Agricultural intensification escalates future conservation costs

Abstract

The supposition that agricultural intensification results in land sparing for conservation has become central to policy formulations across the tropics. However, underlying assumptions remain uncertain and have been little explored in the context of conservation incentive schemes such as policies for Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation, conservation, sustainable management, and enhancement of carbon stocks (REDD+). Incipient REDD+ forest carbon policies in a number of countries propose agricultural intensification measures to replace extensive "slash-andburn" farming systems. These may result in conservation in some contexts, but will also increase future agricultural land rents as productivity increases, creating new incentives for agricultural expansion and deforestation. While robust governance can help to ensure land sparing, we propose that conservation incentives will also have to increase over time, tracking future agricultural land rents, which might lead to runaway conservation costs. We present a conceptual framework that depicts these relationships, supported by an illustrative model of the intensification of key crops in the Democratic Republic of Congo, a leading REDD+ country. A von Thünen land rent model is combined with geographic information systems mapping to demonstrate how agricultural intensification could influence future conservation costs. Once postintensification agricultural land rents are considered, the cost of reducing forest sector emissions could significantly exceed current and projected carbon credit prices. Our analysis highlights the importance of considering escalating conservation costs from agricultural intensification when designing conservation initiatives.swidden | slash and burn | land use change | payment for ecoysystem services | biodiversity N ovel conservation policies for Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation and through the conservation, sustainable management, and enhancement of carbon stocks (REDD+) have been deployed in more than four dozen tropical developing countries (1, 2). These propose to financially compensate countries that improve forest conservation and management to reduce emissions and mitigate against climate change. The pantropical initiative has the potential to recruit billions of dollars in annual conservation finance (3) and is the focus of United Nations negotiations and multi-and bilateral agreements between industrialized and developing nations (2). Moreover, REDD+ interventions have the potential to yield knock-on effects, including cobenefits for biodiversity conservation and poverty alleviation (3). These incipient REDD+ schemes involve a broad range of conservation interventions, ranging from protected areas establishment, improved environmental governance, and agricultural intensification to motivate land sparing. Intensification to Reduce DeforestationAgricultural intensification-increasing agricultural inputs to improve per-hectare yields rather than expanding land under cultivation-is o...

Intensification of cattle ranching production systems: socioeconomic and environmental synergies and risks in Brazil

“…Landowners have to maintain a minimum percentage of forested areas inside their properties: 80% of their total land area in the Amazon region and 35% in the Cerrado region, as well as natural vegetation surrounding rivers and other special areas such as mountaintops. Phelps et al (2013) showed that future agricultural land rents will increase as productivity increases, which may raise future conservation costs. Therefore, if conservation incentives fail to match future agricultural rents, particularly in a landscape characterized by intensive agriculture, conservation could face local resistance and conflicts, potentially leading to deforestation (Phelps et al, 2013).…”

“…Phelps et al (2013) showed that future agricultural land rents will increase as productivity increases, which may raise future conservation costs. Therefore, if conservation incentives fail to match future agricultural rents, particularly in a landscape characterized by intensive agriculture, conservation could face local resistance and conflicts, potentially leading to deforestation (Phelps et al, 2013). In addition, if conservation reduces land available for farming, agricultural rents may further increase, compounded with increasing commodity prices and economic globalization (Lambin and Meyfroidt, 2011).…”

“…In addition, if conservation reduces land available for farming, agricultural rents may further increase, compounded with increasing commodity prices and economic globalization (Lambin and Meyfroidt, 2011). In order to mitigate future deforestation, conservation incentives therefore need to remain competitive against rising agricultural land rents (Phelps et al, 2013).…”

Integrated pest management for sustainable rice cultivation: a holistic approach

“…nations (Phelps et al, 2013). Ecological engineering is a related concept, but stresses the design of habitat based on species interactions and feedback mechanisms that are highly predictable.…”

Landscape Ethnoecology of Forest Food Harvesting in the Talamanca Bribri Indigenous Territory, Costa Rica

“…Much of this agricultural expansion is speculated to come at the expense of natural systems, including forests and other tree-based systems, despite the current pervasive paradigm of intensification to "spare" land from conversion (Phelps et al 2013). Although other studies assert that agricultural production is already sufficient to achieve global food security and we grow enough food to provide for current and future populations at estimated human growth rates, thus there is little need to convert forests and other land for agriculture (Stringer 2000), the view that increased food production should be pursued at all costs including at the expense of nature as the only means of achieving global food security seems to be the currently accepted wisdom (Pinstrup-Andersen 2013).…”