Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Deforestation and trends of change in protected areas of the Usumacinta River basin (2000–2018), Mexico and Guatemala

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Regional Environmental Change Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Deforestation is one of the processes that most impact the functioning of terrestrial ecosystems. In Mexico and Guatemala, deforestation continues to increase at alarming rates, but there are still regions where extended areas of conserved vegetation persist, such as the Usumacinta River basin. Throughout history, various protected areas (PA) have been designated in this basin; however, anthropogenic activities put its natural heritage at risk. This research aimed to analyze the current status and process of forest cover loss in the region and compare it within and outside PA, as well as among different PA administrations. In 2000, 75% of the basin’s area was covered by some type of tree-dominated plant community. Over the following 18 years, this area was reduced by 27%. Most of this forest loss occurred in Guatemalan territory. Although the net forest loss was higher in unprotected areas than in protected areas in Guatemala, the opposite pattern was observed in terms of the annual rate of forest loss. In the case of Mexico, forest loss was higher in unprotected areas in terms of both net forest loss and annual rates. Additionally, in both countries, PA under the administration of municipal authorities showed the lowest forest loss rates. This study showed that deforestation is an ongoing process in the Usumacinta basin with a heterogeneous spatial distribution, where PA have had different capabilities in helping conserve its forest cover. This information will be essential for binational conservation strategies aimed at preserving forest connectivity in the region.

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.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Source: Hansen et al. (2013), Mexico’s Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía (INEGI) and Guatemala’s Instituto Geográfico Nacional (IGN)

Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Andam KS, Ferraro PJ, Pfaff A, Sanchez-Azofeifa GA, Robalino JA (2008) Measuring the effectiveness of protected area networks in reducing deforestation. PNAS 105:16089–16094. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0800437105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Angelsen A, Brockhaus M, Sunderlin W, Verchot LV (2013) Análisis de REDD+ Retos y opciones. CIFOR, Bogor. https://doi.org/10.17528/cifor/004117

  • Arriaga-Cabrera L, Espinoza-Rodríguez JM, Aguilar-Zúñiga C, Martínez-Romero E, Gómez-Mendoza L et al (2000) Regiones terrestres prioritarias de México. Comisión Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad, Mexico City

  • Blankespoor B, Dasgupta S, Wheeler D (2017) Protected areas and deforestation: new results from high-resolution panel data. Nat Resour Forum 41:55–68. https://doi.org/10.1111/1477-8947.12118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonham C, Sacayon E, Tzi E (2008) Protecting imperiled ‘“paper parks”’: potential lessons from the Sierra Chinajá, Guatemala. Biodiv Cons 17:1581–1593. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-008-9368-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bray DB, Duran E, Ramos VH, Mas JF, Velazquez A et al (2008) Tropical deforestation, community forests, and protected areas in the Maya Forest. Ecol Soc 13:56. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-02593-130256

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bray DB, Velázquez A (2009) From displacement-based conservation to place-based conservation. Conserv Soc 7:11–14. https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-4923.54791

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brechin SR (2003) Wandering boundaries and illegal residents the political ecology of protected area deforestation in South Sumatra Indonesia from 1979 to 1992. In: Brechin SR, Fortwangler CL, WilshusenPR, West PC (eds.). Contested nature: promoting international biodiversity with social justice in the twenty-first century. Suny Press, New York, USA, pp 59–72

  • Bruner AG, Gullison RE, Rice RE, Da Fonseca GAB (2001) Effectiveness of parks in protecting tropical biodiversity. Science 291:125–128. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.291.5501.125

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bullock EL, Nolte C, Segovia AR, Woodcock CE (2019) Ongoing forest disturbance in Guatemala’s protected areas. Remote Sens Ecol Conserv 6:141–152. https://doi.org/10.1002/rse2.130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burivalova Z, Allnut TF, Rademacher D, Schlemm A, Wilcove DS et al (2019) What works in tropical forest conservation, and what does not: effectiveness of four strategies in terms of environmental, social, and economic outcomes. Cons Sci and Pract 1:e28. https://doi.org/10.1111/csp2.28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butler RA (2015) What’s the current deforestation rate in the Amazon rainforest? Mongabay: News & Inspiration from Nature’s Frontline. https://news.mongabay.com/2015/05/whats-the-current-deforestation-rate-in-the-amazon-rainforest/. Accessed 21 April 2020

