Advertisement
Advertisement

More Related Content

Similar to Environmental policy’s new role in the Brazilian Amazon(20)

More from ASB Partnership for the Tropical Forest Margins(20)

Advertisement

Environmental policy’s new role in the Brazilian Amazon

  1. Environmental policy’s new role in the Brazilian Amazon Jan Börner (UniBonn/CIFOR) Jorge Hargrave (IPEA) Krisztina Kis-Katos (Freiburg University) Konstantin König (ICRAF) Monique Sacardo Ferreira (IPEA)
  2. Background • Deforestation rates peaked in 2004 • Command-and- Control policy considered largely ineffective • Broad changes in governance system in 2004/5 (PPCdAM) • Since then reductions by over two thirds 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 2004200520062007 2008200920102011 years Deforestation(sq.km) 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 Numberoffines
  3. Background • Shift from large to smaller scale deforestation: result of enforcement strategy (Rosa et al. 2012) or structural change (Pacheco 2011)? Rosa et al. 2011
  4. Research questions 1. Districts with high fine intensity were focus of many complementary measures (e.g. embargoes, exclusion from credit, etc.). What is the deterrence effect of an individual fine (field-based enforcement)? 2. Does targeting field operations towards large- scale deforestation induce „avoidance behavior“, e.g., an increase in small-scale deforestation?
  5. 2010 fine locations and 2010/11 change in deforestation
  6. Empirical strategy • Grid-based approach – Measurement of all covariates at 20x20km resolution – Measurement of fine (location) and deforestation at <=10x10 km resolution • Matching analysis – Pooling of 2010 and 2011 observation periods – Exclusion of non-treated neighbors of treated grid cells to reduce neighborhood effects – Stratification by fine type (all fines vs only deforestation fines) – Analysis for small versus large-scale (>20ha*) deforestation – Problems: clouds and imprecise fines * Minimum detection of DETER monitoring system
  7. Cloud and/or Deforestation? 2010 2011 PRODES-Deforestation PRODES-Clouds PRODES + DETER - Deforestation
  8. Imprecisely measured fines 0 20 40 60 80 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 precise 44% Imprecise (56%)
  9. Matching full set of covariates emb Forest2007 acc_def Clouds Clouds_lagged prodes_lag prod_splagt1 DISTANCIA DISTANCIAsq MUNimprecise TI_percent UC Assenta smallsh sh_high_lag agrsh pastsh tractor_w Prec_ann Share.owners -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 unmatched matched MHD matched INV Standardized difference in means
  10. Matching (change in deforestation) ATT AI SE / AI p Number of treated cells All fine types / all cells -2.98 2.18 / 0.171 2848 All fine types / excluding neighbors -4.39 2.21 / 0.047 2848 Only deforestation fines -8.21 4.33 / 0.058 614 Only deforestation fines no clouds -8.42 5.31 / 0.113 410 Only deforestation fines no clouds >20ha patches -10.59 4.72 / 0.024 410 Only deforestation fines no clouds <20ha patches 2.17 2.21 / 0.328 410
  11. Matching (share of deforestation patches > 20ha) ATT AI SE / AI p Number of treated cells All fine types / excluding neighbors 0.02 0.01 / 0.051 2848 Only deforestation fines 0.01 0.02 / 0.493 614 Only deforestation fines no clouds 0.01 0.02 / 0.518 410
  12. Key findings • Significant deterrence effects of fines issued in field-based enforcement campaigns • On average a single additional fine reduces deforestation by 10-20% in the subsequent year • Effects vary across states (different dynamics of confounding factors) • Only limited evidence for “avoidance behavior”
  13. Caveats • Clouds, imprecisely measured fines, and unobserved state-level action remain not fully controlled confounding factors • Balance on past deforestation cannot be fully achieved with full set of covariates • Further robustness tests pending
  14. Conclusions • After major reductions, field-based enforcement still exerts significant and sizeable negative effects on deforestation at the local scale • Reason may not be the fine itself, but the host of economic implications that arise from having received one (embargo, etc.) • Signs of “avoidance behavior”, i.e. small-scale deforestation increasing in response to enforcement that targets large-scale deforestation less pronounced than suggested by previous analyses • Average operational costs per fine are at about R$4650 and thus probably still lower than the environmental benefit of avoided deforestation measured at carbon offset price values
  15. THANK YOU
Advertisement