CHALLENGE

Between 1990 and 2010, Mexico lost 5.5 million hectares (or 7.8 percent) of its forest cover (FAO 2010). Deforestation is largely driven by the conversion of forests to croplands or pasture. In response, Mexico’s National Forestry Commission (CONAFOR) introduced its first program of payments for ecosystem services (PES) in 2003. The program encourages forest conservation by making payments to owners of ecologically valuable land. The program has grown substantially since its inception, encompassing 2.5 million hectares of forests as of the end of 2013, making it by far the largest PES program in Latin America. This activity is the first attempt at applying rigorous evaluation methods to a large-scale PES program, to extract valuable lessons learned for similar programs elsewhere. Mexico is planning to make PES a central tool in its strategy for implementing REDD+ and other carbon funds, so a better understanding of the impact of the current program on deforestation is critical.  

APPROACH

• The use of payments differentiated by land cover type and economic pressure to deforest, in an effort to attract lands with greater potential environmental benefits;
• Longer-term environmental impacts as a result of participant behavior, including whether applicants re-apply and what their behavior is upon exiting voluntarily or being rejected upon reapplication;
• Whether enrolling forest land lead to deforestation in other, non-enrolled areas;
• The impacts on social capital, especially in regard to the program component that encourages communities to organize themselves in groups in order to better administer forests;
• Household socioeconomic impacts, and whether the program reduces agricultural or pastoral development and incomes as land is committed to conservation uses;
• Whether households and communities are willing to accept contracts with different payment levels.

RESULTS

The study found causal evidence of program effectiveness for this large-scale, government-run program. Looking at an index of community land management activities, communities involved in the program increased their participation by over 50%, protecting land cover by patrolling for illegal conversion, building fire breaks, or combatting soil erosion. Compared to control households, participant households spent approximately 2.7 days more per year in land management activities.

Estimated impacts were small and not statistically significant for changes in average household assets, housing stock, food consumption, and primary education. However, they there was a statistically significant increase of 20-25% in community infrastructure, and a substantive 30-40% increase in school attendance by 16-18-year-olds. 

The program’s conditional payments have maintained or made modest improvements in pro-social work effort and measures of social capital at the communal and household level, including measures of institutions, attitudes and participation in community governance. Across all cohorts, the study finds a significant increase of approximately 8% in an index of community social capital, compared to controls. Additional time spent in land management activities does not crowd out other community work by households. Household-level measures of trust and participation are not changed by the program. 
Due to data limitations and the overall low rates of forest cover change during the study period, it was difficult to detect anything except a 100% impact by the program. Drawing on the only published data source with annual variation, the analysis suggests that the program has likely reduced the rate of tree cover loss. Within areas at high risk of deforestation, the program reduced the loss of tree cover by approximately 40%. Larger reductions of land cover change were observed in the Yucatan peninsula. Although imprecise, estimates of the percentage change in loss rates are similar in magnitude to prior studies, which found changes between 20-50% depending on the method used.

This study illustrated that an impact evaluation based on causal analysis is possible, and most importantly, research can be done for large-scale government-run programs. With the expansion of climate change initiatives, it is key to support impact evaluation work, especially for a subset of programs that are likely to be replicated or scaled up across different countries.

CHALLENGE
Sustainable forest management certification enjoys wide support; yet critical evaluation of forest certification has not been carried out. Most studies that have attempted to study the impact of SFM certification have methodological shortcomings, such as selection bias (non-random participation), or lack a robust understanding of market impacts of certification at firm and farm levels. With these deficiencies, its not possible to assess the impacts of  forest certification on forests, firms, employees, and rural communities with any scientific precision.

APPROCAH
This activity financed a three-day workshop on evaluating the impacts of certification in Montpellier, France, on 12-14 November 2011.  Participants representing the evaluation community, economists, sociologists, ecologists, and foresters discussed and decided on an integrated evaluation method to elucidate whether certification is achieving its set objectives in different countries.The workshop assembled an overview of available quantitative and qualitative approaches to impact evaluation for tropical timber certification; and provided an opportunity to assemble the expertise needed to develop a research agenda for evaluating the impact of forest certification.

FINDINGS
The working paper available on this page summarizes the state of knowledge on the conservation impact of forest certification. Key conclusions and recommendations include:

• It is essential to use systematic analyses when making decisions on forest management and practices. These include better understanding of the complex dynamics and theory of change of forest sector interventions as well as on the ultimate objectives of forest management.
• Despite not having full understanding of all the dimensions and impacts of forest management certification, it can be assumed that certified forests are, on average, most likely better managed than noncertified forests. Certification also ensures to the public that sustainability of forest management is promoted.
• Forests provide several benefits. Forest management certification mainly deals with the productive functions of the forests and with ensuring that these functions can create economic goods without jeopardizing social benefits and environmental sustainability. National governments and donor agencies should continue their support for well-managed sustainable production forestry, and forest certification is one instrument for achieving it.
• Methodological challenges in measuring the impact of forest certification cannot be interpreted as lack of impact. Forest certification increases the information available in the marketplace for all participants, and this improved information increases confidence in certified producers. Having better and scientifically verified information on the impact would improve the information base even further and could also be used to improve the design of certification schemes.

