Land-sharing logging is more profitable than land sparing in the Brazilian Amazon
Selective logging is pervasive across the tropics and a key driver of forest degradation. Two competing harvest management strategies have been proposed: Land sharing via low-intensity logging throughout a concession; and high-intensity land-sparing logging across a smaller area, protecting part of...
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
IOP Publishing
2021-01-01
|
| Series: | Environmental Research Letters |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ac2b5f |
| _version_ | 1827869976027987968 |
|---|---|
| author | Christopher G Bousfield Mike R Massam Ileana A Acosta Carlos A Peres David P Edwards |
| author_facet | Christopher G Bousfield Mike R Massam Ileana A Acosta Carlos A Peres David P Edwards |
| author_sort | Christopher G Bousfield |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Selective logging is pervasive across the tropics and a key driver of forest degradation. Two competing harvest management strategies have been proposed: Land sharing via low-intensity logging throughout a concession; and high-intensity land-sparing logging across a smaller area, protecting part of the concession as primary forest. Empirical research points to land sparing being more optimal for maintaining biodiversity and carbon, especially under secure land tenure, but a key question for forest-based economies is how each strategy affects the profitability of logging. We combine detailed financial data with harvest simulations to assess the profitability of land-sharing and land-sparing logging in the Brazilian Amazon. Under business-as-usual, land-sharing is significantly more profitable than land-sparing logging, whether sparing is conducted in a single block or targeting the highest-density timber stocks, highlighting a conflict between economic and conservation priorities. Land-sharing logging is also more profitable than hybrid strategies whereby a mix of land-sharing and land-sparing logging is employed. Conservation-based restrictions that apply quotas on species in different size classes reduces the opportunity cost of land sparing, but even under tight restrictions land sharing remains more profitable and land sparing often returns a loss. Additional financial incentives, including timber certification schemes and carbon-based payment for ecosystem services, are needed to bridge the opportunity cost of land-sparing logging and minimise ecological damage to tropical rainforests. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-12T15:51:17Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-cf09124ff86743269efc4e76d23ae4cd |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1748-9326 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-12T15:51:17Z |
| publishDate | 2021-01-01 |
| publisher | IOP Publishing |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Environmental Research Letters |
| spelling | doaj.art-cf09124ff86743269efc4e76d23ae4cd2023-08-09T15:08:18ZengIOP PublishingEnvironmental Research Letters1748-93262021-01-01161111400210.1088/1748-9326/ac2b5fLand-sharing logging is more profitable than land sparing in the Brazilian AmazonChristopher G Bousfield0https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3576-9779Mike R Massam1https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4591-0369Ileana A Acosta2Carlos A Peres3https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1588-8765David P Edwards4https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8562-3853Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, School of Biosciences, University of Sheffield , Sheffield S10 2TN, United KingdomEcology and Evolutionary Biology, School of Biosciences, University of Sheffield , Sheffield S10 2TN, United KingdomEcology and Evolutionary Biology, School of Biosciences, University of Sheffield , Sheffield S10 2TN, United KingdomSchool of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia , Norwich NR4 7TJ, United KingdomEcology and Evolutionary Biology, School of Biosciences, University of Sheffield , Sheffield S10 2TN, United KingdomSelective logging is pervasive across the tropics and a key driver of forest degradation. Two competing harvest management strategies have been proposed: Land sharing via low-intensity logging throughout a concession; and high-intensity land-sparing logging across a smaller area, protecting part of the concession as primary forest. Empirical research points to land sparing being more optimal for maintaining biodiversity and carbon, especially under secure land tenure, but a key question for forest-based economies is how each strategy affects the profitability of logging. We combine detailed financial data with harvest simulations to assess the profitability of land-sharing and land-sparing logging in the Brazilian Amazon. Under business-as-usual, land-sharing is significantly more profitable than land-sparing logging, whether sparing is conducted in a single block or targeting the highest-density timber stocks, highlighting a conflict between economic and conservation priorities. Land-sharing logging is also more profitable than hybrid strategies whereby a mix of land-sharing and land-sparing logging is employed. Conservation-based restrictions that apply quotas on species in different size classes reduces the opportunity cost of land sparing, but even under tight restrictions land sharing remains more profitable and land sparing often returns a loss. Additional financial incentives, including timber certification schemes and carbon-based payment for ecosystem services, are needed to bridge the opportunity cost of land-sparing logging and minimise ecological damage to tropical rainforests.https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ac2b5fland-sparing versus land-sharing loggingtropical forestforest degradationREDD+Amazon |
| spellingShingle | Christopher G Bousfield Mike R Massam Ileana A Acosta Carlos A Peres David P Edwards Land-sharing logging is more profitable than land sparing in the Brazilian Amazon Environmental Research Letters land-sparing versus land-sharing logging tropical forest forest degradation REDD+ Amazon |
| title | Land-sharing logging is more profitable than land sparing in the Brazilian Amazon |
| title_full | Land-sharing logging is more profitable than land sparing in the Brazilian Amazon |
| title_fullStr | Land-sharing logging is more profitable than land sparing in the Brazilian Amazon |
| title_full_unstemmed | Land-sharing logging is more profitable than land sparing in the Brazilian Amazon |
| title_short | Land-sharing logging is more profitable than land sparing in the Brazilian Amazon |
| title_sort | land sharing logging is more profitable than land sparing in the brazilian amazon |
| topic | land-sparing versus land-sharing logging tropical forest forest degradation REDD+ Amazon |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ac2b5f |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT christophergbousfield landsharingloggingismoreprofitablethanlandsparinginthebrazilianamazon AT mikermassam landsharingloggingismoreprofitablethanlandsparinginthebrazilianamazon AT ileanaaacosta landsharingloggingismoreprofitablethanlandsparinginthebrazilianamazon AT carlosaperes landsharingloggingismoreprofitablethanlandsparinginthebrazilianamazon AT davidpedwards landsharingloggingismoreprofitablethanlandsparinginthebrazilianamazon |