Essays on the Evaluation of Environmental Programs

This dissertation comprises four chapters. The unifying theme is the evaluation of environmental programs. Specifically, each chapter examines some facet of the impacts of protected areas. The first chapter examines the heterogeneous environmental and economic impacts of protected areas in Costa Rica. Previous studies suggest that Costa Rica\u27s protected area system induced both reduced deforestation and alleviated poverty. We demonstrate that these environmental and social impacts were spatially heterogeneous. Importantly, the characteristics associated with the most avoided deforestation are the characteristics associated with the least poverty alleviation. In other words, the same characteristics that have limited the conservation effectiveness of protected areas may have improved the social welfare impacts of these areas. These results suggest that `win-win\u27 efforts to protect ecosystems and alleviate poverty may be possible when policymakers are satisfied with low levels of each outcome, but tradeoffs exist when more of either outcome is desired. The second chapter explores in more detail the heterogeneous impacts of protected areas in Costa Rica and Thailand. In particular we investigate the potential for protected areas to act as a mechanism for poverty traps and use semiparametric models to identify the spatial congruence of environmental and economic outcomes. We find no evidence that protected areas trap historically poorer areas in poverty. In fact, we find that poorer areas at baseline appear to have the greatest levels of poverty reduction as a result of protection. However, we do find that the spatial characteristics associated with the most poverty alleviation are not necessarily the characteristics associated with the most avoided deforestation. We demonstrate how an understanding of these spatially heterogeneous responses to protection can be used to generate suitability maps that identify locations in which both environmental and poverty alleviation goals are most likely to be achieved. In the third chapter we address the mechanisms through which protected areas affect economic outcomes. Using recently developed quasi-experimental methods and rich biophysical and demographic data, we quantify the causal post-treatment mechanism impacts of tourism, infrastructure development and ecosystem services on poverty, due to the establishment of protected areas in Costa Rica prior to 1980. We find that nearly 50% of the poverty reduction estimated in a previous study can be attributed to tourism. In addition, although the mechanism estimates for the infrastructure and ecosystem services proxies are negligible, we argue that the results provide evidence that enhanced ecosystem services from the establishment of protected areas has likely helped to reduce poverty. The results provide additional information to policy makers that wish to enhance the future establishment of protected areas with complementary policy. The final chapter studies the economic impacts of protected areas in Bolivia. We find that municipalities with at least 10% of their area occupied by a protected area between 1992 and 2000 exhibited differentially greater levels of poverty reduction between 1992 and 2001 compared to similar municipalities unaffected by protected areas. We find that the results are robust to a number of econometric specifications, spillover analyses and a placebo study. Although the overarching results that Bolivia\u27s protected areas were associated with poverty reduction are similar to previous studies , the underlying results are subtly, but significantly, different. In previous studies it was found that controlling for key observable covariates lead to fundamentally antithetical results compared to naive estimates. Conversely, these results indicate that naive estimates lead to an over-estimation of the poverty reducing impacts of protected areas. The results expose the heterogeneity of protected area impacts across countries and, therefore, underscore the importance of country-level impact evaluations in order to build the global knowledge base regarding the socioeconomic impacts of protected areas

Estimating the Impacts of Bolivia\u27s Protected Areas on Poverty

Protected areas represent a powerful policy tool for the preservation of ecosystems and their services. The rapid proliferation of protected areas in Bolivia over the past several decades has prompted interest in understanding their impacts on surrounding populations. Recent studies from other developing countries show that protected areas have had positive impacts on poverty. Using rich biophysical and socioeconomic data from Bolivia we and that municipalities with at least 10% of their area occupied by a protected area established between 1992 and 2000 exhibited differentially greater levels of poverty reduction between 1992 and 2001 compared to similar municipalities indicted by protected areas. We and that our results are robust to a number of econometric specifications, spillover analyses and a placebo study. Although our overarching results that Bolivia\u27s protected areas were associated with poverty reduction are similar to previous studies, our underlying results di are subtly, but significantly. Previous studies found that controlling for key observable covariates led to fundamentally antithetical results compared to na+ye (uncontrolled) estimates. Conversely, our results indicate that na+ve estimates lead to an over estimation of the poverty reducing impacts of protected areas. Our results expose the heterogeneity of protected area impacts across countries and, therefore, underscore the importance of country-level impact evaluations in order to build the global knowledge base regarding the socioeconomic impacts of protected areas

Impacts of forests on children’s diet in rural areas across 27 developing countries

