Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Designing conservation-development policies for the forest frontier

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Sustainability Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The conservation of forests in expanding frontier landscapes is critically important to maintain intact forest ecosystems and support forest dependent communities. To conserve frontier forests, policy approaches are needed that conserve forests and advance the well-being of local resource dependent communities. To identify such approaches, the forest conservation and development framework (FCDF) was designed to find place-based conservation-development policies that target system leverage-points influencing land-use practices. To demonstrate the utility of the FCDF, a portfolio of conservation-development policies were identified for Peru’s Manu-Tambopata Corridor (MAT) and evaluated by local land-users. Results of the MAT case study show high levels of interest in the proposed policies, but a wide variation in interest levels relative to personal circumstances and policies proposed. Barriers to implementing conservation-development policies in frontier environments were also identified, including high value land-use alternatives generating high opportunity costs for accepting PES payments (e.g., REDD+), insecure land tenure and conflicting authorizations limiting land-users policy choices, and broad demographic diversity among local land-users. Collectively, this research suggests the FCDF is a useful approach for identifying policies matched to local conditions that advance conservation and human development. This research also indicates policy design in frontier environments is most effective when adapted to local conditions, seeks to identify a mix of complementary policies, and is targeted at key system variables influencing land-use practices (i.e., system leverage-points). Importantly, the MAT case study also highlights how even in rapidly changing frontier landscapes, land-users are interested in policies that advance conservation and development goals.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ahnström J, Höckert J, Bergeå HL, Francis CA, Skelton P, Hallgren L (2009) Farmers and nature conservation: what is known about attitudes, context factors and actions affecting conservation? Renew Agric Food Syst 24(01):38–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alix-Garcia J, Aronson G, Radeloff V, Ramirez-Reyes C, Shapiro E, Sims K, Yañez-Pagans P (2014) Environmental and Socioeconomic Impacts of Mexico’s Payments for Ecosystem Services Program. 3ie Grantee Final Report, New Delhi: International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie)

  • Angelsen A, Brockhaus M, Sunderlin WD, Verchot LV (2012) Analysing REDD+: challenges and choices. CIFOR

  • Asner G, Rudel T, Aide T, Defries R, Emerson R (2009) A contemporary assessment of change in humid tropical forests. Conserv Biol 23(6):1386–1395

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beierle T (2002) The quality of stakeholder-based decisions. Risk Anal 22:739–749

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blackmore L, Doole GJ (2013) Drivers of landholder participation in tender programs for Australian biodiversity conservation. Environ Sci Policy 33:143–153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Börner J, Wunder S, Wertz-Kanounnikoff S, Tito R, Pereira L, Nascimento N (2010) Direct conservation payments in the Brazilian Amazon: scope and equity implications. Ecol Econ 69(6):1272–1282

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bunker DR (1972) Policy sciences perspectives on implementation process. Policy Sci 3(1):71–80

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burton JB (1995) The decisive point: identifying points of leverage in tactical combat operations. Army Command and General Staff College Fort Leavenworth KS School of Advanced Military Studies

  • Butler RA, Laurance W (2008) New strategies for conserving tropical forests. Trends Ecol Evol 23(9):469–472

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butler RA, Koh LP, Ghazoul J (2009) REDD in the red: palm oil could undermine carbon payment schemes. Conserv Lett 2(2):67–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chapman R (2003) Policy mix for environmentally sustainable development-learning from the Dutch experience. NZJ Environ Lett 7(29):29–52

    Google Scholar 

  • Chavez B, Perz S (2012) Adoption of policy incentives and land use: lessons from frontier agriculture in Southeastern Peru. Human Ecol 40(4):525–539

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Checkland P (1998) Systems Thinking. Systems Practice, Wiley

    Google Scholar 

  • Checkland P, Poulter J (2006) Learning for action: a short definitive account of soft systems methodology and its use for practitioners, teachers and students. Wiley, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen X, Lupi F, He G, Liu J (2009) Linking social norms to efficient conservation investment in payments for ecosystem services. Proc Natl Acad Sci 106(28):11812–11817

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Clay JW, Dufey A, MacGregor J (2005) Leverage-points for encouraging sustainable commodities. Commodities, trade and sustainable development. In: Lines T (ed) Agricultural commodities, trade and sustainable development. International Institute for Environment and Development, London, pp 201–225

    Google Scholar 

  • Cocklin C, Mautner N, Dibden J (2007) Public policy, private landholders: perspectives on policy mechanisms for sustainable land management. J Environ Manag 85:986–998

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conservation Measures Partnership (2013) Open standards for the practice of conservation. Version 3.0. http://www.conservationmeasures.org/. Accessed May 2014

