Population and Environment

, Volume 38, Issue 4, pp 424–447 | Cite as

Family planning and deforestation: evidence from the Ecuadorian Amazon

Original Paper
  • 1k Downloads

Abstract

Despite an abundant literature exploring the relationship between population growth and forest cover change, comparatively little research has examined the forest cover impacts of family planning use—a key determinant of population growth rates in many developing countries. Using data from a panel survey of farms in the Northern Ecuadorian Amazon, this paper explores whether family planning use affects changes in forest cover. After controlling for household life cycle effects, family planning use among female heads of farm households did not have an independent effect on deforestation, reforestation, or net forest loss between 1990 and 2008. Rather, shorter-term drivers of forest change tend to be associated with household life cycles and shifts in production and consumption. However, family planning will continue to improve development and health outcomes for women by reducing unwanted fertility and may offer longer-term environmental benefits.

Keywords

Family planning Deforestation Ecuador Fertility 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Clark Gray provided key insights and guidance that led to the development of this paper. Richard Bilsborrow and Pamela Jagger also provided feedback on a draft of this manuscript. Brian Frizzelle was instrumental in collecting and processing the farm boundary data that are used in this study. Funding for the Ecuador household surveys was provided by the World Wildlife Fund, the National Science Foundation, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and the Mellon Foundation. This research received support from the Population Research Training grant (T32 HD007168) and the Population Research Infrastructure Program (P2C HD050924) awarded to the Carolina Population Center from NIH/NIHCD.