  • Carabias J, de la Maza J, Cadena R (2015) El escenario natural y social. In: Carabias J, de la Maza, J, Cadena R (eds) Conservación y desarrollo sustentable en la Selva Lacandona: 25 años de actividades y experiencias. Natura y Ecosistemas Mexicanos, Mexico City, pp 16–17

  • Carey C, Dudley N, Stolton S (2000) Threats to protected areas: squandering paradise? The importance and vulnerability of the world’s protected areas. World Wide Fund for Nature. https://portals.iucn.org/library/sites/library/files/documents/Bios-Cons-Nat-Pro-061.pdf. Accessed 21 April 2020

  • Chape S, Harrison J, Spalding M, Lysenko I (2005) Measuring the extent and effectiveness of protected areas as an indicator for meeting global biodiversity targets. Philos T R Soc B 360:443–455. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2004.1592

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Comision Centroamericana de Ambiente y Desarrollo (CCAD) (2003) Sistema centroamericano de áreas protegidas: un entorno para conservar la diversidad biológica. Informe Regional 2003: Avance en el cumplimiento del Convenio sobre la Diversidad Biológica. CCAD. http://www.fao.org/forestry/13161-0e678e66b4685e9a7850699e9c2674a04.pdf. Accessed 21 April 2020

  • Comisión Nacional del Agua (CONAGUA) (2014) Estudio para el proyecto Hidrológico para proteger a la población de inundaciones y aprovechar mejor el agua. CONAGUA, Mexico City. https://www.gob.mx/conagua/documentos/estudio-para-el-proyecto-hidrologico-para-proteger-a-la-poblacion-de-inundaciones-y-aprovechar-mejor-el-agua-prohtab-38848. Accessed 21 April 2020

  • Congreso de la República de Guatemala (1989) Decreto número 4–89, Ley de Áreas Protegidas. Guatemala, Guatemala. https://www.acnur.org/fileadmin/Documentos/BDL/2008/6696.pdf. Accessed 21 April 2020

  • Consejo Nacional de Áreas Protegidas (CONAP) (2006) Plan Maestro de las Áreas Protegidas del Suroeste del Petén 2008–2012. Guatemala, Guatemala. https://www.silene.ong/en/documentation-centre/planning-documents/plan-maestro-2008-2012-areas-protegidas-suroeste-peten. Accessed 21 April 2020

  • Covaleda S, Aguilar S, Ranero A, Marín I, Paz F (2014) Diagnóstico sobre determinantes de deforestación en Chiapas. Alianza México para la reducción de emisiones por deforestación y degradación, Mexico City. http://sis.cnf.gob.mx/wp-content/plugins/conafor-files/2018/nacional/catalogo/biblioteca/101.pdf. Accessed 21 April 2020

  • Cruz-Paz G, Mercedes-Castillo M, Espinoza-Tenorio A, Bravo-Peña LC, Valencia-Barrera E et al (2018) Áreas prioritarias de conservación en la cuenca Usumacinta: la aplicación de un enfoque multicriterio. Inv Geogr 97:2448–7279. https://doi.org/10.14350/rig.59482

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cuevas ML, Garrido A, Pérez-Damián JL, Iura-González D (2010) Procesos de cambio de uso de suelo y degradación de la vegetación natural. In Cotler-Ávalos H (ed) Las cuencas hidrográficas de México: Diagnóstico y Priorización. Secretaría de Medio Ambiente Recursos Naturales and Fundación Gonzalo Río Arronte, Mexico City, pp 96–103. https://micrositios.inecc.gob.mx/cuenca/diagnostico/20-cambio-uso-suelo.pdf. Accessed 21 April 2020

  • De Jong BHJ, Ochoa-Gaona S, Castillo-Santiago MA, Ramírez-Marcial N, Cairns MA (2000) Carbon flux and patterns of land-use/land-cover change in the Selva Lacandona, Mexico. Ambio 29:504–511. https://doi.org/10.1579/0044-7447-29.8.504

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Vos, J (2002) Una tierra para sembrar sueños: historia reciente de la Selva Lacandona, 1950–2000. Fondo de Cultura Económica, México City

  • Díaz MB, Martner D, Domínguez A, Martner T (2019) La producción agroecológica como alternativa de conservación de la biodiversidad. In: Obregón-Viloria R, Almeida-Valles D (eds) Desarrollo rural sustentable en corredores biológicos: una experiencia en conservación y producción sustentable en Chiapas. Comisión Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad, México City, pp 87–114

