Unconditional Transfers and Tropical Forest Conservation: Evidence from a Randomized Control Trial in Sierra Leone

Unconditional conservation payments are increasingly used by conservation non-governmental organizations to further their environmental objectives. One key objective in many conservation projects that use such unconditional payments schemes is the protection of tropical forest ecosystems in buffer zone areas around protected parks where the scope of instating mandatory restrictions is more limited. We use a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the impact of unconditional livelihood payments to local communities on land use outside a protected area – the Gola Rainforest National Park – which is a biodiversity hotspot on the border of Sierra Leone and Liberia. High resolution RapidEye satellite imagery from before and after the intervention was used to determine land use changes in treated and control villages. We find support for the hypothesis that unconditional payments, in this setting, increase land clearance in the short run. The study constitutes one of the first attempts to use evidence from a randomized control trial to evaluate the efficacy of conservation payments and provides insights for further research.Cambridge Conservation Initiative International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (grant # TW1.1042) NWO (#45-14-001 and #451-14-001

Impacts of land use change due to biofuel crops on climate regulation services: Five case studies in Malawi, Mozambique and Swaziland

Understanding changes in carbon sequestration due to land conversion is key for elucidating the true potential of biofuel landscapes to provide climate regulation ecosystem services. In this study, we focus on the two most promoted biofuel crops in southern Africa, Jatropha and sugarcane, to analyse the land use change effects and associated carbon impacts of growing biofuel crops in five study sites in Mozambique, Malawi and Swaziland. We found that, considering a 20-year cycle, carbon stocks in aboveground biomass are higher for sugarcane than for Jatropha. However, as soil organic carbon (SOC) is generally the main carbon pool, total carbon stocks (considering biomass and soil) will highly depend on SOC. Our results show that, in our study sites, sugarcane replaced land uses with low carbon stocks (low-density forest and agriculture), and as a result carbon gains occurred due to land use change. In the Jatropha projects, carbon gains are observed in the smallholder scheme as agricultural land was converted to Jatropha, but carbon debts occurred in the Jatropha plantation as high-density forest was cleared to grow this feedstock. Finally we show that, if a plantation of sugarcane or Jatropha is envisioned to be located in the studied regions, more forested land could potentially be converted into sugarcane (30–44% of forest) than into Jatropha (24–32%), without creating carbon debts due to land conversion. To our knowledge, this is the first comparative study of the carbon impacts of land use change of the main biofuel crops in southern Africa