Park Location Affects Forest Protection: Land Characteristics Cause Differences in Park Impacts across Costa Rica," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 9(2), pages 1-26, July.
    15. Angelsen, Arild & Kaimowitz, David, 1999. "Rethinking the Causes of Deforestation: Lessons from Economic Models," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 14(1), pages 73-98, February.
    16. Rodrigo A. Arriagada, & Paul J. Ferraro & Erin O. Sills & Subhrendu K. Pattanayak & Silvia Cordero-Sancho, 2012. "Do Payments for Environmental Services Affect Forest Cover? A Farm-Level Evaluation from Costa Rica," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 88(2), pages 382-399.
    17. Kelly J. Wendland & Matthias Baumann & David J. Lewis & Anika Sieber & Volker C. Radeloff, 2015. "Protected Area Effectiveness in European Russia: A Postmatching Panel Data Analysis," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 91(1), pages 149-168.
    18. Juan Robalino & Catalina Sandoval & David N Barton & Adriana Chacon & Alexander Pfaff, 2015. "Evaluating Interactions of Forest Conservation Policies on Avoided Deforestation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(4), pages 1-16, April.
    19. Turpie, J.K. & Marais, C. & Blignaut, J.N., 2008. "The working for water programme: Evolution of a payments for ecosystem services mechanism that addresses both poverty and ecosystem service delivery in South Africa," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 788-798, May.
    20. Pablo Cuenca & Cristian Echeverria, 2017. "How do protected landscapes associated with high biodiversity and population levels change?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(7), pages 1-17, July.
    21. Southgate, Douglas & Sierra, Rodrigo & Brown, Lawrence, 1991. "The causes of tropical deforestation in Ecuador: A statistical analysis," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 19(9), pages 1145-1151, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Etchart, Nicolle & Freire, José Luis & Holland, Margaret B. & Jones, Kelly W. & Naughton-Treves, Lisa, 2020. "What happens when the money runs out? Forest outcomes and equity concerns following Ecuador’s suspension of conservation payments," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    2. Robalino, Juan & Pfaff, Alexander & Sandoval, Catalina & Sanchez-Azofeifa, G. Arturo, 2021. "Can we increase the impacts from payments for ecosystem services? Impact rose over time in Costa Rica, yet spatial variation indicates more potential," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    3. David López-Carr, 2021. "A Review of Small Farmer Land Use and Deforestation in Tropical Forest Frontiers: Implications for Conservation and Sustainable Livelihoods," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-23, October.
    4. Niaz Ahmed Khan & Junaid Kabir Choudhury & A. Z. M. Manzoor Rashid & Mohammad Raqibul Hasan Siddique & Karishma Sinha, 2022. "Co-Management Practices by Non-Government Organizations (NGOs) in Selected Coastal Forest Zones of Bangladesh: A Focus on Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-21, November.
    5. Javier Montoya-Zumaeta & Eduardo Rojas & Sven Wunder, 2019. "Adding rewards to regulation: The impacts of watershed conservation on land cover and household wellbeing in Moyobamba, Peru," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(11), pages 1-22, November.
    6. Fischer, Richard & Tamayo Cordero, Fabian & Ojeda Luna, Tatiana & Ferrer Velasco, Rubén & DeDecker, Maria & Torres, Bolier & Giessen, Lukas & Günter, Sven, 2021. "Interplay of governance elements and their effects on deforestation in tropical landscapes: Quantitative insights from Ecuador," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    7. Ojeda Luna, Tatiana & Zhunusova, Eliza & Günter, Sven & Dieter, Matthias, 2020. "Measuring forest and agricultural income in the Ecuadorian lowland rainforest frontiers: Do deforestation and conservation strategies matter?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    8. Fischer, Richard & Lippe, Melvin & Dolom, Priscilla & Kalaba, Felix Kanungwe & Tamayo, Fabian & Torres, Bolier, 2023. "Effectiveness of policy instrument mixes for forest conservation in the tropics – Stakeholder perceptions from Ecuador, the Philippines and Zambia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    9. Sarker, Pradip Kumar & Fischer, Richard & Tamayo, Fabian & Navarrete, Bolier Torres & Günter, Sven, 2022. "Analyzing forest policy mixes based on the coherence of policies and the consistency of legislative policy instruments: A case study from Ecuador," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    10. Gallemore, Caleb & Pham, Thu Thuy & Hamilton, Matthew & Munroe, Darla K., 2024. "Vietnam's Payments for Forest Ecosystem Services scheme's puzzling role in protecting longstanding forests as deforestation rates rise," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 217(C).
    11. Jin Kyoung Noh & Cristian Echeverria & Gabriel Gaona & Janina Kleemann & Hongmi Koo & Christine Fürst & Pablo Cuenca, 2022. "Forest Ecosystem Fragmentation in Ecuador: Challenges for Sustainable Land Use in the Tropical Andean," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-16, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gwenolé Le Velly & Céline Dutilly, 2016. "Evaluating Payments for Environmental Services: Methodological Challenges," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(2), pages 1-20, February.