  • Díaz-Gallegos JR, Mas J-F, Velázquez-Montes A (2008) Monitoreo de los patrones de deforestación en el Corredor Biológico Mesoamericano, México. Interciencia 33:882–890. http://ve.scielo.org/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0378-18442008001200006. Accessed 21 April 2020

  • Dudley N (2008) Directrices para la aplicación de las categorías de gestión de áreas protegidas. International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), Gland. https://portals.iucn.org/library/efiles/documents/PAPS-016-Es.pdf. Accessed 21 April 2020

  • Durán-Medina E, Mas JF, Velázquez A (2001) Cambios en las coberturas de vegetación y usos del suelo en regiones con manejo forestal comunitario y áreas naturales protegidas de México. In: Bray DB, Merino Pérez L, Barry D. (eds) Los bosques comunitarios de México. Manejo sustentable de paisajes forestales. Secretaría de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales, Instituto Nacional de Ecología, Consejo Civil Mexicano para la Silvicultura Sostenible, Instituto de Geografía, UNAM, Florida International Institute, México, pp 267–300

  • Duran-Medina E, Mas JF, Velázquez A (2005) Land use/cover change in community-based forest management regions and protected areas in Mexico. In: Bray DB, Merino Pérez L, Barry D (eds) The community forests of Mexico. Managing for sustainable landscapes. University of Texas Press, Austin, pp 215–238

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Fernández-Montes de Oca A, Gallardo-Cruz JA, Martínez M (2015) Deforestación en la región Selva Lacandona. In: Carabias J, de la Maza J, Cadena R (eds) Conservación y desarrollo sustentable en la Selva Lacandona: 25 años de actividades y experiencias. Natura y Ecosistemas Mexicanos, Mexico City, pp 16–17

  • Figueroa F, Sánchez-Cordero V, Illoldi-Rangel P, Linaje M (2011) Evaluación de la efectividad de las áreas protegidas para contener procesos de cambio en el uso del suelo y la vegetación: ¿Un índice es suficiente? Rev Mex Biod 82:951–963. http://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1870-34532011000300020&lng=es&tlng=es. Accessed 21 April 2020

  • Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) FAOSTAT Statistical Database, FAO, Land Use (2020)

  • Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) (2015). Global Forest Resources Assessment 2015. FAO, Rome. http://www.fao.org/3/a-i4808e.pdf. Accessed 21 April 2020

  • Furumo PR, Aide TM (2017) Characterizing commercial oil palm expansion in Latin America: land use change and trade. Environ Res Lett 12:024008. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa5892

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galiatsatos N, Donoghue DNM, Watt P, Bholanath P, Hansen MC et al (2020) An assessment of global forest change datasets for national forest monitoring and reporting. Remote Sens 12:1790. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12111790

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • García A, Kauffer MEF (2011) Las cuencas compartidas entre México, Guatemala y Belice: un acercamiento a su delimitación y problemática general. Frontera Norte 23:131–162. http://www.scielo.org.mx/pdf/fn/v23n45/v23n45a5.pdf. Accessed 21 April 2020

  • Gaveau DL, Curran LM, Paoli GD, Carlson KM, Wells P et al (2012) Examining protected area effectiveness in Sumatra: importance of regulations governing unprotected lands. Conserv Lett 5:142–148. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-263X.2011.00220.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giam X (2017) Global biodiversity loss from tropical deforestation. Proc Nat Acad Sci 114:5775–5777. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1706264114

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • González-Roglich M, Villarreal D, Castro MG (2012) Evaluación de la efectividad de la Reserva Parque Luro como herramienta de conservación del Caldenal pampeano: cambios en la cobertura vegetal a nivel de paisaje entre 1960 y 2004. Ecol Aust 22:11–21. https://bibliotecadigital.exactas.uba.ar/download/ecologiaaustral/ecologiaaustral_v022_n01_p011.pdf. Accessed 21 April 2020

  • Gillespie TW, Willis KS, Ostermann-Kelm S (2015) Spaceborne remote sensing of the world’s protected areas. Prog Phys Geog 39:388–404. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309133314561648

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gollnow F, Göpel J, Viana-Hissa L, Schaldach R, Lakes T (2018) Scenarios of land-use change in a deforestation corridor in the Brazilian Amazon: combining two scales of analysis. Reg Environ Change 18:143–159. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-017-1129-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hannah L, Midgley GF, Lovejoy T, Bond WJ, Bush M et al (2002) Conservation of biodiversity in a changing climate. Conserv Biol 16:11–15. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.2002.00465.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen MC, Potapov PV, Moore R, Hancher M, Turubanova SAA et al (2013) High-resolution global maps of 21st-century forest cover change. Science 342:850–853. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1244693

