Propensity of farmers to conserve forest within REDD + projects in areas affected by armed-conflict

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2016.02.005Get rights and content

Highlights

  • We developed a model for assessing farmers' propensity to conserve forest (FPCF).

  • Conservation propensity seems to be influenced by previous peacebuilding efforts.

  • The use of NTFPs is positively associated with high FPCF.

  • Non-carbon benefits seem more important than financial benefits in FPCF.

  • Conservation of water resources is an important reason for conserving forest.

Abstract

The implementation of carbon-storage efforts in countries experiencing armed conflicts or confronting illegal activities (such as illicit crop cultivation) will permit additional tropical forests to be protected for climate change mitigation. Yet, despite these potential gains, the appropriate design and application of forest conservation and climate change mitigation approaches such as the mechanism for Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD +) in such contexts remain little studied. Unanswered questions relate to the propensity of farmers in conflict affected areas to conserve forests for climate change mitigation. Such questions include, for what reasons and under what circumstances would such farmer participate in climate change mitigation activities? In this paper we address these questions by developing an econometric Logit model to understand factors influencing the propensity to conserve forest of farmers from 14 villages in Colombia. These villages are located in a region recognized as a stronghold of guerrilla insurgencies and as the center for illegal crop cultivation. The region was selected as it is also the proposed target area for piloting Colombian government REDD + activities. A household survey (n = 90) showed that four explanatory variables are significantly related to the ‘propensity to conserve forest’. ‘Harvest of non-timber forest products’ (specifically bush meat) positively influences a farmer's propensity to conserve forest. In contrast, higher ‘percentage of forest area’, ‘deforestation for (the production of) subsistence crops’ and ‘harvest of wood product’, each have a negative influence. Overall, results show an already high propensity to conserve forest among farmers (70% of respondents) and indicate their growing propensity toward the conservation of primary forest and management of degraded lands and secondary forest. These results might be attributable to efforts undertaken to reduce the causes of armed-conflicts and ecosystem deterioration, such as enhancement of land tenure security and farmer associations' rules to reduce deforestation. They might also be linked to communities' positive attitudes toward water resources conservation. We conclude that most farmers will not oppose forest conservation as long as it is compatible with their respective livelihood priorities.

Introduction

Developing countries are gradually integrating climate change mitigation approaches into their public policies. These include efforts such as Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD +), which seeks to incentivize the implementation of national policy measures to halt deforestation and forest degradation (Agrawal et al., 2011). However, based on UCDP (2014) and Themnér and Wallensteen (2013), we estimate that some 39% of countries participating in any of the three available REDD + funds (UN-REDD, Forest Carbon Partnership Facility and Forest Investment Program) are experiencing, or are emerging from, armed-conflicts1 which, to some extent, are related to unclear land tenure regimes and unbalanced land-use competition (de Jong et al., 2007). Consequently, despite the imminence of climate change impacts on ecosystems and human life, it appears that priority should be given to first tackle the causes of armed-conflicts. Nonetheless, integration of policies around peacebuilding and land-based climate change mitigation remain limited, even where these might apply in the same areas.

Synergies between land-based climate change mitigation and peacebuilding efforts may be possible in some, but not all, conflict affected areas (Castro-Nunez et al., Unpublished results). This will depend on the impacts of periods of violence on forest cover, which can be very diverse. Land-uses emerging during (and after) armed-conflict periods can contribute to the recovery or, conversely, the reduction of forested lands (Sánchez-Cuervo and Aide, 2013a, Sánchez-Cuervo et al., 2012). While no form of violence can be deemed ‘positive’, conflict might, in some circumstances, be associated with ‘positive’ environmental outcomes, such as the reduced pressure on forest ecosystems (Burgess et al., 2015, Hecht and Saatchi, 2007). An example of this is when vast amounts of forested lands are systematically isolated and abandoned due to armed violence or as part of an armed group's military strategies. Under these circumstances, abandoned land recovers, and forest carbon stocks and biodiversity habitats are enhanced due to the displacement of economic activities such as cattle grazing or unsustainable forest management (Sánchez-Cuervo and Aide, 2013a, Sánchez-Cuervo and Aide, 2013b, Sánchez-Cuervo et al., 2012). Nonetheless, under other circumstances, violent conflict can increase the exploitation of forested areas, for instance when armed groups undertake damaging illegal or excessive revenue-generating activities, such as the overharvesting of forest species (Didia, 1997) and wildlife (Dudley et al., 2002).

