IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v96y2020ics0264837719312153.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Correlates of forest-cover change in European Russia, 1989–2012

Author

Listed:
  • Uvsh, Delgerjargal
  • Gehlbach, Scott
  • Potapov, Peter V.
  • Munteanu, Catalina
  • Bragina, Eugenia V.
  • Radeloff, Volker C.

Abstract

European Russia rapidly transitioned after the collapse of the Soviet Union from state socialism to a market economy. How did this political and economic transformation interact with ecological conditions to determine forest loss and gain? We explore this question with a study of European Russia in the two decades following the collapse of the Soviet Union. We identify three sets of potential determinants of forest-cover change—supply-side (environmental), demand-side (economic), and political/administrative factors. Using new satellite data for three distinct types of forest-cover change—logging, forest fires, and forest gain—we quantify the relative importance of these variables in province-level regression models during periods of a) state collapse (1990s), and b) state growth (2000s). The three sets of covariates jointly explain considerable variation in the outcomes we examine, with size of forest bureaucracy, autonomous status of the region, and prevalence of evergreen forests emerging as robust predictors of forest-cover change. Overall, economic and administrative variables are significantly associated with rates of logging and reforestation, while environmental variables have high explanatory power for patterns of forest fire loss.

Suggested Citation

  • Uvsh, Delgerjargal & Gehlbach, Scott & Potapov, Peter V. & Munteanu, Catalina & Bragina, Eugenia V. & Radeloff, Volker C., 2020. "Correlates of forest-cover change in European Russia, 1989–2012," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:96:y:2020:i:c:s0264837719312153
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104648
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837719312153
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104648?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robin Burgess & Matthew Hansen & Benjamin A. Olken & Peter Potapov & Stefanie Sieber, 2012. "The Political Economy of Deforestation in the Tropics," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 127(4), pages 1707-1754.
    2. Brown, J. David & Earle, John S. & Gehlbach, Scott, 2009. "Helping Hand or Grabbing Hand? State Bureaucracy and Privatization Effectiveness," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 103(2), pages 264-283, May.
    3. Patrick Meyfroidt & Florian Schierhorn & Alexander Vladimirovich Prishchepov & Daniel Muller & Tobias Kuemmerle, 2016. "Drivers, Constraints and Trade-Offs Associated with Recultivating Abandoned Cropland in Russia, Ukraine and Kazakhstan," Spatial Economics=Prostranstvennaya Ekonomika, Economic Research Institute, Far Eastern Branch, Russian Academy of Sciences (Khabarovsk, Russia), issue 2, pages 55-103.
    4. Müller, Robert & Müller, Daniel & Schierhorn, Florian & Gerold, Gerhard & Pacheco, Pablo, 2012. "Proximate causes of deforestation in the Bolivian lowlands: an analysis of spatial dynamics," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 12(3), pages 445-459.
    5. Dunning,Thad, 2012. "Natural Experiments in the Social Sciences," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107017665, November.
    6. Jan Svejnar, 2002. "Transition Economies: Performance and Challenges," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 16(1), pages 3-28, Winter.
    7. Kelly Wendland & David Lewis & Jennifer Alix-Garcia, 2014. "The Effect of Decentralized Governance on Timber Extraction in European Russia," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 57(1), pages 19-40, January.
    8. Alcantara, Camilo & Kuemmerle, Tobias & Baumann, Matthias & Bragina, Eugenia V & Griffiths, Patrick & Hostert, Patrick & Knorn, Jan & Müller, Daniel & Prishchepov, Alexander V & Schierhorn, Florian & , 2013. "Mapping the extent of abandoned farmland in Central and Eastern Europe using MODIS time series satellite data," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 8(3), pages 1-9.
    9. Galiani,Sebastian & Sened,Itai (ed.), 2014. "Institutions, Property Rights, and Economic Growth," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107041554, June.
    10. Grigory Ioffe & Tatyana Nefedova & Kirsten de Beurs, 2014. "Agrarian transformation in the Russian breadbasket: contemporary trends as manifest in Stavropol'," Post-Soviet Affairs, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(6), pages 441-463, November.
    11. Dunning,Thad, 2012. "Natural Experiments in the Social Sciences," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107698000, November.
    12. Raj M. Desai & Lev M. Freinkman & Itzhak Goldberg, 2003. "Fiscal federalism and regional growth : evidence from the Russian Federation in the 1990s," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3138, The World Bank.