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hervas A (2020) Cultivating vulnerability: oil palm expansion and the socio-ecological food system in the Lachuá Ecoregion. Guatemala Reg Environ Change 20:45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-020-01630-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodgdon BD, Hughell D, Ramos VH, McNab RB (2015) Deforestation trends in the Maya Biosphere Reserve, Guatemala 2000–2013. Rainforest Alliance, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Instituto de Agricultura, Recursos Naturales y Ambiente de la Universidad Rafael Landívar (2014) Compilación de investigaciones y análisis de coyuntura sobre la conflictividad socioambiental de Guatemala. Universidad Rafael Landívar, Guatemala. https://www.url.edu.gt/publicacionesurl/FileCS.ashx?Id=40240. Accessed 21 April 2020

  • International Union for Conservation Nature (IUCN) (1994) Guidelines for protected area management categories. IUCN, Gland

    Google Scholar 

  • Joppa LN, Loarie SR, Pimm SL (2008) On the protection of “protected areas.” PNAS 105:6673–6678. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0802471105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Locke H, Dearden P (2005) Rethinking protected area categories and the new paradigm. Environ Conserv 32:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0376892905001852

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • López-Feldman A (2012) Deforestación en México: un análisis preliminar. Working papers DTE 527. Centro de Investigación y Docencia Económicas (CIDE), Mexico City. https://ideas.repec.org/p/emc/wpaper/dte527.html. Accessed 21 April 2020

  • Lovejoy TE (2006) Protected areas: a prism for a changing world. TREE 21:329–333. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2006.04.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • March-Misfut IJ, Castro M (2010) La cuenca del Río Usumacinta: perfil y perspectivas para su conservación para su conservación y desarrollo sustentable. In: Cotler-Ávalos H (ed) Las cuencas hidrográficas de México: Diagnóstico y Priorización. Secretaría de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales and Fundación Gonzalo Río Arronte, Mexico City, pp 193–197. https://agua.org.mx/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/cuencausumacinta_conservacionydesarrollo.pdf. Accessed 21 April 2020

  • Mas JF, Velázquez A, Schmitt A, Castro R (2003) Una evaluación de los efectos del aislamiento, la topografía, los suelos y el estatus de protección sobre las tasas de deforestación en México. Revista Espacio Geográfico (Ra’ega) 6:61–73

  • Mas JF (2005) Assessing protected area effectiveness using surrounding (buffer) areas environmentally similar to the target area. Environ Monit Assess 105:69–80. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-005-3156-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Medina-Sanson L, Hernández FG (2018) Apropiación territorial y recursos hídricos en la cuenca de los ríos Grijalva y Usumacinta, México. Agua y Territorio 12:133–144. https://doi.org/10.17561/at.12.3505

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milodowski DT, Mitchard ETA, Williams M (2017) Forest loss maps from regional satellite monitoring systematically underestimate deforestation in two rapidly changing parts of the Amazon. Environ Res Lett 12:094003. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa7e1e

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller TR, Minteer BA, Malan LC (2011) The new conservation debate: the view from practical ethics. Biol Conserv 144:948–957. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2010.04.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nagendra H, Lucas R, Honrado J, Jongman RHG, Tarantino C et al (2013) Remote sensing for conservation monitoring: assessing protected areas, habitat extent, habitat condition, species diversity and threats. Ecol Ind 33:45–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2012.09.014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naughton-Treves L, Holland MB, Brandon K (2005) The role of protected areas in conserving biodiversity and sustaining local livelihoods. Annu Rev Environ Resour 30:219–252. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.energy.30.050504.164507

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patarkalashvili T (2019) Deforestation threaten plant biodiversity and climate change. CIACR 6:748–753. https://doi.org/10.32474/CIACR.2019.06.000236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips A (2003) Turning ideas on their head: the new paradigm for protected areas. The George Wright Forum 20:8–32. https://www.jstor.org/stable/43599027

  • Pimentel D, McNair M, Buck L, Pimentel M, Kamil J (1997) The value of forests to world food security. Hum Ecol 25:91–120. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021987920278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter-Bolland L, Ellis EA, Guariguata MR, Ruiz-Mallén I, Negrete-Yankelevich S et al (2012) Community managed forests and forest protected areas: an assessment of their conservation effectiveness across the tropics. For Ecol Man 268:6–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2011.05.034

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Puyravaud JP (2003) Standardizing the calculation of the annual rate of deforestation. For Ecol Manag 177:593–596. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(02)00335-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quezada ML, Arroyo-Rodríguez V, Pérez-Silva E, Aide M (2014) Land cover changes in the Lachuá region, Guatemala: patterns, proximate causes, and underlying driving forces over the last 50 years. Reg Environ Change 14:1139–1149. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-013-0548-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramos VH, Burgués I, Fleck LC, Castellanos B, Albacete C et al (2007) Análisis económico y ambiental de carreteras propuestas dentro de la Reserva de la Biosfera Maya. Serie Técnica No. 8. Conservation Strategy Fund, Arcata. https://cebem.org/revistaredesma/vol2/pdf/biosfera_maya.pdf. Accessed 21 April 2020

  • Rodríguez N, Armenteras D, Retana J (2013) Effectiveness of protected areas in the Colombian Andes: deforestation, fire and land-use changes. Reg Environ Change 13:423–435. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-012-0356-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodríguez-Aldabe A, Rodríguez-Aldabe Y (2015) Rasgos de la ocupación territorial en la Selva Lacandona y su entorno, desde una perspectiva demográfica. In: Carabias J, de la Maza J, Cadena R (eds) Conservación y desarrollo sustentable en la Selva Lacandona: 25 años de actividades y experiencias. Natura y Ecosistemas Mexicanos, Mexico City, pp 45–60

  • Rosa IMD, Smith MJ, Wearn OR, Purves D, Ewers RM (2016) The environmental legacy of modern tropical deforestation. Curr Biol 26:2161–2166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2016.06.013

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rueda X (2010) Understanding deforestation in the southern Yucatán: insights from a sub-regional, multi-temporal analysis. Reg Environ Change 10:175–189. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-010-0115-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saavedra-Guerrero A, López-López DM, Castellanos-Fajardo LA (2015) Descripción del medio físico de la cuenca media del río Usumacinta en México. In: Carabias J, de la Maza J, Cadena R (eds) Conservación y desarrollo sustentable en la Selva Lacandona: 25 años de actividades y experiencias. Natura y Ecosistemas Mexicanos, Mexico City, pp 19–34

  • Sánchez AJ, Salcedo MA, Florido R, Mendoza JD, Ruiz-Carrera V et al (2015) Ciclos de inundación y conservación de servicios ambientales en la cuenca baja de los ríos Grijalva-Usumacinta. ContactoS 97:5–14. http://www2.izt.uam.mx/newpage/contactos/revista/97/pdfs/inundacion.pdf. Accessed 21 April 2020

  • Sánchez-Colón S, Flores-Martínez A, Cruz-Leyva IA, Velázquez A (2009) Estado y transformación de los ecosistemas terrestres por causas humanas. In: Comisión Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad (ed) Capital natural de México, vol. II: Estado de conservación y tendencias de cambio. Comisión Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad, Mexico City, pp 75–129

  • Schleicher J, Peres CA, Amano T, Llactayo W, Leader-Williams N (2017) Conservation performance of different conservation governance regimes in the Peruvian Amazon. Sci Rep 7:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-10736-w

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Schoene D, Killmann W, von Lüpke H, LoycheWilkie M (2007) Forests and climate change working paper 5: definitional issues related to reducing emissions from deforestation in developing countries. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Rome. http://www.fao.org/3/j9345e/j9345e00.pdf. Accessed 21 April 2020

  • Secretaría de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (SEMARNAT) (2003) Ley General del Equilibrio Ecológico y la Protección al Ambiente (LGEEPA). SEMARNAT, Mexico

  • Secretaría de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (SEMARNAT) (2016) Compendio de estadísticas ambientales, indicadores clave y de desempeño ambiental. SEMARNAT, Mexico

  • Secretaría de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (SEMARNAT), Comisión Nacional de Áreas Naturales Protegidas (CONANP) (2016) Prontuario Estadístico y Geográfico de las Áreas Naturales Protegidas de México. SEMARNAT, México

  • Sugden AM (2018) Mapping global deforestation patterns. Science 361:1083. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.361.6407.1083-e

