IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/dbl/dblwop/1989.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Comparing Protection Types in The Peruvian Amazon: Multiple-Use Protected Areas Did No Worse for Forests

Author

Listed:
  • Rico-Straffon, Jimena
  • Wang, Zhenhua
  • Pfaff, Alexander

Abstract

Protected areas (PAs), which restrict economic activities, are the leading land and marine policy for ecosystem conservation. Most contexts feature different types of protection that vary in their stringency of management. Using spatially detailed panel data for 1986-2018, we estimate PAs’ impacts upon forests in the Peruvian Amazon. Which type of protection has greater impacts on the forest is ambiguous, theoretically, given potential for significant differences by type in siting and enforcement. We find that the less strict multiple-use PAs, that allow local livelihoods, do no worse for forests than strict PAs: each PA type holds off small loss spikes seen in unprotected forests; and multipleuse, if anything, do a bit better. This adds to evidence on the coexistence of private activities with conservation objectives.

Suggested Citation

  • Rico-Straffon, Jimena & Wang, Zhenhua & Pfaff, Alexander, 2022. "Comparing Protection Types in The Peruvian Amazon: Multiple-Use Protected Areas Did No Worse for Forests," Research Department working papers 1989, CAF Development Bank Of Latinamerica.
    • Handle: RePEc:dbl:dblwop:1989
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://scioteca.caf.com/handle/123456789/1989
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Ambiente; Evaluación de impacto;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:dbl:dblwop:1989. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Pablo Rolando (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cafffve.html .

    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.