  • Cubbage F, Harou P, Sills E (2007) Policy instruments to enhance multi-functional forest management. For Policy Econ 9(7):833–851

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eloy L, Méral P, Ludewigs T, Pinheiro GT, Singer B (2012) Payments for ecosystem services in Amazonia. Payments for Ecosystem Services in Amazonia. The challenge of land use heterogeneity in agricultural frontiers near Cruzeiro do Sul (Acre, Brazil). J Environ Plan Manag 55(6):685–703

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • FAO (UN Food and Agriculture Organization) (2010) Global forest resources assessment 2010. Main Report. 163. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson L, Lee T, Koh L, Brook B, Gardner T, Barlow J, Peres C, Bradshaw C, Laurance W, Lovejoy T, Sodhi N (2011) Primary forests are irreplaceable for sustaining tropical biodiversity. Nature 478(7369):378–381

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Greiner R, Gregg D (2011) Farmers intrinsic motivations, barriers to the adoption of conservation practices and effectiveness of policy instruments: empirical evidence from northern Australia. Land Use Policy 28(1):257–265

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greiner R, Patterson L, Miller O (2009) Motivations, risk perceptions and adoption of conservation practices by farmers. Agric Syst 99(2):86–104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen MC, Potapov PV, Moore R, Hancher M, Turubanova SA, Tyukavina A, Townshend JR (2013) High-resolution global maps of 21st-century forest cover change. Science 342(6160):850–853

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kajikawa Y (2008) Research core and framework of sustainability science. Sustain Sci 3(2):215–239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kates R, Clark W, Corell R, Hall J, Jaeger C, Lowe I, McCarthy J, Schellnhuber H, Bolin B, Dickson N, Faucheux S, Gallopin G, Grübler A, Huntley B, Jäger J, Jodha N, Kasperson R, Mabogunje A, Matson P, Mooney H, Moore B, O’Riordan T, Svedin U (2001) Sustainability science. Science 292(5517):641–642

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Killeen T (2007) A perfect storm in the Amazon wilderness. Adv Appl Biodivers Sci 7:102

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirkby CA, Giudice-Granados R, Day B, Turner K, Velarde-Andrade LM, Dueñas-Dueñas A, Douglas WY (2010) The market triumph of ecotourism: an economic investigation of the private and social benefits of competing land uses in the Peruvian Amazon. PLoS One 5(9):e13015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knowler D, Bradshaw B (2007) Farmers adoption of conservation agriculture: a review and synthesis of recent research. Food Policy 32(1):25–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kosoy N, Martineztuna M, Muradian R, Martinezalier J (2007) Payments for environmental services in watersheds: insights from a comparative study of three cases in Central America. Ecol Econ 61:446–455

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kosoy N, Corbera E, Brown K (2008) Participation in payments for ecosystem services: case studies from the Lacandon rainforest. Mexico Geoforum 39(6):2073–2083

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kremen C, Merenlender A, Murphy D (1994) Ecological monitoring: a vital need for integrated conservation and development programs in the tropics. Conserv Biol 8(2):388–397

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laurance W (1999) Reflections on the tropical deforestation crisis. Biol Conserv 91(2):109–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laurance WF, Kakul T, Keenan RJ, Sayer J, Passingan S, Clements GR, Sodhi NS (2011) Predatory corporations, failing governance, and the fate of forests in Papua New Guinea. Conserv Lett 4(2):95–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawlor K, Olander L, Boyd W, Niles J, Madeira E (2009) Addressing the causes of tropical deforestation: Lessons learned and the implications for international forest carbon policy. International forest carbon and the climate change challenge series—brief number 5. Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions, Duke University, Durham

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin S (2003) Complex adaptive systems: exploring the known, the unknown and the unknowable. Bull Am Math Soc 40(1):3–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindenmayer DB, Laurance WF, Franklin JF, Likens GL, Banks SC, Blanchard W, Gibbons F (2014) New policies for old trees: averting a global crisis in a keystone ecological structure. Conserv Lett 7(1):61–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu J, Dietz T, Carpenter S, Alberti M, Folke C, Moran E, Pell A et al (2007a) Complexity of coupled human and natural systems. Science 317(5844):1513–1516

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Liu J, Dietz T, Carpenter S, Folke C, Alberti M, Redman C, Schneider H et al (2007b) Coupled human and natural systems. AMBIO J Hum Environ 36(8):639–649