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas CD, Cameron A, Green RE, Bakkenes M, Beaumont LJ, Collingham YC, Erasmus BFN, de Siqueira MF, Grainger A, Hannah L, Hughes L, Huntley B, van Jaarsveld AS, Midgley GF, Miles L, Ortega-Huerta MA, Townsend Peterson A, Phillips OL, Williams SE (2004) Extinction risk from climate change. Nature 427(6970):145–148. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature02121

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Toledo VM (2005) Repensar la conservación: ¿áreas naturales protegidas o estrategia bioregional? Gaceta Ecol 77:67–83. https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/539/53907705.pdf. Accessed 21 April 2020

  • Toledo A (2003) Ríos, costas, mares. Hacia un análisis integrado de las regiones hidrológicas de México. Secretaría de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales, Mexico City

  • Trench T (2014) ¿Ganando terreno?: La CONANP en la subregión Miramar de la Reserva de la Biosfera Montes Azules, Chiapas. In: Legorreta Díaz, M del C, Márquez Rosano, C, Trench, T (eds) Paradojas de las tierras protegidas. democracia y política ambiental en reservas de biosfera en Chiapas. Centro de Investigaciones Interdisciplinarias en Ciencias y Humanidades, Centro Regional de Investigaciones Multidisciplinarias, Universidad Autónoma de Chapingo / Dirección de Centros Regionales Universitarios, Mexico City, pp 61–105

  • UN General Assembly (2015) Transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable development, A/RES/70/1. https://www.refworld.org/docid/57b6e3e44.html. Accessed 21 April 2020

  • Vaca RA, Golicher DJ, Rodiles-Hernández R, Castillo-Santiago MA, Bejarano M et al (2019) Drivers of deforestation in the basin of the Usumacinta River: inference on process from pattern analysis using generalised additive models. PLoS One 14:1–21. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222908

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Vásquez-Sánchez MA, March IJ, Lazcano-Barrero MA (1992) Características socioeconómicas de la Selva Lacandona. In: Vásquez-Sánchez MA, Ramos MA (eds) Reserva de la Biósfera Montes Azules, Selva Lacandona: Investigación para su conservación. Publ Esp Ecosfera, Mexico City, pp 287–323

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This project was funded by the National Council of Science and Technology (Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología; FORDECyT-273646) and by the Universidad Iberoamericana (Dirección de Investigación-Fondo SNI 100 and 14th research fund). We thank very much Isabelle Gamache for translating the manuscript into English.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centro Transdisciplinar Universitario para la Sustentabilidad (CENTRUS) , Universidad Iberoamericana, 01219, Mexico City, Mexico

    José Alberto Gallardo-Cruz

  2. Centro del Cambio Global y la Sustentabilidad, A.C., 86080, Villahermosa, Tabasco, Mexico

    Candelario Peralta-Carreta & Jonathan Vidal Solórzano

  3. Posgrado en Geografía, Centro de Investigaciones en Geografía Ambiental (CIGA), Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, 58190, Morelia, Mexico

    Jonathan Vidal Solórzano

  4. Laboratorio de Sistemas de Información Geográfica, Instituto de Biología, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, 04510, Mexico City, Mexico

    Ana Isabel Fernández-Montes de Oca

  5. CONACyT-Centro del Cambio Global y la Sustentabilidad, A.C., 86080, Villahermosa, Tabasco, Mexico

    Luzma Fabiola Nava

  6. International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), Schlossplatz 1, A-2361, Laxenburg, Austria

    Luzma Fabiola Nava

  7. Centro de Investigaciones y Estudios Superiores en Antropología Social (CIESAS) - Unidad Regional Sureste, 29247, San Cristóbal de las Casas, Chiapas, Mexico

    Edith Kauffer

  8. Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, 04510, Mexico City, Mexico

    Julia Carabias

Authors
  1. José Alberto Gallardo-Cruz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Candelario Peralta-Carreta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jonathan Vidal Solórzano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ana Isabel Fernández-Montes de Oca
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Luzma Fabiola Nava
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Edith Kauffer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Julia Carabias
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jonathan Vidal Solórzano.

Additional information

Communicated by Diana Sietz.

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gallardo-Cruz, J.A., Peralta-Carreta, C., Solórzano, J.V. et al. Deforestation and trends of change in protected areas of the Usumacinta River basin (2000–2018), Mexico and Guatemala. Reg Environ Change 21, 97 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-021-01833-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-021-01833-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation