Robert Heilmayr

Land-use policies and corporate investments in agriculture in the Gran Chaco and Chiquitano

Significance A growing global demand for agricultural products such as soybeans and beef is causing agriculture to expand into forest ecosystems. Many countries are tightening environmental regulations as a response. Because agricultural companies can move, there is a risk that stringent land-use regulations might just displace land conversion geographically. A better understanding of how these regulations affect companies’ movements is therefore crucial for designing effective conservation policies. Here we analyze the determinants of siting choices by agricultural companies. We find that companies that tend to clear more forest prefer areas with lower deforestation restrictions, and that all companies prefer areas with low enforcement. However, these effects are less important than the availability of forestland or the proximity to current investments. Growing demand for agricultural commodities is causing the expansion of agricultural frontiers onto native vegetation worldwide. Agribusiness companies linking these frontiers to distant spaces of consumption through global commodity chains increasingly make zero-deforestation pledges. However, production and land conversion are often carried out by less-visible local and regional actors that are mobile and responsive to new agricultural expansion opportunities and legal constraints on land use. With more stringent deforestation regulations in some countries, we ask whether their movements are determined partly by differences in land-use policies, resulting in “deforestation havens.” We analyze the determinants of investment decisions by agricultural companies in the Gran Chaco and Chiquitano, a region that has become the new deforestation “hot spot” in South America. We test whether companies seek out less-regulated forest areas for new agricultural investments. Based on interviews with 82 companies totaling 2.5 Mha of properties, we show that, in addition to proximity to current investments and the availability of cheap forestland, lower deforestation regulations attract investments by companies that tend to clear more forest, mostly cattle ranching operations, and that lower enforcement attracts all companies. Avoiding deforestation leakage requires harmonizing deforestation regulations across regions and commodities and promoting sustainable intensification in cattle ranching.

Impacts of nonstate, market-driven governance on Chilean forests

Significance Global trade in commodities has become an important driver of environmental degradation. In response, there has been a proliferation of nonstate, market-driven governance seeking to reduce environmental degradation through interventions in the supply chain. We provide some of the first quasiexperimental evidence to show that private, market-driven policies can slow deforestation. We compare the impacts of two certification schemes and a deforestation moratorium in Chile using a factorial quasiexperimental design. Our results indicate that governance regimes with greater collaboration between environmental and industry stakeholders achieved better environmental outcomes. In contrast to many public conservation policies, we find that private governance systems can effectively target high-deforestation properties. Global markets for agricultural products, timber, and minerals are critically important drivers of deforestation. The supply chains driving land use change may also provide opportunities to halt deforestation. Market campaigns, moratoria, and certification schemes have been promoted as powerful tools to achieve conservation goals. Despite their promise, there have been few opportunities to rigorously quantify the ability of these nonstate, market-driven (NSMD) governance regimes to deliver conservation outcomes. This study analyzes the impacts of three NSMD governance systems that sought to end the conversion of natural forests to plantations in Chile at the start of the 21st century. Using a multilevel, panel dataset of land use changes in Chile, we identify the impact of participation within each of the governance regimes by implementing a series of matched difference-in-differences analyses. Taking advantage of the mosaic of different NSMD regimes adopted in Chile, we explore the relative effectiveness of different policies. NSMD governance regimes reduced deforestation on participating properties by 2–23%. The NSMD governance regimes we studied included collaborative and confrontational strategies between environmental and industry stakeholders. We find that the more collaborative governance systems studied achieved better environmental performance than more confrontational approaches. Whereas many government conservation programs have targeted regions with little likelihood of conversion, we demonstrate that NSMD governance has the potential to alter behavior on high-deforestation properties.

The role of supply-chain initiatives in reducing deforestation

A major reduction in global deforestation is needed to mitigate climate change and biodiversity loss. Recent private sector commitments aim to eliminate deforestation from a company’s operations or supply chain, but they fall short on several fronts. Company pledges vary in the degree to which they include time-bound interventions with clear definitions and criteria to achieve verifiable outcomes. Zero-deforestation policies by companies may be insufficient to achieve broader impact on their own due to leakage, lack of transparency and traceability, selective adoption and smallholder marginalization. Public–private policy mixes are needed to increase the effectiveness of supply-chain initiatives that aim to reduce deforestation. We review current supply-chain initiatives, their effectiveness, and the challenges they face, and go on to identify knowledge gaps for complementary public–private policies.In this Perspective, private company supply-chain initiatives designed to reduce deforestation are assessed. Public–private policy mixes are advocated to increase their efficacy.