    2. Sims, Katharine R.E. & Alix-Garcia, Jennifer M., 2017. "Parks versus PES: Evaluating direct and incentive-based land conservation in Mexico," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 8-28.
    3. Gwenolé Le Velly & Alexandre Sauquet & Sergio Cortina-Villar, 2017. "PES Impact and Leakages over Several Cohorts: The Case of the PSA-H in Yucatan, Mexico," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 93(2), pages 230-257.
    4. Sébastien Desbureaux & Eric Nazindigouba Kere & Pascale Combes Motel, 2016. "Impact Evaluation in a Landscape: Protected Natural Forests, Anthropized Forested Lands and Deforestation Leakages in Madagascar's Rainforests," Working Papers halshs-01342182, HAL.
    5. Jones, Kelly W. & Muñoz Brenes, Carlos L. & Shinbrot, Xoco A. & López-Báez, Walter & Rivera-Castañeda, Andrómeda, 2018. "The influence of cash and technical assistance on household-level outcomes in payments for hydrological services programs in Chiapas, Mexico," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PA), pages 208-218.
    6. Sébastien Costedoat & Esteve Corbera & Driss Ezzine-de-Blas & Jordi Honey-Rosés & Kathy Baylis & Miguel Angel Castillo-Santiago, 2015. "How Effective Are Biodiversity Conservation Payments in Mexico?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(3), pages 1-20, March.
    7. Pablo Cuenca & Cristian Echeverria, 2017. "How do protected landscapes associated with high biodiversity and population levels change?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(7), pages 1-17, July.
    8. Desbureaux Sébastien & Eric Kéré Nazindigouba & Combes Motel Pascale, 2016. "Working Paper 238 - Impact Evaluation in a Landscape: protected natural forests, anthropized forested lands and deforestation leakages in Madagascar’s rainforests," Working Paper Series 2341, African Development Bank.
    9. Delacote, Philippe & Le Velly, Gwenolé & Simonet, Gabriela, 2022. "Revisiting the location bias and additionality of REDD+ projects: the role of project proponents status and certification," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    10. Jennifer M. Alix-Garcia & Elizabeth N. Shapiro & Katharine R. E. Sims, 2012. "Forest Conservation and Slippage: Evidence from Mexico’s National Payments for Ecosystem Services Program," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 88(4), pages 613-638.
    11. Ina, Porras & Bruce, Alyward & Jeff, Dengel, 2013. "Monitoring payments for watershed services schemes in developing countries," MPRA Paper 47185, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Kelly J. Wendland & Matthias Baumann & David J. Lewis & Anika Sieber & Volker C. Radeloff, 2015. "Protected Area Effectiveness in European Russia: A Postmatching Panel Data Analysis," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 91(1), pages 149-168.
    13. Börner, Jan & Baylis, Kathy & Corbera, Esteve & Ezzine-de-Blas, Driss & Honey-Rosés, Jordi & Persson, U. Martin & Wunder, Sven, 2017. "The Effectiveness of Payments for Environmental Services," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 359-374.
    14. Jones, Kelly W. & Mayer, Alex & Von Thaden, Juan & Berry, Z. Carter & López-Ramírez, Sergio & Salcone, Jacob & Manson, Robert H. & Asbjornsen, Heidi, 2020. "Measuring the net benefits of payments for hydrological services programs in Mexico," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    15. Schomers, Sarah & Matzdorf, Bettina, 2013. "Payments for ecosystem services: A review and comparison of developing and industrialized countries," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 16-30.
    16. Philippe Delacote & Gwenolé Le Velly & Gabriela Simonet, 2020. "Distinguishing potential and effective additionality to revisit the location bias of REDD+ project," Working Papers hal-01954923, HAL.
    17. Camilo De Los Rios Rueda, 2020. "The Double Fence: Overlapping Institutions and Deforestation in the Colombian Amazon," Documentos CEDE 18007, Universidad de los Andes, Facultad de Economía, CEDE.
    18. Chervier, Colas & Costedoat, Sébastien, 2017. "Heterogeneous Impact of a Collective Payment for Environmental Services Scheme on Reducing Deforestation in Cambodia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 148-159.
    19. Mohebalian, Phillip M. & Aguilar, Francisco X., 2018. "Beneath the Canopy: Tropical Forests Enrolled in Conservation Payments Reveal Evidence of Less Degradation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 64-73.
    20. Kaczan, David & Pfaff, Alexander & Rodriguez, Luz & Shapiro-Garza, Elizabeth, 2017. "Increasing the impact of collective incentives in payments for ecosystem services," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 48-67.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0203545. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.