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lynam T, de Jong W, Sheil D, Kusumanto T, Evans K (2007) A review of tools for incorporating community knowledge, preferences, and values into decision making in natural resources management. Ecol Soc 12(1):1–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Margerum RD, Hooper B (2001) Integrated environmental management: improving implementation through leverage-point mapping. Soc Nat Resour 14(1):1–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Margono B, Turubanova S, Zhuravleva I, Potapov P, Tyukavina A, Baccini A, Goetz S, Hansen M (2012) Mapping and monitoring deforestation and forest degradation in Sumatra (Indonesia) using Landsat time series data sets from 1990 to 2010. Environ Res Lett 7(3):034010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MEA Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being: current state and trends. Chapter 21. Forest and Woodland Systems. Island Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Meadows D (1999) Leverage-points. Places to intervene in a system. The Sustainability Institute, Hartland

    Google Scholar 

  • MINAM (Ministry of the Environment, Peru) (2009) Macro zonificación ecológica económica (ZEE) de Madre de Dios. http://sinia.minam.gob.pe/. Accessed March 2014

  • MINAM (Ministry of the Environment, Peru) Alvarez J, Sotero V, Brack Egg A, Ipenza Peralta CA (2011) Mineria Aurifera en Madre de Dios y Contaminacion con Mercurio, Inform from El Instituto de la Amazonia Peruana y el Ministerio del Ambiente

  • Mitchell B, Pigram JJ (1989) Integrated resource management and the Hunter Valley conservation trust, NSW, Australia. Appl Geogr 9:196–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moon K, Cocklin C (2011) A landholder-based approach to the design of private-land conservation programs. Conserv Biol 25:493–503

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murdoch W, Polasky S, Wilson K, Possingham HP, Kareiva P, Shaw R (2007) Maximizing return on investment in conservation. Biol Conserv 139(3):375–388

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Myers N (2001) Hotspots. Encyclopedia of biodiversity. Academic Press, San Diego

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson G (2005) Drivers of ecosystem change: summary chapter. Ecosystems and human well-being: current state and trends. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Island Press, Washington, D.C., pp 74–76

    Google Scholar 

  • Nguyen NC, Bosch OJH (2013) A systems thinking approach to identify leverage-points for sustainability: a case study in the Cat Ba Biosphere Reserve Vietnam. Syst Res Behav Sci 30:104–115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom E (1990) Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge University Press, New York, p 90

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Phuc XT, Wolfram D, Sango M, Thu PT, Zingerli C (2012) The prospects for payment for ecosystem services (PES) in Vietnam: a look at three payment schemes. Hum Ecol 40(2):237–249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pullin AS, Knight TM (2001) Effectiveness in conservation practice: pointers from medicine and public health. Conserv Biol 15(1):50–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Putz F, Dykstra D, Heinrich R (2000) Why poor logging practices persist in the tropics. Conserv Biol 14(4):951–956

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reed M (2008) Stakeholder participation for environmental management: a literature review. Biol Conserv 141(10):2417–2431

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reed M, Fraser E, Dougill A (2006) An adaptive learning process for developing and applying sustainability indicators with local communities. Ecol Econ 59:406–418

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richards C, Blackstock K, Carter C (2004) Practical approaches to participation SERG policy brief no. 1. Macauley Land Use Research Institute, Aberdeen

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenthal A, Stutzman H, Forsyth A (2012) Creating mosaic-based conservation corridors to respond to major threats in the Amazon headwaters. Ecol Restor 30:296–299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rountree J (1977) Systems thinking—some fundamental aspects. Agric Syst 2(4):247–254

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schirmer J, Dovers S, Clayton H (2012) Informing conservation policy design through an examination of landholder preferences: a case study of scattered tree conservation in Australia. Biol Conserv 153:51–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schroth G, Fonseco G, Harvey C, Gascon C, Vasconcelos H, Isac A (eds) (2004) Agroforestry and biodiversity conservation in tropical landscapes. Island Press, washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Scullion J, Thomas C, Vogt K, Pérez-Maqueo O, Logsdon M (2011) Evaluating the environmental impact of payments for ecosystem services in Coatepec (Mexico) using remote sensing and on-site interviews. Environ Conserv 38(4):426–434

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scullion J, Vogt K, Sienkiewicz A, Gmur S, Trujillo C (2014) Assessing the influence of land-cover change and conflicting land-use authorizations on ecosystem conversion on the forest frontier of MdD, Peru. Biol Conserv 171:247–258

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Senge P (2006) The fifth discipline: the art and practice of the learning organization (revised and updated). Random House, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Sewall B, Freestone A, Moutui M, Toilibou N, Said I, Toumani S, Iboura C (2011) Reorienting systematic conservation assessment for effective conservation planning. Conserv Biol 25(4):688–696