Effect of oil palm sustainability certification on deforestation and fire in Indonesia

Significance Demand for agricultural commodities is the leading driver of tropical deforestation. Many corporations have pledged to eliminate forest loss from their supply chains by purchasing only certified “sustainable” products. To evaluate whether certification fulfills such pledges, we applied statistical analyses to satellite-based estimates of tree cover loss to infer the causal impact of a third-party certification system on deforestation and fire within Indonesian oil palm plantations. We found that certification significantly reduced deforestation, but not fire or peatland clearance, among participating plantations. Moreover, certification was mostly adopted in older plantations that contained little remaining forest. Broader adoption by oil palm growers is likely needed for certification to have a large impact on total forest area lost to oil palm expansion. Many major corporations and countries have made commitments to purchase or produce only “sustainable” palm oil, a commodity responsible for substantial tropical forest loss. Sustainability certification is the tool most used to fulfill these procurement policies, and around 20% of global palm oil production was certified by the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) in 2017. However, the effect of certification on deforestation in oil palm plantations remains unclear. Here, we use a comprehensive dataset of RSPO-certified and noncertified oil palm plantations (∼188,000 km2) in Indonesia, the leading producer of palm oil, as well as annual remotely sensed metrics of tree cover loss and fire occurrence, to evaluate the impact of certification on deforestation and fire from 2001 to 2015. While forest loss and fire continued after RSPO certification, certified palm oil was associated with reduced deforestation. Certification lowered deforestation by 33% from a counterfactual of 9.8 to 6.6% y−1. Nevertheless, most plantations contained little residual forest when they received certification. As a result, by 2015, certified areas held less than 1% of forests remaining within Indonesian oil palm plantations. Moreover, certification had no causal impact on forest loss in peatlands or active fire detection rates. Broader adoption of certification in forested regions, strict requirements to avoid all peat, and routine monitoring of clearly defined forest cover loss in certified and RSPO member-held plantations appear necessary if the RSPO is to yield conservation and climate benefits from reductions in tropical deforestation.

Effective, efficient or equitable: using allowance allocations to mitigate emissions leakage

The European Union (EU), the US and Australia have each adopted, or are considering, free allocations to emissions-intensive, trade-exposed industries (EITEIs) in order to minimize emissions leakage and industrial offshoring resulting from climate policy. Differences in the design of these schemes, including how a country defines eligible EITEIs, the scale of allocation and the method of distribution, all have the potential to affect the outcomes of the programmes. In crafting their EITEI allocation formulas, policymakers in each country must balance three important priorities – the economic efficiency of the cap and trade programme, an equitable distribution of the programmes allowances and the effectiveness of the allocations in addressing leakage and competitiveness concerns. These three priorities provide a useful framework for considering the tradeoffs inherent in designing allocation schemes for EITEIs. Through this lens, policy approaches taken by the EU, US and Australia are evaluated with respect to four important questions of allocation policy design: the definition of EITEIs, the costs to be covered, the methodology for distributing allowances and the duration of free allocation.

Navigating Novelty and Risk in Resilience Management

Resilience theory is increasingly applied to the management of global change impacts. There is growing concern, however, that misapplications of resilience-based management (RBM) can sometimes lead to undesirable outcomes. We address here an inescapable conundrum in the application of resilience theory: systems will need to track environmental change, but management that aims to support adaptive capacity can introduce undesirable levels of change. We provide a framework that links concepts from novel ecosystems and resilience theory to inform management of ecosystem change. We highlight that resilience-based applications need to address risks associated with novel human impacts to improve management outcomes.

Reply to Levine-Schnur: Decisions to deforest illegally are influenced by fines and their perceived enforcement probability

We thank Ronit Levine-Schnur for the interest she took in our paper and for taking the time to suggest improvements to the methods (1). Finding ways to accurately measure enforcement is an important challenge for sustainability research, and especially so for research conducted in data-poor environments such as the Gran Chaco and Chiquitano region, where government institutions themselves sometimes lack proper data on illegal deforestation and fines. Borner et al. (2) applied previous economic theorizations about optimal law enforcement to the context of illegal … [↵][1]1To whom correspondence should be addressed. Email: elambin{at}stanford.edu. [1]: #xref-corresp-1-1