What incentivizes local forest conservation efforts? Evidence from Bolivia
Efforts to promote forest conservation have focused on two separate types of policy reforms. Decentralization reforms have attempted to make local forest governance more accountable to demands from voters. Meanwhile, Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES) schemes like the REDD program (Reducing Emis...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Utrecht University Library Open Access Journals (Publishing Services)
2015-03-01
|
| Series: | International Journal of the Commons |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.thecommonsjournal.org/articles/494 |
| _version_ | 1811286015418040320 |
|---|---|
| author | Glenn Daniel Wright Krister Andersson Clark Gibson Tom Evans |
| author_facet | Glenn Daniel Wright Krister Andersson Clark Gibson Tom Evans |
| author_sort | Glenn Daniel Wright |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Efforts to promote forest conservation have focused on two separate types of policy reforms. Decentralization reforms have attempted to make local forest governance more accountable to demands from voters. Meanwhile, Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES) schemes like the REDD program (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) have sought to use economic incentives to promote conservation. These programs make different assumptions about the incentives most likely to work in forest conservation. Decentralization reforms assume that citizen pressures on politicians will encourage conservation, while PES approaches assume that an economic incentive—money—is the best approach. Which type of incentive works best in settings with weak institutions? Here, using a unique longitudinal dataset of forest policy in 100 Bolivian municipalities, we examine the relationships between citizen pressures and economic incentives on forest policy. We find that both types of incentives are positively and significantly associated with government investments in forest conservation, and that the magnitudes of these relationships are similar. Further, we find that economic incentives may be especially effective at promoting conservation where citizen pressures are weak or absent. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-13T02:53:23Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-a1b120aae9c247a1bafb252280f1d393 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1875-0281 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-13T02:53:23Z |
| publishDate | 2015-03-01 |
| publisher | Utrecht University Library Open Access Journals (Publishing Services) |
| record_format | Article |
| series | International Journal of the Commons |
| spelling | doaj.art-a1b120aae9c247a1bafb252280f1d3932022-12-22T03:05:46ZengUtrecht University Library Open Access Journals (Publishing Services)International Journal of the Commons1875-02812015-03-019132234610.18352/ijc.494245What incentivizes local forest conservation efforts? Evidence from BoliviaGlenn Daniel Wright0Krister Andersson1Clark Gibson2Tom Evans3University of Alaska SoutheastUniversity of Colorado BoulderUniversity of California, San DiegoIndiana University, BloomingtonEfforts to promote forest conservation have focused on two separate types of policy reforms. Decentralization reforms have attempted to make local forest governance more accountable to demands from voters. Meanwhile, Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES) schemes like the REDD program (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) have sought to use economic incentives to promote conservation. These programs make different assumptions about the incentives most likely to work in forest conservation. Decentralization reforms assume that citizen pressures on politicians will encourage conservation, while PES approaches assume that an economic incentive—money—is the best approach. Which type of incentive works best in settings with weak institutions? Here, using a unique longitudinal dataset of forest policy in 100 Bolivian municipalities, we examine the relationships between citizen pressures and economic incentives on forest policy. We find that both types of incentives are positively and significantly associated with government investments in forest conservation, and that the magnitudes of these relationships are similar. Further, we find that economic incentives may be especially effective at promoting conservation where citizen pressures are weak or absent.https://www.thecommonsjournal.org/articles/494decentralizationforestry |
| spellingShingle | Glenn Daniel Wright Krister Andersson Clark Gibson Tom Evans What incentivizes local forest conservation efforts? Evidence from Bolivia International Journal of the Commons decentralization forestry |
| title | What incentivizes local forest conservation efforts? Evidence from Bolivia |
| title_full | What incentivizes local forest conservation efforts? Evidence from Bolivia |
| title_fullStr | What incentivizes local forest conservation efforts? Evidence from Bolivia |
| title_full_unstemmed | What incentivizes local forest conservation efforts? Evidence from Bolivia |
| title_short | What incentivizes local forest conservation efforts? Evidence from Bolivia |
| title_sort | what incentivizes local forest conservation efforts evidence from bolivia |
| topic | decentralization forestry |
| url | https://www.thecommonsjournal.org/articles/494 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT glenndanielwright whatincentivizeslocalforestconservationeffortsevidencefrombolivia AT kristerandersson whatincentivizeslocalforestconservationeffortsevidencefrombolivia AT clarkgibson whatincentivizeslocalforestconservationeffortsevidencefrombolivia AT tomevans whatincentivizeslocalforestconservationeffortsevidencefrombolivia |