References

  1. Aide, T. M., & Grau, H. R. (2004). Globalization, migration, and Latin American ecosystems. Science, 305(5692), 1915–1916.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aldrich, S., Walker, R., Simmons, C., Caldas, M., & Perz, S. (2012). Contentious land change in the Amazon’s arc of deforestation. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 102(1), 103–128. doi: 10.1080/00045608.2011.620501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Allison, P. D. (2009). Fixed effects regression models (Vol. 160). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Angeles, G., Guilkey, D. K., & Mroz, T. A. (2005). The effects of education and family planning programs on fertility in Indonesia. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 54(1), 165–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Angelsen, A., & Kaimowitz, D. (1999). Rethinking the causes of deforestation: lessons from economic models. The World Bank Research Observer, 14(1), 73–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Barber, C. P., Cochrane, M. A., Souza Jr., C. M., & Laurance, W. F. (2014). Roads, deforestation, and the mitigating effect of protected areas in the Amazon. Biological Conservation, 177, 203–209. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2014.07.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Barbieri, A. F., Bilsborrow, R. E., & Pan, W. K. (2005). Farm household lifecycles and land use in the Ecuadorian Amazon. Population and Environment, 27(1), 1–27. doi: 10.1007/s11111-005-0013-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Barbieri, A. F., & Carr, D. L. (2005). Gender-specific out-migration, deforestation and urbanization in the Ecuadorian Amazon. Global and Planetary Change, 47(2), 99–110. doi: 10.1016/j.gloplacha.2004.10.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Barbieri, A. F., Carr, D. L., & Bilsborrow, R. E. (2009). Migration within the frontier: the second generation colonization in the Ecuadorian Amazon. Population Research and Policy Review, 28(3), 291–320. doi: 10.1007/s11113-008-9100-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Barbieri, A. F., & Pan, W. K. (2013). People, land, and context: multilevel determinants of off-farm employment in the Ecuadorian Amazon. Population, Space and Place, 19(5), 558–579. doi: 10.1002/psp.1733.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bass, M. S., Finer, M., Jenkins, C. N., Kreft, H., Cisneros-Heredia, D. F., McCracken, S. F., et al. (2010). Global conservation significance of Ecuador’s Yasuní National Park. PloS One, 5(1), e8767. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0008767.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bhattarai, M., & Hammig, M. (2001). Institutions and the environmental Kuznets curve for deforestation: a crosscountry analysis for Latin America, Africa and Asia. World Development, 29(6), 995–1010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bilsborrow, R. E. (1987). Population pressures and agricultural development in developing countries: a conceptual framework and recent evidence. World Development, 15(2), 183–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bilsborrow, R. E., Barbieri, A. F., & Pan, W. K. (2004). Changes in population and land use over time in the Ecuadorian Amazon. Acta Amazonica, 34, 635–647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bongaarts, J. (1997). The role of family planning programmes in contemporary fertility transitions. In G. W. Jones, R. M. Douglas, J. C. Caldwell, & R. M. De Souza (Eds.), The continuing demographic transition (pp. 422–443). New York, NY: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  16. Bongaarts, J. (2008). Fertility transitions in developing countries: progress or stagnation? Studies in Family Planning, 39(2), 105–110. doi: 10.1111/j.1728-4465.2008.00157.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Boserup, E. (1965). The conditions of agricultural growth. Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
  18. Boserup, E. (1981). Population and technological change: a study of long-term trends. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  19. Bremner, J., Bilsborrow, R., Feldacker, C., & Holt, F. L. (2009). Fertility beyond the frontier: indigenous women, fertility, and reproductive practices in the Ecuadorian Amazon. Population and Environment, 30(3), 93–113. doi: 10.1007/s11111-009-0078-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Brondízio, E. S., Cak, A., Caldas, M. M., Mena, C., Bilsborrow, R., Futemma, C. T., et al. (2009). Small farmers and deforestation in Amazonia. In M. Keller, M. Bustamante, J. Gash, & P. S. Dias (Eds.), Amazonia and global change (pp. 117–143). Washington D.C.: American Geophysical Union.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Cain, M. (1985). On the relationship between landholding and fertility. Population Studies, 39(1), 5–15. doi: 10.1080/0032472031000141246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Caldwell, J. C. (1978). A theory of fertility: from high plateau to destabilization. Population and Development Review, 4(4), 553–577. doi: 10.2307/1971727.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Carr, D. L. (2005). Forest clearing among farm households in the Maya Biosphere Reserve. The Professional Geographer, 57(2), 157–168. doi: 10.1111/j.0033-0124.2005.00469.