IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v122y2022ics0264837722004100.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Global deforestation revisited: The role of weak institutions

Author

Listed:
  • Moreira-Dantas, Ianna Raissa
  • Söder, Mareike

Abstract

Linking weak governance and forest degradation has received increasing attention in scientific and political spheres. Deforestation remains a global matter as a major agent of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, for endangering the lives of several plant and animal species, and for triggering political disputes involving land tenure and rural violence. Political factors are acknowledged to have a direct impact on forest resources management. Corruption and weak governance are able to deflect policies to private interests, and encourage illegal logging and unlawful allowances to forest degradation even in protected areas. However, the effects of corruption and weak institutions in forest management are still uncertain. This paper offers empirical-based evidence about the relationship between institutional factors and forest cover conversion. The role of weak institutions is explored by employing a logistic model of recent high-resolution global remote sensing data from the European Space Agency (ESA) Climate Change Initiative Land Cover (CCI-LC) from 1992 and 2015. We assess the cross-country associations of the Corruption Perception Index (CPI) and the World Bank Government Effectiveness (GE) index while controlling for physiographic and structural variables. Results are robust and show, as expected, that difficult access areas pose considerable barriers to forest conversion, and regions of high agricultural suitability are more likely to be converted from forests to agricultural fields. Furthermore, higher government effectiveness with stronger political enforcement, policy design, and lower corruption perception are significantly related to a lower probability of deforestation. Further elaborating governance and corruption indicators with emphasis on forest management/conservation can potentially improve the accuracy of local and cross-country quantitative land use studies. Our findings support the continuous understanding of weak institutions in deforestation debates. The paper highlights the need to fight corruption and to build strong institutions into effective policy strategies.

