Protected area types, strategies and impacts in Brazil’s Amazon: public protected area strategies do not yield a consistent ranking of protected area types by impact

The leading policy to conserve forest is protected areas (PAs). Yet, PAs are not a single tool: land users and uses vary by PA type; and public PA strategies vary in the extent of each type and in the determinants of impact for each type, i.e. siting and internal deforestation. Further, across regio...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Pfaff, Alexander, Robalino, Juan, Sandoval, Catalina, Herrera, Diego
Formato:	Artículo
Lenguaje:	Inglés
Publicado:	The Royal Society, Londres (Reino Unido) 2020
Materias:	AREAS PROTEGIDAS ESTRATEGIAS IMPACTO AMBIENTAL CONSERVACION DE BOSQUES DEFORESTACIÓN POLITICAS BOSQUE TROPICAL CARBONO DESARROLLO AMAZONIA (BRASIL)
Acceso en línea:	http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2014.0273 https://repositorio.catie.ac.cr/handle/11554/9538

id	RepoCATIE9538
record_format	dspace
spelling	RepoCATIE95382022-02-19T17:43:06Z Protected area types, strategies and impacts in Brazil’s Amazon: public protected area strategies do not yield a consistent ranking of protected area types by impact Pfaff, Alexander Robalino, Juan Sandoval, Catalina Herrera, Diego AREAS PROTEGIDAS ESTRATEGIAS IMPACTO AMBIENTAL CONSERVACION DE BOSQUES DEFORESTACIÓN POLITICAS BOSQUE TROPICAL CARBONO DESARROLLO AMAZONIA (BRASIL) The leading policy to conserve forest is protected areas (PAs). Yet, PAs are not a single tool: land users and uses vary by PA type; and public PA strategies vary in the extent of each type and in the determinants of impact for each type, i.e. siting and internal deforestation. Further, across regions and time, strategies respond to pressures (deforestation and political). We estimate deforestation impacts of PA types for a critical frontier, the Brazilian Amazon. We separate regions and time periods that differ in their deforestation and political pressures and document considerable variation in PA strategies across regions, time periods and types. The siting of PAs varies across regions. For example, all else being equal, PAs in the arc of deforestation are relatively far from non-forest, while in other states they are relatively near. Internal deforestation varies across time periods, e.g. it is more similar across the PA types for PAs after 2000. By contrast, after 2000, PA extent is less similar across PA types with little non-indigenous area created inside the arc. PA strategies generate a range of impacts for PA types—always far higher within the arc—but not a consistent ranking of PA types by impact. 2020-08-27T21:39:06Z 2020-08-27T21:39:06Z 2015 Artículo http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2014.0273 https://repositorio.catie.ac.cr/handle/11554/9538 en Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, Volumen 370 (2015) info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess application/pdf The Royal Society, Londres (Reino Unido)
institution	Centro Agronómico Tropical de Investigación y Enseñanza
collection	Repositorio CATIE
language	Inglés
topic	AREAS PROTEGIDAS ESTRATEGIAS IMPACTO AMBIENTAL CONSERVACION DE BOSQUES DEFORESTACIÓN POLITICAS BOSQUE TROPICAL CARBONO DESARROLLO AMAZONIA (BRASIL)
spellingShingle	AREAS PROTEGIDAS ESTRATEGIAS IMPACTO AMBIENTAL CONSERVACION DE BOSQUES DEFORESTACIÓN POLITICAS BOSQUE TROPICAL CARBONO DESARROLLO AMAZONIA (BRASIL) Pfaff, Alexander Robalino, Juan Sandoval, Catalina Herrera, Diego Protected area types, strategies and impacts in Brazil’s Amazon: public protected area strategies do not yield a consistent ranking of protected area types by impact
description	The leading policy to conserve forest is protected areas (PAs). Yet, PAs are not a single tool: land users and uses vary by PA type; and public PA strategies vary in the extent of each type and in the determinants of impact for each type, i.e. siting and internal deforestation. Further, across regions and time, strategies respond to pressures (deforestation and political). We estimate deforestation impacts of PA types for a critical frontier, the Brazilian Amazon. We separate regions and time periods that differ in their deforestation and political pressures and document considerable variation in PA strategies across regions, time periods and types. The siting of PAs varies across regions. For example, all else being equal, PAs in the arc of deforestation are relatively far from non-forest, while in other states they are relatively near. Internal deforestation varies across time periods, e.g. it is more similar across the PA types for PAs after 2000. By contrast, after 2000, PA extent is less similar across PA types with little non-indigenous area created inside the arc. PA strategies generate a range of impacts for PA types—always far higher within the arc—but not a consistent ranking of PA types by impact.
format	Artículo
author	Pfaff, Alexander Robalino, Juan Sandoval, Catalina Herrera, Diego
author_facet	Pfaff, Alexander Robalino, Juan Sandoval, Catalina Herrera, Diego
author_sort	Pfaff, Alexander
title	Protected area types, strategies and impacts in Brazil’s Amazon: public protected area strategies do not yield a consistent ranking of protected area types by impact
title_short	Protected area types, strategies and impacts in Brazil’s Amazon: public protected area strategies do not yield a consistent ranking of protected area types by impact
title_full	Protected area types, strategies and impacts in Brazil’s Amazon: public protected area strategies do not yield a consistent ranking of protected area types by impact
title_fullStr	Protected area types, strategies and impacts in Brazil’s Amazon: public protected area strategies do not yield a consistent ranking of protected area types by impact
title_full_unstemmed	Protected area types, strategies and impacts in Brazil’s Amazon: public protected area strategies do not yield a consistent ranking of protected area types by impact
title_sort	protected area types, strategies and impacts in brazil’s amazon: public protected area strategies do not yield a consistent ranking of protected area types by impact
publisher	The Royal Society, Londres (Reino Unido)
publishDate	2020
url	http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2014.0273 https://repositorio.catie.ac.cr/handle/11554/9538
work_keys_str_mv	AT pfaffalexander protectedareatypesstrategiesandimpactsinbrazilsamazonpublicprotectedareastrategiesdonotyieldaconsistentrankingofprotectedareatypesbyimpact AT robalinojuan protectedareatypesstrategiesandimpactsinbrazilsamazonpublicprotectedareastrategiesdonotyieldaconsistentrankingofprotectedareatypesbyimpact AT sandovalcatalina protectedareatypesstrategiesandimpactsinbrazilsamazonpublicprotectedareastrategiesdonotyieldaconsistentrankingofprotectedareatypesbyimpact AT herreradiego protectedareatypesstrategiesandimpactsinbrazilsamazonpublicprotectedareastrategiesdonotyieldaconsistentrankingofprotectedareatypesbyimpact
_version_	1808117693620944896

Protected area types, strategies and impacts in Brazil’s Amazon: public protected area strategies do not yield a consistent ranking of protected area types by impact

Ejemplares similares