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Carr, D. L. (2009). Population and deforestation: why rural migration matters. Progress in Human Geography, 33(3), 355–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Carr, D. L., Lopez, A. C., & Bilsborrow, R. E. (2009). The population, agriculture, and environment nexus in Latin America: country-level evidence from the latter half of the twentieth century. Population and Environment, 30(6), 222–246. doi: 10.1007/s11111-009-0090-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Carr, D. L., Pan, W. K., & Bilsborrow, R. E. (2006). Declining fertility on the frontier: the Ecuadorian Amazon. Population and Environment, 28(1), 17–39. doi: 10.1007/s11111-007-0032-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Carr, D. L., Suter, L., & Barbieri, A. (2005). Population dynamics and tropical deforestation: state of the debate and conceptual challenges. Population and Environment, 27(1), 89–113. doi: 10.1007/s11111-005-0014-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Carrasco, A., Terán, C., Crespo, E., & Mejía, E. (2014). Domestic timber market. In E. Mejía & P. Pacheco (Eds.), Forest use and timber markets in the Ecuadorian Amazon. Center for International Forestry Research: Bogor, Indonesia.Google Scholar
  29. CEPAR, & CDC. (1999). Encuesta demografica y de salud materna e infantil ENDEMAIN-99. Quito: Centro de Estudios de Población y Desarrollo Social and Centers for Disease Control.Google Scholar
  30. Chayanov, A. V. (1986). The theory of peasant economy. (D. Thorner, Ed.). Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Cleland, J., Bernstein, S., Ezeh, A., Faundes, A., Glasier, A., & Innis, J. (2006). Family planning: the unfinished agenda The Lancet, 368. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(06)69480-4.
  32. Davis, J., Bilsborrow, R. E., & Gray, C. L. (2015). Delayed fertility transition among indigenous women in the Ecuadorian Amazon. International Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 41(1), 1–10. doi: 10.1363/4100115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. De Koning, F., Aguiñaga, M., Bravo, M., Chiu, M., Lascano, M., Lozada, T., & Suarez, L. (2011). Bridging the gap between forest conservation and poverty alleviation: the Ecuadorian Socio Bosque program. Environmental Science & Policy, 14(5), 531–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. DeFries, R. S., Rudel, T. K., Uriarte, M., & Hansen, M. (2010). Deforestation driven by urban population growth and agricultural trade in the twenty-first century. Nature Geoscience, 3(3), 178–181. doi: 10.1038/ngeo756.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Derose, L. F., & Ezeh, A. C. (2005). Men’s influence on the onset and progress of fertility decline in Ghana, 1988–98. Population Studies, 59(2), 197–210. doi: 10.1080/00324720500099496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Ehrhardt-Martinez, K. (1998). Social determinants of deforestation in developing countries: a cross-national study. Social Forces, 77(2), 567–586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Engelman, R. (2016). Family Planning and Environmental Sustainability Assessment. Washington D.C.: Worldwatch Institute. http://fpesa.net/. Accessed 9 May 2016
  38. Ferretti-Gallon, K., & Busch, J. (2014). Stopping deforestation: what works and what doesn’t (no. 361). Washington D.C.: Center for Global Development.Google Scholar
  39. Finer, M., Jenkins, C. N., Pimm, S. L., Keane, B., & Ross, C. (2008). Oil and gas projects in the western Amazon: threats to wilderness, biodiversity, and indigenous peoples. PloS One, 3(8), e2932.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Geist, H. J., & Lambin, E. F. (2002). Proximate causes and underlying driving forces of tropical deforestation. Bioscience, 52(2), 143–150. doi: 10.1641/0006-3568(2002)052[0143:PCAUDF]2.0.CO;2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Ghimire, D. J., & Hoelter, L. F. (2007). Land use and first birth timing in an agricultural setting. Population and Environment, 28(6), 289–320. doi: 10.1007/s11111-007-0056-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Goicolea, I. (2001). Exploring women’s needs in an Amazon region of Ecuador. Reproductive Health Matters, 9(17), 193–202. doi: 10.1016/S0968-8080(01)90024-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Goicolea, I., San Sebastián, M., & Wulff, M. (2008). Women’s reproductive rights in the Amazon basin of Ecuador: challenges for transforming policy into practice. Health and Human Rights, 91–103.Google Scholar
  44. Gray, C. L., Bilsborrow, R. E., Bremner, J. L., & Lu, F. (2008). Indigenous land use in the Ecuadorian Amazon: a cross-cultural and multilevel analysis. Human Ecology, 36(1), 97–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Hansen, M. C., Potapov, P. V., Moore, R., Hancher, M., Turubanova, S., Tyukavina, A., et al. (2013). High-resolution global maps of 21st-century forest cover change. Science, 342(6160), 850–853.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Hiday, V. A. (1978). Agricultural organization and fertility: a comparison of two Philippine frontier communities. Social Biology, 25(1), 69–79. doi: 10.1080/19485565.1978.9988320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Holland, M. B., de Koning, F., Morales, M., Naughton-Treves, L., Robinson, B. E., & Suárez, L. (2014). Complex tenure and deforestation: implications for conservation incentives in the Ecuadorian Amazon. World Development, 55, 21–36. doi: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2013.01.012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Huber, P. J., & Ronchetti, E. M. (2009). Robust statistics (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. INEC. (2011). Poblaciόn y Tasas de Crecimiento Intercensal de 2010–2001-1990 por Sexo, Segun Parroquias. Downloaded from: http://www.ecuadorencifras.gob.ec/informacion-censal-cantonal/. Accessed 9 May 2016