Peacebuilding processes could incorporate conservation strategies (Brottem and Unruh, 2009) and land reforms, such as individual or collective land-titling (Albertus and Kaplan, 2013, Hecht and Saatchi, 2007). However, while the effects of land reforms on peacebuilding have been demonstrated (Albertus and Kaplan, 2013, Unruh, 2009), their effects on households' land-use decisions, environmental degradation and particularly on deforestation (and therefore on GHG emissions) remain a matter of debate and are probably dependent on a set of factors defined by site-specific circumstances (Angelsen, 2007, Bromley, 2009, Dokken et al., 2014, Feder and Nishio, 1998, Gould, 2006, Wannasai and Shrestha, 2008).

Although peace processes might be conducive to forest conservation, they do not determine a farmer's decisions toward forest conservation. Similarly, financial benefits alone are unlikely to prompt tropical forest carbon conservation (Karsenty and Ongolo, 2012). Farmers' decisions as to whether or not they adopt particular alternative practices or technology greatly depend on specific characteristics of respective farms and households (Lapar and Pandey, 1999). Decisions are also linked to the availability of other livelihood support, such as extension services, social networks or subsidies (Conley and Udry, 2001, Knowler and Bradshaw, 2007). It is commonly recognized that no single factor can determine farmers' sustainable land-use decisions (Baumgart-Getz et al., 2012, Knowler and Bradshaw, 2007, Pannell et al., 2006, Prokopy et al., 2008, Tey et al., 2014). Furthermore, there is evidence that factors such as forest dwellers' priorities and cultural preferences highly influence REDD + adoption (Coomes et al., 2008, Peterson St-Laurent et al., 2013, Sheil et al., 2006),

Identifying factors that discourage or encourage farmers to implement forest conservation practices would be useful prior to implementing REDD + projects. This would be particularly useful in complex armed conflict affected contexts where many additional factors might come into play. One approach to identifying such factors is via the systematic evaluation of multiple variables that might influence the adoption of forest conservation practices. As a response to these research gaps and to advance the understanding of potential synergies between peacebuilding and climate change mitigation, this study aims to: (1) assess the propensity to conserve forest among farmers affected by armed-conflict; and (2) understand which factors encourage or discourage forest conservation in conflict-affected areas. These aims are targeted by posing the question: what factors explain the propensity to conserve forest among armed-conflict affected farmers? The research question is explored in the context of Colombia, a country confronted with well-known challenges relating to illegal crop cultivation, smuggling, and ongoing armed-conflict, dating back to the 1940s (Ross, 2007). We start this paper by introducing the research area in order to set the stage for the analysis. We then provide a review of other studies on adoption of sustainable land use practices that has guided the choice of our hypotheses. The subsequent sections describe the methods and present the results, discussions and conclusions.

Section snippets

Study area

Colombia provides a range of pertinent study sites due to its national: strategy for ‘(peace) territorial consolidation’ (involving land titling and land restitution programs for those displaced by armed-conflict) (Summers, 2012); commitment to reduce forest-based net emissions to zero by 2020 (Colombia-Reports, 2013); and ongoing peace negotiations with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) (Zuleta et al., 2013). The Special Management Area of the Macarena (AMEM; Fig. 1) was chosen

Methodology

Our methodology followed four steps: (1) identification of ‘farmers disposed to conserve forest’ based on pre-defined criteria (dependent variable); (2) identification of variables that might explain farmers' propensity to conserve forest (independent variables); (3) design and undertaking of a survey to gather information on variables that can influence farmers' propensity to conserve forest; (4) development of a “logit” model to identify variables significantly related to farmers' propensity

Factors influencing farmers' propensity to conserve forest

Descriptive statistics of variables used in the model are presented in Table 2. Seventy per cent of surveyed farmers are identified as farmers with propensity to conserve forest, given that they responded that they would not accept forests to be cut down to increase pasture (82% of respondents) nor would they look for land in other territories if community rules prohibited deforestation (78% of respondents). It is worth noting that although the communities comprise a high percentage of farmers

Discussion

In many developing countries, forest-based climate change mitigation policies and programs can only make significant contributions to climate change mitigation if they are designed according to nationally determined development challenges, as well as local livelihood strategies, priorities and preferences. Our results indicate that no single factor can determine a farmer's decisions toward forest conservation. This finding is consistent with those of previous studies into the determinants of

Conclusion

Achieving global uptake of REDD + requires that developing countries' governments are committed to adopt policies to reduce pressures on forests, and enable institutional conditions that motivate farmers to adopt production options that provide a viable alternative to deforestation and to conserve forests. Our study demonstrates that the propensity of farmers to conserve forest in a very bio-diverse and conflict-ridden area such as the AMEN is high and this can be statistically related to the

Acknowledgments

We thank the Project ‘Valorización del potencial REDD + y MDL para el desarrollo sostenible del Rio Grande de la Magdalena (PREPAREDD Project)’ for providing a scholarship to the corresponding author. Thanks also goes to the Patrimonio Natural and ONF Andina - Coorporacion Ecoversa for providing support under the framework of the collaboration agreement number 001-2012. We also offer our appreciation to officials from the Colombian National Parks (Orinoquian and Amazonian Directorates and PNN

References (79)

  • A. Etter et al.