RESULTS
The workshop and working paper available on this page have contributed to defining a research project on the field impacts of SFM certification conducted by CIFOR, the University of Florida and CIRAD. Implementation of the research will require extensive support as well as collaboration and sharing of experiences by a wide range of stakeholders and institutions.

CHALLENGE
Sustainable forest management certification enjoys wide support; yet critical evaluation of forest certification has not been carried out. Most studies that have attempted to study the impact of SFM certification have methodological shortcomings, such as selection bias (non-random participation), or lack a robust understanding of market impacts of certification at firm and farm levels. With these deficiencies, its not possible to assess the impacts of  forest certification on forests, firms, employees, and rural communities with any scientific precision.

APPROCAH
This activity financed a three-day workshop on evaluating the impacts of certification in Montpellier, France, on 12-14 November 2011.  Participants representing the evaluation community, economists, sociologists, ecologists, and foresters discussed and decided on an integrated evaluation method to elucidate whether certification is achieving its set objectives in different countries.The workshop assembled an overview of available quantitative and qualitative approaches to impact evaluation for tropical timber certification; and provided an opportunity to assemble the expertise needed to develop a research agenda for evaluating the impact of forest certification.

FINDINGS
The working paper available on this page summarizes the state of knowledge on the conservation impact of forest certification. Key conclusions and recommendations include:

• It is essential to use systematic analyses when making decisions on forest management and practices. These include better understanding of the complex dynamics and theory of change of forest sector interventions as well as on the ultimate objectives of forest management.
• Despite not having full understanding of all the dimensions and impacts of forest management certification, it can be assumed that certified forests are, on average, most likely better managed than noncertified forests. Certification also ensures to the public that sustainability of forest management is promoted.
• Forests provide several benefits. Forest management certification mainly deals with the productive functions of the forests and with ensuring that these functions can create economic goods without jeopardizing social benefits and environmental sustainability. National governments and donor agencies should continue their support for well-managed sustainable production forestry, and forest certification is one instrument for achieving it.
• Methodological challenges in measuring the impact of forest certification cannot be interpreted as lack of impact. Forest certification increases the information available in the marketplace for all participants, and this improved information increases confidence in certified producers. Having better and scientifically verified information on the impact would improve the information base even further and could also be used to improve the design of certification schemes.

RESULTS
The workshop and working paper available on this page have contributed to defining a research project on the field impacts of SFM certification conducted by CIFOR, the University of Florida and CIRAD. Implementation of the research will require extensive support as well as collaboration and sharing of experiences by a wide range of stakeholders and institutions.

CHALLENGE
Sustainable forest management certification enjoys wide support; yet critical evaluation of forest certification has not been carried out. Most studies that have attempted to study the impact of SFM certification have methodological shortcomings, such as selection bias (non-random participation), or lack a robust understanding of market impacts of certification at firm and farm levels. With these deficiencies, its not possible to assess the impacts of  forest certification on forests, firms, employees, and rural communities with any scientific precision.

APPROCAH
This activity financed a three-day workshop on evaluating the impacts of certification in Montpellier, France, on 12-14 November 2011.  Participants representing the evaluation community, economists, sociologists, ecologists, and foresters discussed and decided on an integrated evaluation method to elucidate whether certification is achieving its set objectives in different countries.The workshop assembled an overview of available quantitative and qualitative approaches to impact evaluation for tropical timber certification; and provided an opportunity to assemble the expertise needed to develop a research agenda for evaluating the impact of forest certification.

FINDINGS
The working paper available on this page summarizes the state of knowledge on the conservation impact of forest certification. Key conclusions and recommendations include:

• It is essential to use systematic analyses when making decisions on forest management and practices. These include better understanding of the complex dynamics and theory of change of forest sector interventions as well as on the ultimate objectives of forest management.
• Despite not having full understanding of all the dimensions and impacts of forest management certification, it can be assumed that certified forests are, on average, most likely better managed than noncertified forests. Certification also ensures to the public that sustainability of forest management is promoted.
• Forests provide several benefits. Forest management certification mainly deals with the productive functions of the forests and with ensuring that these functions can create economic goods without jeopardizing social benefits and environmental sustainability. National governments and donor agencies should continue their support for well-managed sustainable production forestry, and forest certification is one instrument for achieving it.
• Methodological challenges in measuring the impact of forest certification cannot be interpreted as lack of impact. Forest certification increases the information available in the marketplace for all participants, and this improved information increases confidence in certified producers. Having better and scientifically verified information on the impact would improve the information base even further and could also be used to improve the design of certification schemes.