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spangenberg J (2011) Sustainability science: a review, an analysis and some empirical lessons. Environ Conserv 38(03):275–287

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stickler C, Nepstad D, Coe M, Mcgrath D, Rodrigues H, Walker W, Davidson E et al (2009) The potential ecological costs and cobenefits of REDD: a critical review and case study from the Amazon region. Glob Chang Biol 15(12):2803–2824

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sultana P, Abeyasekera S (2007) Effectiveness of participatory planning for community management of fisheries in Bangladesh. J Environ Manag 86:201–213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swenson J, Carter CE, Domec JC, Delgado C (2011) Gold mining in the Peruvian Amazon: global prices, deforestation, and mercury imports. PLoS One 6(4):e18875

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tear TH, Stratton BN, Game ET, Brown MA, Apse CD, Shirer RR (2014) A return-on-investment framework to identify conservation priorities in Africa. Biol Conserv 173:42–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Terauchi D, Imang N, Nanang M, Kawai M, Sardjono MA, Pambudhi F, Inoue F (2014) Implication for designing a REDD+ program in a frontier of oil palm plantation development: evidence in East Kalimantan, Indonesia. Open J For 4(3):260–277

    Google Scholar 

  • Tosakana NSP, Van Tassell LW, Wulfhorst JD, Boll J, Mahler R, Brooks ES, Kane S (2010) Determinants of the adoption of conservation practices by farmers in the Northwest Wheat and Range Region. J Soil Water Conserv 65(6):404–412

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vatn A (2010) An institutional analysis of payments for environmental services. Ecol Econ 69(6):1245–1252

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Villoria NB, Byerlee D, Stevenson J (2014) The effects of agricultural technological progress on deforestation: what do we really know. Appl Econ Perspec Policy 0:1–27

    Google Scholar 

  • Vuohelainen J, Coad L, Marthews T, Yadvinder M, Killeen T (2012) Effectiveness of contrasting protected areas in preventing deforestation in MdD, Peru. Environ Manag 50(4):645–663

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • WCED World Commission on Environment and Development (1987) Our common future. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Wells M, Guggenheim S, Khan A, Wardojo W, Jepson P (1999) Investing in biodiversity: a review of Indonesia’s integrated conservation and development projects. World Bank Publications, Washington

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Withey JC, Lawler J, Polasky S, Planting AJ, Nelson EJ, Kareiva P, Reid W (2012) Maximizing return on conservation investment in the conterminous USA. Ecol Lett 15(11):1249–1256

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wunder S, Engel S, Pagiola S (2008) Taking stock: a comparative analysis of payments for environmental services programmes in developed and developing countries. Ecol Econ 65:834–852

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yli-Pelkonen V, Koh J (2005) The role of local ecological knowledge in sustainable urban planning: perspectives from Finland. Sustain Sci Pract Policy 1 1

Download references

Acknowledgments

This project benefited greatly from the assistance of the following people and organizations: Yadira Cipriani, Kurt Holle, Chris Kirkby, Juan Obesso Andrea Odle, Hannah Stutzman, and Daniel Vogt, as well as the nonprofit organizations the Amazon Conservation Association (ACA) and the Asociación para la Conservación de la Cuenca Amazónica (ACCA). Special thanks to the reviewers whose helpful comments improved the manuscript, as well as to Stephan Gmur for creating the study area map

Conflict of interest

J.S. received financial support from a US State Department Fulbright fellowship to Peru and project support from the Amazon Conservation Association. The views expressed in this paper are solely those of the authors and are not endorsed by the United States Government or any supporting organization. The authors do not have any conflicts of interest to disclose.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Environmental Studies, McDaniel College, Westminster, USA

    Jason J. Scullion

  2. School of Environmental and Forest Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, USA

    Kristiina A. Vogt, Sophia Winkler-Schor & Alison Sienkiewicz

  3. National University of Madre de Dios (UNAMAD), Puerto Maldonado, Peru

    Carlos Peña

  4. Nature Services Peru, Cusco, Peru

    Frank Hajek

Authors
  1. Jason J. Scullion
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kristiina A. Vogt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sophia Winkler-Schor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Alison Sienkiewicz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Carlos Peña
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Frank Hajek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jason J. Scullion.

Additional information

Handled by Matthias Ruth, School of Public Policy and Urban Affairs, USA.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Scullion, J.J., Vogt, K.A., Winkler-Schor, S. et al. Designing conservation-development policies for the forest frontier. Sustain Sci 11, 295–306 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-015-0315-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-015-0315-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation