Most Popular Posts
Categories
- Biodiversity (92)
- Climate change (172)
- Community-based conservation (81)
- Economics and conservation (136)
- Endangered species (211)
- Fresh water (48)
- Habitat (221)
- Invasive species (93)
- Marine (123)
- Monitoring (230)
- Restoration (150)
- Socio-political issues (176)
- Tools and technology (101)
Archives
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
Jun
12
2009
Rainforest clearing is not profitable for locals
A basic assumption behind a lot of tropical deforestation may be wrong, a study in this week’s Science shows.
Amazon communities that convert their forests to ranches or farms are usually seeking to earn money and better their lives. But a study of 286 municipalities in the poorest regions of Brazil shows that, overall, residents who cleared their local forests were no better off than those who abstained.
What really happens is a “boom and bust” cycle following forest clearing. Communities that cut down their trees initially become more prosperous, as measured by the U.N.’s Human Development Index, an average of life expectancy, literacy, and standard of living. The boom times on the clearing frontiers were fueled by sale of harvested resources and the access brought by new roads.
But the improvements were usually only transient, the study found. Before long the timber was gone, and the towns were often left to support a flood of poor migrants who came during wealthier times. In the end, the “pre” and “post” frontier states were pretty much the same. Such results suggest that a more sustainable development framework would be best not just for the forest but for locals as well, the team writes. – Jessica Leber
Source: Rodrigues, A.L. et al. 2009. Boom-And-Bust Development Patterns Across the Amazon Frontier. Science DOI: 10.1126/science.1174002
Image © Ricardo Azoury, iStockphoto.com
Filed Under Biodiversity, Climate change, Community-based conservation, Economics and conservation, Habitat, Invasive species, Marine, Monitoring, Restoration, Socio-political issues |
Email This Post
[...] Rainforest clearing doesn’t raise the incomes of poor residents in Brazil who do the clearing, says a new study in Science — there’s initial prosperity because of the sale of the timber, followed by a return to pre-harvest income levels once the timber’s gone. (Hat tip: Journal Watch Online.) [...]
[...] study of nearly 300 communities in Brazil found that clearing forest for ranches and farmland did not lead to long-term economic, social and health benef… for residents. The prosperity of such boom towns is short-lived, says the study, suggesting that [...]