  50. Jorgenson, A. K., & Burns, T. J. (2007). Effects of rural and urban population dynamics and national development on deforestation in less-developed countries, 1990–2000. Sociological Inquiry, 77(3), 460–482. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-682X.2007.00200.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Kastner, T., Schaffartzik, A., Eisenmenger, N., Erb, K.-H., Haberl, H., & Krausmann, F. (2014). Cropland area embodied in international trade: contradictory results from different approaches. Ecological Economics, 104, 140–144. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.12.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Lam, D., & Duryea, S. (1999). Effects of schooling on fertility, labor supply, and investments in children, with evidence from Brazil. The Journal of Human Resources, 34(1), 160–192. doi: 10.2307/146306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Lambin, E. F., & Meyfroidt, P. (2011). Global land use change, economic globalization, and the looming land scarcity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(9), 3465–3472. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1100480108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Lambin, E. F., Turner, B. L., Geist, H. J., Agbola, S. B., Angelsen, A., Bruce, J. W., et al. (2001). The causes of land-use and land-cover change: moving beyond the myths. Global Environmental Change, 11(4), 261–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Laurance, W. F., Albernaz, A. K. M., Schroth, G., Fearnside, P. M., Bergen, S., Venticinque, E. M., & Da Costa, C. (2002). Predictors of deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon. Journal of Biogeography, 29(5–6), 737–748. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2699.2002.00721.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. López-Carr, D. (2012). Agro-ecological drivers of rural out-migration to the Maya Biosphere Reserve, Guatemala. Environmental Research Letters, 7(4), 45603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. López-Carr, D., & Burgdorfer, J. (2013). Deforestation drivers: population, migration, and tropical land use. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development, 55(1), 3–11.Google Scholar
  58. MAE. (2011). Estimacion de la tasa de deforestacion del Ecuador continental.Google Scholar
  59. MAE. (2012). Línea Base de Deforestación del Ecuador Continental. Quito.Google Scholar
  60. Malthus, T. R. (1993). An essay on the principle of population (1798). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  61. Marquette, C. M. (1998). Land use patterns among small farmer settlers in the northeastern Ecuadorian Amazon. Human Ecology, 26(4), 573–598. doi: 10.1023/a:1018797325069.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. McCracken, S. D., Siqueira, A. D., Moran, E. F., Brondízio, E. S., Wood, C. H., & Porro, R. (2002). Land use patterns on an agricultural frontier in Brazil. In Deforestation and land use in the Amazon (pp. 162–192). Gainesville, FL: University Press of Florida.Google Scholar
  63. Mena, C. F., Bilsborrow, R. E., & McClain, M. E. (2006). Socioeconomic drivers of deforestation in the Northern Ecuadorian Amazon. Environmental Management, 37(6), 802–815.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Meyfroidt, P., Rudel, T. K., & Lambin, E. F. (2010). Forest transitions, trade, and the global displacement of land use. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(49), 20917–20922. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1014773107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Mosandl, R., Günter, S., Stimm, B., & Weber, M. (2008). Ecuador suffers the highest deforestation rate in South America. In E. Beck, J. Bendix, I. Kottke, F. Makeschin, & R. Mosandl (Eds.), Gradients in a tropical mountain ecosystem of Ecuador (Vol. 198, pp. 37–40). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.  10.1007/978–3–540-73526-7_4
  66. Pan, W. K., & Bilsborrow, R. E. (2005). The use of a multilevel statistical model to analyze factors influencing land use: a study of the Ecuadorian Amazon. Global and Planetary Change, 47(2–4), 232–252. doi: 10.1016/j.gloplacha.2004.10.014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Pan, W. K., Carr, D., Barbieri, A., Bilsborrow, R. E., & Suchindran, C. (2007). Forest clearing in the Ecuadorian Amazon: a study of patterns over space and time. Population Research and Policy Review, 26(5–6), 635–659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Pan, W. K., & López-Carr, D. L. (2016). Land use as a mediating factor of fertility in the Amazon. Population and Environment. doi: 10.1007/s11111-016-0253-z.Google Scholar