    13. André Schultz & Alexander Libman, 2015. "Is there a local knowledge advantage in federations? Evidence from a natural experiment," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 162(1), pages 25-42, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Parker Hevron, 2018. "Judicialization and Its Effects: Experiments as a Way Forward," Laws, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-21, May.
    2. Baldwin, Kate & Bhavnani, Rikhil R., 2013. "Ancillary Experiments: Opportunities and Challenges," WIDER Working Paper Series 024, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    3. Adam Brzezinski & Nuno Palma & François R. Velde, 2024. "Understanding Money Using Historical Evidence," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 16(1), pages 571-595, August.
    4. Thomas R. Dyckman & Stephen A. Zeff, 2019. "Important Issues in Statistical Testing and Recommended Improvements in Accounting Research," Econometrics, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-11, May.
    5. Grüner Sven, 2020. "Sample Size Calculation in Economic Experiments," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 240(6), pages 791-823, December.
    6. Youwei Wang & Yuxin Chen & Yi Qian, 2018. "The Causal Link between Relative Age Effect and Entrepreneurship: Evidence from 17 Million Users across 49 Years on Taobao," NBER Working Papers 25318, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Peter J. Buckley, 2016. "Historical Research Approaches to the Analysis of Internationalisation," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 56(6), pages 879-900, December.
    8. repec:jdm:journl:v:17:y:2022:i:6:p:1176-1207 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Haoge Chang & Joel Middleton & P. M. Aronow, 2021. "Exact Bias Correction for Linear Adjustment of Randomized Controlled Trials," Papers 2110.08425, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2021.
    10. Luke N. Condra & Michael Callen & Radha K. Iyengar & James D. Long & Jacob N. Shapiro, 2019. "Damaging democracy? Security provision and turnout in Afghan elections†," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(2), pages 163-193, July.
    11. Panos Sousounis & Gauthier Lanot, 2022. "Minimum Wage Effects on Reservation Wages," Journal of Labor Research, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 415-439, December.
    12. Paolo Pinotti, 0. "The Credibility Revolution in the Empirical Analysis of Crime," Italian Economic Journal: A Continuation of Rivista Italiana degli Economisti and Giornale degli Economisti, Springer;Società Italiana degli Economisti (Italian Economic Association), vol. 0, pages 1-14.
    13. Oded Galor & Ömer Özak, 2016. "The Agricultural Origins of Time Preference," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(10), pages 3064-3103, October.
    14. Du, Yao & Sun, Guibo & Heinen, Eva, 2024. "Does subjective wellbeing modify travel behaviour changes among older people in response to a new metro line?," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    15. Catherine Welch & Eriikka Paavilainen-Mäntymäki & Rebecca Piekkari & Emmanuella Plakoyiannaki, 2022. "Reconciling theory and context: How the case study can set a new agenda for international business research," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 53(1), pages 4-26, February.
    16. Gregory J. Wawro & Ira Katznelson, 2020. "American political development and new challenges of causal inference," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 185(3), pages 299-314, December.
    17. de Renzio, Paolo & Wehner, Joachim, 2017. "The impacts of fiscal openness," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 82521, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    18. Arzi Adbi, 2023. "Financial Sustainability of For-Profit Versus Non-Profit Microfinance Organizations Following a Scandal," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 188(1), pages 57-74, November.
    19. Pinotti, Paolo, 2020. "The credibility revolution in the empirical analysis of crime," CEPR Discussion Papers 14850, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    20. Leppänen, Simo & Solanko, Laura & Kosonen, Riitta, 2015. "Could climate change affect government expenditures? Early evidence from the Russian regions," BOFIT Discussion Papers 27/2015, Bank of Finland, Institute for Economies in Transition.
    21. Ormazabal, Gaizka, 2018. "The Role of Stakeholders in Corporate Governance: A View from Accounting Research," CEPR Discussion Papers 12775, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.

    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:eee:lauspo:v:96:y:2020:i:c:s0264837719312153. 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: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    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.