    Regional patterns of agricultural land use and deforestation in Colombia

    Agric. Ecosyst. Environ.

    (2006)
  • A. Etter et al.

    Unplanned land clearing of Colombian rainforests: spreading like disease?

    Landsc. Urban Plan.

    (2006)
  • G. Feder et al.

    The benefits of land registration and titling: economic and social perspectives

    Land Use Policy

    (1998)
  • K.A. Gould

    Land regularization on agricultural frontiers: the case of Northwestern Peten, Guatemala

    Land Use Policy

    (2006)
  • C.L. Gray

    Environment, Land, and Rural Out-migration in the Southern Ecuadorian Andes

    World Development

    (2009)
  • R. Greiner et al.

    Farmers' intrinsic motivations, barriers to the adoption of conservation practices and effectiveness of policy instruments: empirical evidence from northern Australia

    Land Use Policy

    (2011)
  • R. Greiner et al.

    Motivations, risk perceptions and adoption of conservation practices by farmers

    Agric. Syst.

    (2009)
  • A. Karsenty et al.

    Can “fragile states” decide to reduce their deforestation? The inappropriate use of the theory of incentives with respect to the REDD mechanism

    Forest Policy and Economics

    (2012)
  • D. Knowler et al.

    Farmers' adoption of conservation agriculture: a review and synthesis of recent research

    Food Policy

    (2007)
  • M. Kröger

    Grievances, agency and the absence of conflict: the new Suzano pulp investment in the Eastern Amazon

    Forest Policy and Economics

    (2013)
  • M.L.A. Lapar et al.

    Adoption of soil conservation: the case of the Philippine uplands

    Agric. Econ.

    (1999)
  • G. Peterson St-Laurent et al.

    REDD + and the agriculture frontier: understanding colonists' utilization of the land

    Land Use Policy

    (2013)
  • J. Schirmer et al.

    Assessing the likelihood of widespread landholder adoption of afforestation and reforestation projects

    Global Environmental Change-Human and Policy Dimensions

    (2014)
  • J.D. Unruh

    Carbon sequestration in Africa: the land tenure problem

    Global Environmental Change-Human and Policy Dimensions

    (2008)
  • J.D. Unruh

    Land rights in postwar Liberia: the volatile part of the peace process

    Land Use Policy

    (2009)
  • M. Verpoorten

    Household coping in war- and peacetime: cattle sales in Rwanda, 1991–2001

    J. Dev. Econ.

    (2009)
  • N. Wannasai et al.

    Role of land tenure security and farm household characteristics on land use change in the Prasae Watershed, Thailand

    Land Use Policy

    (2008)
  • H. Zuleta et al.

    Conflict and negotiation in Colombia: are pre-donations useful?

    J. Socio-Econ.

    (2013)
  • A. Adesina et al.

    Determinants of farmers' adoption and adaptation of alley farming technology in Nigeria

    Agrofor. Syst.

    (2002)
  • A. Agrawal et al.

    Conservation and displacement: an overview

    Conserv. Soc.

    (2009)
  • A. Agrawal et al.

    Changing governance of the world's forests

    Science

    (2008)
  • A. Agrawal et al.

    Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation

    Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour.

    (2011)
  • AGROGUEJAR

    Plan de desarrollo sostenible -vida en mi vejez y la niñez-

    Proceso de constitución de Zona de Reserva Campesina Ariari-Guejar-Cafre.

    (2012)
  • M. Albertus et al.

    Land reform as a counterinsurgency policy: evidence from Colombia

    J. Confl. Resolut.

    (2013)
  • A. Angelsen

    Forest Cover Change in Space And Time: Combining the Von Thunen and Forest Transition Theories

    (2007)
  • A. Angelsen et al.

    Rethinking the causes of deforestation: lessons from economic models

    World Bank Res. Obs.

    (1999)
  • A. Asdal

    Presencia Creciente del Estado: Pasos Inmediatos para Intervenciones de Tipo Empresarial en Zonas Rurales en Áreas de Conflicto

    (2013)
  • L. Brottem et al.

    Territorial tensions: rainforest conservation, postconflict recovery, and land tenure in Liberia

    Ann. Assoc. Am. Geogr.

    (2009)
  • R. Burgess et al.

    War and deforestation in Sierra Leone

    Environ. Res. Lett.

    (2015)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text