Regional- and district-level drivers of timber harvesting in European Russia after the collapse of the Soviet Union

Wendland, Kelly J.; Lewis, D. J.; Alix‐Garcia, Jennifer; Özdoğan, Mutlu; Baumann, Matthias; Radeloff, Volker C.

doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.07.003

Cited by 39 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 34 publications

(34 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Our results are thus consistent with other analyses of drivers of forest cover change, which found higher disturbance probability in areas with less rough terrains and mild slopes (Levers et al, 2014;Nagendra et al, 2003;Wendland et al, 2011), and that such areas often represent deciduous and mixed forests at lower elevations. We found slightly more disturbance in areas farther away from cities and roads, but most of our data was concentrated at distances less than 10 km away from roads.…”

Section: Spatial Determinants Of Disturbancesupporting

confidence: 92%

Legacies of 19th century land use shape contemporary forest cover

Munteanu

Kuemmerle

Keuler

et al. 2015

Global Environmental Change

Self Cite

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Spatial Determinants Of Disturbancesupporting

confidence: 92%

Legacies of 19th century land use shape contemporary forest cover

Munteanu

Kuemmerle

Keuler

et al. 2015

Global Environmental Change

Self Cite

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…To determine the effect of protected status on forest disturbance rates, we combined matching statistics with fixed effects linear probability models (Wendland et al 2011;Arriagada et al 2012). …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effect of protected areas on forest disturbance in the Carpathian Mountains 1985–2010

Butsic

Munteanu²,

Griffiths

et al. 2017

Conservation Biology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Protected areas are a cornerstone for forest protection, but they are not always effective during times of socioeconomic and institutional crises. The Carpathian Mountains in Eastern Europe are an ecologically outstanding region, with widespread seminatural and old-growth forest. Since 1990, Carpathian countries (Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, and Ukraine) have experienced economic hardship and institutional changes, including the breakdown of socialism, European Union accession, and a rapid expansion of protected areas. The question is how protected-area effectiveness has varied during these times across the Carpathians given these changes. We analyzed a satellite-based data set of forest disturbance (i.e., forest loss due to harvesting or natural disturbances) from 1985 to 2010 and used matching statistics and a fixed-effects estimator to quantify the effect of protection on forest disturbance. Protected areas in the Czech Republic, Slovakia, and the Ukraine had significantly less deforestation inside protected areas than outside in some periods; the likelihood of disturbance was reduced by 1-5%. The effectiveness of protection increased over time in these countries, whereas the opposite was true in Romania. Older protected areas were most effective in Romania and Hungary, but newer protected areas were more effective in Czech Republic, and Poland. Strict protection (International Union for Conservation of Nature [IUCN] protection category Ia-II) was not more effective than landscape-level protection (IUCN III-VI). We suggest that the strength of institutions, the differences in forest privatization, forest management, prior distribution of protected areas, and when countries joined the European Union may provide explanations for the strikingly heterogeneous effectiveness patterns among countries. Our results highlight how different the effects of protected areas can be at broad scales, indicating that the effectiveness of protected areas is transitory over time and space and suggesting that generalizations about the effectiveness of protected areas can be misleading.

show abstract

“…The second component ∼ (0, 2 ) varies between both pixels and municipalities. This decomposition of the error term of the model into its nesting components allows taking into account the spatial correlation of the error term in municipalities (Anselin, 2002;Wendland et al, 2011).…”

Section: Baseline Estimates Of the Effect Of Protected Areasmentioning

confidence: 99%

Addressing Contextual and Location Biases in the Assessment of Protected Areas Effectiveness on Deforestation in the Brazilian Amazônia

Kéré¹,

Choumert

Motel

et al. 2017

Ecological Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using a remotely sensed pixel data set, we develop a multilevel model and propensity score weighting with multilevel data to assess the impact of protected areas on deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon. These techniques allow taking into account location bias, contextual bias and the dependence of spatial units. The results suggest that protected areas have slowed down deforestation between 2005 and 2009, whatever the type of governance. The results also evidence that protected and unprotected areas do not share the same location characteristics. In addition, the effectiveness of protected areas differs according to socioeconomic and environmental variables measured at municipal level.

show abstract

Regional- and district-level drivers of timber harvesting in European Russia after the collapse of the Soviet Union

Cited by 39 publications

References 34 publications

Legacies of 19th century land use shape contemporary forest cover

Legacies of 19th century land use shape contemporary forest cover

The effect of protected areas on forest disturbance in the Carpathian Mountains 1985–2010

Addressing Contextual and Location Biases in the Assessment of Protected Areas Effectiveness on Deforestation in the Brazilian Amazônia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About