Measuring the effectiveness of protected area networks in reducing deforestation

Global efforts to reduce tropical deforestation rely heavily on the establishment of protected areas. Measuring the effectiveness of these areas is difficult because the amount of deforestation that would have occurred in the absence of legal protection cannot be directly observed. Conventional methods of evaluating the effectiveness of protected areas can be biased because protection is not randomly assigned and because protection can induce deforestation spillovers (displacement) to neighboring forests. We demonstrate that estimates of effectiveness can be substantially improved by controlling for biases along dimensions that are observable, measuring spatial spillovers, and testing the sensitivity of estimates to potential hidden biases. We apply matching methods to evaluate the impact on deforestation of Costa Rica's renowned protected-area system between 1960 and 1997. We find that protection reduced deforestation: approximately 10% of the protected forests would have been deforested had they not been protected. Conventional approaches to evaluating conservation impact, which fail to control for observable covariates correlated with both protection and deforestation, substantially overestimate avoided deforestation (by over 65%, based on our estimates). We also find that deforestation spillovers from protected to unprotected forests are negligible. Our conclusions are robust to potential hidden bias, as well as to changes in modeling assumptions. Our results show that, with appropriate empirical methods, conservation scientists and policy makers can better understand the relationships between human and natural systems and can use this to guide their attempts to protect critical ecosystem services.

[1]  Jasjeet S. Sekhon,et al.  Multivariate and Propensity Score Matching Software with Automated Balance Optimization: The Matching Package for R , 2008 .

[2]  G. Asner,et al.  Land-Use Allocation Protects the Peruvian Amazon , 2007, Science.

[3]  D. Spracklen,et al.  Carbon Mitigation by Biofuels or by Saving and Restoring Forests? , 2007, Science.

[4]  Gary King,et al.  Matching as Nonparametric Preprocessing for Reducing Model Dependence in Parametric Causal Inference , 2007, Political Analysis.

[5]  J. Canadell,et al.  Tropical Forests and Climate Policy , 2007, Science.

[6]  S. Polasky,et al.  Integrating economic costs into conservation planning. , 2006, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[7]  G. Imbens,et al.  On the Failure of the Bootstrap for Matching Estimators , 2006 .

[8]  A. Ichino,et al.  From Temporary Help Jobs to Permanent Employment: What Can We Learn from Matching Estimators and Their Sensitivity? , 2006, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[9]  James N Sanchirico,et al.  Land market feedbacks can undermine biodiversity conservation. , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[10]  Subhrendu K. Pattanayak,et al.  Money for Nothing? A Call for Empirical Evaluation of Biodiversity Conservation Investments , 2006, PLoS biology.

[11]  B. Soares-Filho,et al.  Modelling conservation in the Amazon basin , 2006, Nature.

[12]  K. Brandon,et al.  The role of protected areas in conserving biodiversity and sustaining local livelihoods , 2005 .

[13]  Jean-François Mas,et al.  Assessing protected area effectiveness using surrounding (buffer) areas environmentally similar to the target area , 2005, Environmental monitoring and assessment.

[14]  Taylor H. Ricketts,et al.  The Convention on Biological Diversity's 2010 Target , 2005, Science.

[15]  W. Reid,et al.  Millennium Ecosystem Assessment , 2005 .

[16]  Rik Leemans,et al.  Ecosystems and human well-being : policy responses , 2005 .

[17]  T. DiPrete,et al.  7. Assessing Bias in the Estimation of Causal Effects: Rosenbaum Bounds on Matching Estimators and Instrumental Variables Estimation with Imperfect Instruments , 2004 .

[18]  M. Gangl RBOUNDS: Stata module to perform Rosenbaum sensitivity analysis for average treatment effects on the treated , 2004 .

[19]  L. Lipper,et al.  Estimating Poverty Over Time and Space: Construction of a Time-Variant Poverty Index for Costa Rica , 2004 .

[20]  G. Imbens,et al.  Large Sample Properties of Matching Estimators for Average Treatment Effects , 2004 .

[21]  F. Achard,et al.  Making Deforestation Pay Under the Kyoto Protocol? , 2003, Science.

[22]  B. Sianesi,et al.  PSMATCH2: Stata module to perform full Mahalanobis and propensity score matching, common support graphing, and covariate imbalance testing , 2003 .

[23]  Gretchen C. Daily,et al.  Integrity and isolation of Costa Rica's national parks and biological reserves: examining the dynamics of land-cover change , 2003 .

[24]  S. Chape,et al.  2003 United Nations list of protected areas , 2003 .

[25]  B. Minten,et al.  Determinants of Deforestation and the Economics of Protection: An Application to Mexico , 2002 .

[26]  E. Barbier,et al.  The Economics of Tropical Deforestation , 2002 .

[27]  Robert C. Harriss,et al.  Deforestation in Costa Rica: A Quantitative Analysis Using Remote Sensing Imagery1 , 2001 .

[28]  Robert C. Harriss,et al.  Deforestation in Costa Rica: A Quantitative Analysis Using Remote Sensing Imagery 1 , 2001 .

[29]  R. G. Wright,et al.  NATURE RESERVES: DO THEY CAPTURE THE FULL RANGE OF AMERICA'S BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY? , 2001 .

[30]  Maureen L. Cropper,et al.  Predicting the Location of Deforestation: The Role of Roads and Protected Areas in North Thailand , 2001, Land Economics.

[31]  G A da Fonseca,et al.  Effectiveness of parks in protecting tropical biodiversity. , 2001, Science.

[32]  Kent H. Redford,et al.  Parks in peril : people, politics, and protected areas , 2001 .

[33]  A. M. Stearman Parks in Peril: People, Politics, and Protected Areas , 2000 .

[34]  Arias,et al.  Costa Rica - Forest strategy and the evolution of land use , 2000 .

[35]  J. Cornell Assessing the Role of Parks for Protecting Forest Resources Using GIS and Spatial Modeling , 2000 .

[36]  E. Helmer,et al.  The Landscape Ecology of Tropical Secondary Forest in Montane Costa Rica , 2000, Ecosystems.

[37]  A. Palloni,et al.  Center for Demography and Ecology University of Wisconsin-Madison Population and Deforestation in Costa Rica , 1996 .

[38]  A. Pfaff What drives deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon? Evidence from satellite and socioeconomic data , 1997 .

[39]  K. Chomitz,et al.  Roads, land use, and deforestation : a spatial model applied to Belize , 1996 .

[40]  Alexander Strickland Pfaff Talikoff What Drives Deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon? Evidence from Satellite and Socioeconomic Data , 1996 .

[41]  Robert L. Pressey,et al.  Conservation reserves in NSW: crown jewels or leftovers , 1995 .

[42]  A. V. Korotkov,et al.  Forest resources assessment , 1993 .

[43]  M. Hunter,et al.  Altitudinal Distributions of Birds, Mammals, People, Forests, and Parks in Nepal , 1993 .

[44]  G. Green,et al.  Deforestation History of the Eastern Rain Forests of Madagascar from Satellite Images , 1990, Science.

[45]  Steven A. Sader,et al.  Deforestation rates and trends in Costa Rica, 1940 to 1983 , 1988 .

[46]  D. Rubin,et al.  The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects , 1983 .

[47]  D. Rubin BIAS REDUCTION USING MAHALANOBIS METRIC MATCHING , 1978 .

[48]  W. G. Cochran The effectiveness of adjustment by subclassification in removing bias in observational studies. , 1968, Biometrics.