It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Many tropical forestlands are experiencing changes in land-tenure regimes, but how these changes may affect deforestation rates remains ambiguous. Here, we use Brazil’s land-tenure and deforestation data and quasi-experimental methods to analyze how six land-tenure regimes (undesignated/untitled, private, strictly-protected and sustainable-use protected areas, indigenous, and quilombola lands) affect deforestation across 49 spatiotemporal scales. We find that undesignated/untitled public regimes with poorly defined tenure rights increase deforestation relative to any alternative regime in most contexts. The privatization of these undesignated/untitled lands often reduces this deforestation, particularly when private regimes are subject to strict environmental regulations such as the Forest Code in Amazonia. However, private regimes decrease deforestation less effectively and less reliably than alternative well-defined regimes, and directly privatizing either conservation regimes or indigenous lands would most likely increase deforestation. This study informs the ongoing political debate around land privatization/protection in tropical landscapes and can be used to envisage policy aligned with sustainable development goals.
How land-tenure regimes affect deforestation remains ambiguous. This study shows how deforestation in Brazil is land-tenure dependent, and how strategies to effectively reduce deforestation can range from strengthening poorly defined rights to strengthening conservation-focused regimes.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details


1 German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany (GRID:grid.421064.5) (ISNI:0000 0004 7470 3956); University of Bonn, Institute for Food and Resource Economics, Bonn, Germany (GRID:grid.10388.32) (ISNI:0000 0001 2240 3300)
2 German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany (GRID:grid.421064.5) (ISNI:0000 0004 7470 3956); Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Institute of Geosciences and Geography, Halle (Saale), Germany (GRID:grid.9018.0) (ISNI:0000 0001 0679 2801); Leipzig University, Institute of Biology, Leipzig, Germany (GRID:grid.9647.c) (ISNI:0000 0004 7669 9786)