Suggested Citation

  • Moreira-Dantas, Ianna Raissa & Söder, Mareike, 2022. "Global deforestation revisited: The role of weak institutions," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:122:y:2022:i:c:s0264837722004100
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106383
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837722004100
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106383?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Amacher, Gregory S., 2006. "Corruption: A challenge for economists interested in forest policy design," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 85-89, June.
    2. Marcos-Martinez, Raymundo & Bryan, Brett A. & Schwabe, Kurt A. & Connor, Jeffery D. & Law, Elizabeth A., 2018. "Forest transition in developed agricultural regions needs efficient regulatory policy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 67-75.
    3. Kalifi Ferretti-Gallon and Jonah Busch, 2014. "What Drives Deforestation and What Stops It? A Meta-Analysis of Spatially Explicit Econometric Studies - Working Paper 361," Working Papers 361, Center for Global Development.
    4. Rogelja, Todora & Shannon, Margaret A., 2017. "Structural power in Serbian anti-corruption forest policy network," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 52-60.
    5. Villoria, Nelson & Jing Liu, 2015. "Using continental grids to improve our understanding of global land supply responses: Implications for policy-driven land use changes in the Americas," GTAP Working Papers 4843, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University.
    6. Cuneyt Koyuncu & Rasim Yilmaz, 2009. "The impact of corruption on deforestation: a cross-country evidence," Journal of Developing Areas, Tennessee State University, College of Business, vol. 42(2), pages 213-222, January-M.
    7. Belinda Arunarwati Margono & Peter V. Potapov & Svetlana Turubanova & Fred Stolle & Matthew C. Hansen, 2014. "Primary forest cover loss in Indonesia over 2000–2012," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 4(8), pages 730-735, August.
    8. Maurizio Lisciandra & Carlo Migliardo, 2017. "An Empirical Study of the Impact of Corruption on Environmental Performance: Evidence from Panel Data," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 68(2), pages 297-318, October.
    9. Amacher, Gregory S. & Ollikainen, Markku & Koskela, Erkki, 2012. "Corruption and forest concessions," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 92-104.
    10. Muller, Daniel & Zeller, Manfred, 2002. "Land use dynamics in the central highlands of Vietnam: a spatial model combining village survey data with satellite imagery interpretation," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 27(3), pages 333-354, November.
    11. Cuneyt Koyuncu & Rasim Yilmaz, 2013. "Deforestation, corruption, and private ownership in the forest sector," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 227-236, January.
    12. Chomitz, Kenneth M & Gray, David A, 1996. "Roads, Land Use, and Deforestation: A Spatial Model Applied to Belize," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 10(3), pages 487-512, September.
    13. Galinato, Gregmar I. & Galinato, Suzette P., 2012. "The effects of corruption control, political stability and economic growth on deforestation-induced carbon dioxide emissions," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 17(1), pages 67-90, February.
    14. Villoria, Nelson & Jing Liu, 2015. "Using continental grids to improve our understanding of global land supply responses: Implications for policy-driven land use changes in the Americas," GTAP Working Papers 4843, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Galarza, Francisco & Kámiche Zegarra, Joanna & Gómez de Zea, Rosario, 2023. "Roads and deforestation: do local institutions matter?," Working Papers 23-03, Centro de Investigación, Universidad del Pacífico.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wehkamp, Johanna & Aquino, André & Fuss, Sabine & Reed, Erik W., 2015. "Analyzing the perception of deforestation drivers by African policy makers in light of possible REDD+ policy responses," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 7-18.
    2. Chakravarty, Shourish & Villoria, Nelson B., 2020. "Estimating the spatially heterogeneous elasticities of land supply to U.S. crop agriculture," Conference papers 333156, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    3. Salahodjaev, Raufhon, 2016. "Intelligence and deforestation: International data," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 20-27.
    4. Gellrich, Mario & Baur, Priska & Robinson, Brett Harvey & Bebi, Peter, 2008. "Combining classification tree analyses with interviews to study why sub-alpine grasslands sometimes revert to forest: A case study from the Swiss Alps," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 96(1-3), pages 124-138, March.
    5. Andrew Hargrove & Feng Hao & Jamie Marie Sommer, 2022. "Governing trade: a cross-national study of governance, trade, and CO2 emissions," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 12(4), pages 727-738, December.
    6. Asher, Sam & Garg, Teevrat & Novosad, Paul, 2018. "The Ecological Footprint of Transportation Infrastructure," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 274246, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    7. Pfaff, Alexander S. P. & Robalino, Juan & Reis, Eustaquio J. & Walker, Robert & Perz, Stephen & Laurance, William & Bohrer, Claudio & Aldrich, Steven & Arima, Eugenio & Caldas, Marcellus & Kirby, Kath, 2018. "Roads & SDGs, tradeoffs and synergies: Learning from Brazil's Amazon in distinguishing frontiers," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 12, pages 1-26.
    8. Chenyang Xu & Klaas van’t Veld, 2020. "Team Inspection in the Management of Common-Pool Resources When Corruption is Present," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 75(3), pages 553-584, March.
    9. Kalifi Ferretti-Gallon and Jonah Busch, 2014. "What Drives Deforestation and What Stops It? A Meta-Analysis of Spatially Explicit Econometric Studies - Working Paper 361," Working Papers 361, Center for Global Development.
    10. Adeline-Cristina Cozma & Corina-Narcisa (Bodescu) Cotoc & Viorela Ligia Vaidean & Monica Violeta Achim, 2021. "Corruption, Shadow Economy and Deforestation: Friends or Strangers?," Risks, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-21, August.
    11. Mustafa ÜNVER & Julide Yalçýnkaya KOYUNCU, 2016. "The Impact of Poverty on Corruption," Journal of Economics Library, KSP Journals, vol. 3(4), pages 632-642, December.
    12. Nansikombi, Hellen & Fischer, Richard & Ferrer Velasco, Rubén & Lippe, Melvin & Kalaba, Felix Kanungwe & Kabwe, Gillian & Günter, Sven, 2020. "Can de facto governance influence deforestation drivers in the Zambian Miombo?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    13. Schwerhoff, Gregor & Wehkamp, Johanna, 2018. "Export tariffs combined with public investments as a forest conservation policy instrument," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 69-84.
    14. Cuneyt Koyuncu & Rasim Yilmaz, 2013. "Deforestation, corruption, and private ownership in the forest sector," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 227-236, January.
    15. Philippe Delacote, 2011. "How concessions’ size may influence systemic corruption in forest harvesting: A theoretical assessment," Working Papers - Cahiers du LEF 2011-05, Laboratoire d'Economie Forestiere, AgroParisTech-INRA.
    16. Baldos, Uris Lantz, 2017. "Food and environmental security in 2050: An application of gridded agricultural economic modelling," Conference papers 330176, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    17. repec:rre:publsh:v:35:y:2005:i:2:p:187-205 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Skutsch, Margaret & Turnhout, Esther, 2020. "REDD+: If communities are the solution, what is the problem?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    19. Thiemo Fetzer & Samuel Marden, 2017. "Take What You Can: Property Rights, Contestability and Conflict," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 0(601), pages 757-783, May.
    20. KURKALOVA, Lyubov A. & WADE, Tara R., 2013. "Aggregated Choice Data And Logit Models: Application To Environmental Benign Practices Of Conservation Tillage By Farmers In The State Of Iowa," Applied Econometrics and International Development, Euro-American Association of Economic Development, vol. 13(2), pages 119-128.
    21. Ajanaku, B.A. & Collins, A.R., 2021. "Economic growth and deforestation in African countries: Is the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis applicable?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:122:y:2022:i:c:s0264837722004100. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.