Micronutrient deficiency affects about a third of the world’s population. Children in developing countries are particularly vulnerable. Consequences include impaired cognitive and physical development and increased childhood morbidity and mortality. Recent studies suggest that forests help alleviate micronutrient deficiency by increasing dietary diversity. However, evidence is mostly based on weakly designed local case studies of limited relevance to global policies. Furthermore, impacts of forests on diet vary among communities, and understanding this variation can help target actions to enhance impact. We compile data on children’s diets in over 43,000 households across 27 developing countries to examine the impacts of forests on dietary diversity. We use empirical designs that are attentive to assumptions necessary for causal interpretations and that adequately account for confounding factors that could mask or mimic the impact. We find that high exposure to forests causes children to have at least 25% greater dietary diversity compared to lack of exposure, a result comparable to the impacts of some nutrition-sensitive agricultural programs. A closer look at a subset of African countries indicates that impacts are generally higher for less developed communities, but highest with certain access to markets, roads, and education. Our results also indicate that forests could help reduce vitamin A and iron deficiencies. Our study establishes the causal relationship between forests and diet and thus strengthens the evidence for integrating forest conservation and management into nutrition interventions. Our results also suggest that providing households some access to capital can increase the impact of forest-related interventions on nutrition

Estimating the Impacts of Bolivia's Protected Areas on Poverty

Protected areas represent a powerful policy tool for the preservation of ecosystems and their services. The rapid proliferation of protected areas in Bolivia over the past several decades has prompted interest in understanding their impacts on surrounding populations. Recent studies from other developing countries show that protected areas have had positive impacts on poverty. Using rich biophysical and socioeconomic data from Bolivia we nd that municipalities with at least 10% of their area occupied by a protected area established between 1992 and 2000 exhibited dierentially greater levels of poverty reduction between 1992 and 2001 compared to similar municipalities unaected by protected areas. We nd that our results are robust to a number of econometric specications, spillover analyses and a placebo study. Although our overarching results that Bolivia's protected areas were associated with poverty reduction are similar to previous studies, our underlying results dier subtly, but signicantly. Previous studies found that controlling for key observable covariates led to fundamentally antithetical results compared to nave (uncontrolled) estimates. Conversely, our results indicate that nave estimates lead to an over estimation of the poverty reducing impacts of protected areas. Our results expose the heterogeneity of protected area impacts across countries and, therefore, underscore the importance of country-level impact evaluations in order to build the global knowledge base regarding the socioeconomic impacts of protected areas.

More strictly protected areas are not necessarily more protective: evidence from Bolivia, Costa Rica, Indonesia, and Thailand

National parks and other protected areas are at the forefront of global efforts to protect biodiversity and ecosystem services. However, not all protection is equal. Some areas are assigned strict legal protection that permits few extractive human uses. Other protected area designations permit a wider range of uses. Whether strictly protected areas are more effective in achieving environmental objectives is an empirical question: although strictly protected areas legally permit less anthropogenic disturbance, the social conflicts associated with assigning strict protection may lead politicians to assign strict protection to less-threatened areas and may lead citizens or enforcement agents to ignore the strict legal restrictions. We contrast the impacts of strictly and less strictly protected areas in four countries using IUCN designations to measure de jure strictness, data on deforestation to measure outcomes, and a quasi-experimental design to estimate impacts. On average, stricter protection reduced deforestation rates more than less strict protection, but the additional impact was not always large and sometimes arose because of where stricter protection was assigned rather than regulatory strictness per se . We also show that, in protected area studies contrasting y management regimes, there are y ^2 policy-relevant impacts, rather than only y , as earlier studies have implied

More strictly protected areas are not necessarily more protective: evidence from Bolivia, Costa Rica, Indonesia, and Thailand

National parks and other protected areas are at the forefront of global efforts to protect biodiversity and ecosystem services. However, not all protection is equal. Some areas are assigned strict legal protection that permits few extractive human uses. Other protected area designations permit a wider range of uses. Whether strictly protected areas are more effective in achieving environmental objectives is an empirical question: although strictly protected areas legally permit less anthropogenic disturbance, the social conflicts associated with assigning strict protection may lead politicians to assign strict protection to less-threatened areas and may lead citizens or enforcement agents to ignore the strict legal restrictions. We contrast the impacts of strictly and less strictly protected areas in four countries using IUCN designations to measure de jure strictness, data on deforestation to measure outcomes, and a quasi-experimental design to estimate impacts. On average, stricter protection reduced deforestation rates more than less strict protection, but the additional impact was not always large and sometimes arose because of where stricter protection was assigned rather than regulatory strictness per se. We also show that, in protected area studies contrasting y management regimes, there are y2 policy-relevant impacts, rather than only y, as earlier studies have implied