  69. Pan, W. K., Walsh, S. J., Bilsborrow, R. E., Frizzelle, B. G., Erlien, C. M., & Baquero, F. (2004). Farm-level models of spatial patterns of land use and land cover dynamics in the Ecuadorian Amazon. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 101(2–3), 117–134. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2003.09.022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Perz, S. G. (2001). Household demographic factors as life cycle determinants of land use in the Amazon. Population Research and Policy Review, 20(3), 159–186. doi: 10.1023/A:1010658719768.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Perz, S. G. (2002). The changing social contexts of deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon. Social Science Quarterly, 83(1), 35–52. doi: 10.1111/1540-6237.00069.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Perz, S. G., & Walker, R. T. (2002). Household life cycles and secondary forest cover among small farm colonists in the Amazon. World Development, 30(6), 1009–1027.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Pfaff, A. S. (1999). What drives deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon?: Evidence from satellite and socioeconomic data. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 37(1), 26–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Pichon, F. J. (1997). Colonist land-allocation decisions, land use, and deforestation in the Ecuadorian Amazon frontier. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 45(4), 707–744. doi: 10.1086/452305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Pörtner, C. C., Beegle, K., & Christiaensen, L. (2011). Family planning and fertility: estimating program effects using cross-sectional data (World Bank policy research working paper no. 5812). Washington D.C.: World Bank.Google Scholar
  76. Potter, J. E., Schmertmann, C. P., Assunção, R. M., & Cavenaghi, S. M. (2010). Mapping the timing, pace, and scale of the fertility transition in Brazil. Population and Development Review, 36(2), 283–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Rudel, T. K. (1989). Population development and tropical deforestation: a cross-national study. Rural Sociology, 54(3), 327–338.Google Scholar
  78. Rudel, T. K., Bates, D., & Machinguiashi, R. (2002). A tropical forest transition? Agricultural change, out-migration, and secondary forests in the Ecuadorian Amazon. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 92(1), 87–102. doi: 10.1111/1467-8306.00281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Schutjer, W. A., Stokes, C. S., & Poindexter, J. R. (1983). Farm size, land ownership, and fertility in rural Egypt. Land Economics, 59(4), 393–403. doi: 10.2307/3145654.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Sinha, N. (2005). Fertility, child work, and schooling consequences of family planning programs: evidence from an experiment in rural Bangladesh. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 54(1), 97–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Southworth, J., Marsik, M., Qiu, Y., Perz, S., Cumming, G., Stevens, F., et al. (2011). Roads as drivers of change: trajectories across the Tri-National Frontier in MAP, the Southwestern Amazon. Remote Sensing, 3(5), 1047–1066. doi: 10.3390/rs3051047.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Stokes, C. S., Schutjer, W. A., & Bulatao, R. A. (1986). Is the relationship between landholding and fertility spurious? A response to Cain. Population Studies, 40(2), 305–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Sutherland, E., Carr, D. L., & Curtis, S. L. (2004). Fertility and the environment in a natural resource dependent economy: evidence from Petén, Guatemala. Población y Salud en Mesoamérica, 2(1), 1–14.Google Scholar
  84. Trussell, J. (2011). Contraceptive failure in the United States. Contraception, 83(5), 397–404. doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2011.01.021.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. United Nations. (2015). World urbanization prospects: the 2014 revision. Population Division: Department of Economic and Social Affairs.Google Scholar
  86. VanWey, L. K., D’Antona, Á., & Brondízio, E. (2007). Household demographic change and land use/land cover change in the Brazilian Amazon. Population and Environment, 28(3), 163–185. doi: 10.1007/s11111-007-0040-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Walker, R., Perz, S., Caldas, M., & Silva, L. G. T. (2002). Land use and land cover change in forest frontiers: the role of household life cycles. International Regional Science Review, 25(2), 169–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Weinzettel, J., Hertwich, E. G., Peters, G. P., Steen-Olsen, K., & Galli, A. (2013). Affluence drives the global displacement of land use. Global Environmental Change, 23(2), 433–438. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2012.12.010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Williams, J. N. (2013). Humans and biodiversity: population and demographic trends in the hotspots. Population and Environment, 34(4), 510–523. doi: 10.1007/s11111-012-0175-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Wright, S. J., & Muller-Landau, H. C. (2006). The future of tropical forest species. Biotropica, 38(3), 287–301. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-7429.2006.00154.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Yu, Y., Feng, K., & Hubacek, K. (2013). Tele-connecting local consumption to global land use. Global Environmental Change, 23(5), 1178–1186. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.04.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Curriculum for the Environment and Ecology & Carolina Population CenterUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel HillChapel HillUSA

Personalised recommendations