RESULTS
The workshop and working paper available on this page have contributed to defining a research project on the field impacts of SFM certification conducted by CIFOR, the University of Florida and CIRAD. Implementation of the research will require extensive support as well as collaboration and sharing of experiences by a wide range of stakeholders and institutions.

An Input Paper to the UNFF (2003)

UNFF stands for the United Nations Forum on Forest. The Forum's support for sustainable forest management is guided by a Multi-Year Program of Work comprised of sixteen elements based on the proposals for action of the Intergovernmental Panel on Forests (IPF) and the Intergovernmental Forum on Forests (IFF). 

At the third session of the UNFF (UNFF3), "Economic aspects of forests" was one of the major elements for discussion. To inform this discussion, the World Bank prepared an input paper providing a review of policy reforms, projects and programs at the national and international levels related to the economic aspects of forests. It also highlighted challenges and key areas where international agencies, especially the UNFF, could best assist countries to accelerate progress in achieving sustainable forest management in the future.

The paper provided the basis for the Secretary General's report for UNFF3. (The paper is also available in Arabic, Chinese, French, Russian and Spanish here).

An Input Paper to the UNFF (2003)

UNFF stands for the United Nations Forum on Forest. The Forum's support for sustainable forest management is guided by a Multi-Year Program of Work comprised of sixteen elements based on the proposals for action of the Intergovernmental Panel on Forests (IPF) and the Intergovernmental Forum on Forests (IFF). 

At the third session of the UNFF (UNFF3), "Economic aspects of forests" was one of the major elements for discussion. To inform this discussion, the World Bank prepared an input paper providing a review of policy reforms, projects and programs at the national and international levels related to the economic aspects of forests. It also highlighted challenges and key areas where international agencies, especially the UNFF, could best assist countries to accelerate progress in achieving sustainable forest management in the future.

The paper provided the basis for the Secretary General's report for UNFF3. (The paper is also available in Arabic, Chinese, French, Russian and Spanish here).

CHALLENGE

There is enough land in the Amazon region to satisfy Brazilian society's demands for economic development, environmental management of a resource base of global importance and the challenges of agrarian reform. Yet Brazil has been unable to create a fully coherent and manageable land policy and administration system for the region which permits sustainable development goals to be achieved while reconciling special interests and uses. Instead, resource waste, private appropriation of the public domain and social conflict have characterized land relations in the region.

As the region becomes increasingly accessible for a variety of economic activities, and more central to Brazil's economy, the resolution of the land questions looms large as a foundational element for reconciling and ordering economic development, resource management and social priorities. A better understanding of the dynamics of land grabbing and land speculation as well as of the impact of current policies and of the institutions mandated to implement them could help to influence and design new policies to better manage the race for property rights in the Amazon.

APPROACH

Along with other donors, PROFOR helped finance a study focusing on land management policies in the Brazilian Amazon. The study was conducted by Malcolm Childress, Senior Land Administration Specialist at the World Bank.

FINDINGS

The study revealed that large-scale users, agrarian reformists, conservation interests, and others are racing to claim property rights in the Amazon. With illegal occupation, fraudulent and inconsistent land records, and flawed land laws, the resulting land administration is chaotic. Some actions have begun to bring more order to land administration. An effort to re-inspect and document land records, called recadastre, has uncovered illegal occupation, but is incomplete. Creation of new protected areas has slowed illegal occupation, however these areas still face threats of encroachment. And other factors contribute to the problem: the federal budget process gives land administration low priority and inconsistent support, with predictable results.

The study suggested the creation of a new social and political pact to reform land administration. The reformed system of administration would seek to reclaim illegally occupied lands, rationally identify and allocate lands suitable for agrarian reform, recognize and regularize rights of good-faith occupiers, and expand and consolidate protected areas. The pact would lead to local agreements among a broad range of interest groups and officials, backed by federal enforcement. The goal would be a fair, transparent, and workable allocation, recorded in a multipurpose land information system.

RESULTS

Some of the study's recommendations were reflected in a land regularization program which has brought more order in the Amazon.

CHALLENGE

There is enough land in the Amazon region to satisfy Brazilian society's demands for economic development, environmental management of a resource base of global importance and the challenges of agrarian reform. Yet Brazil has been unable to create a fully coherent and manageable land policy and administration system for the region which permits sustainable development goals to be achieved while reconciling special interests and uses. Instead, resource waste, private appropriation of the public domain and social conflict have characterized land relations in the region.

As the region becomes increasingly accessible for a variety of economic activities, and more central to Brazil's economy, the resolution of the land questions looms large as a foundational element for reconciling and ordering economic development, resource management and social priorities. A better understanding of the dynamics of land grabbing and land speculation as well as of the impact of current policies and of the institutions mandated to implement them could help to influence and design new policies to better manage the race for property rights in the Amazon.

APPROACH

Along with other donors, PROFOR helped finance a study focusing on land management policies in the Brazilian Amazon. The study was conducted by Malcolm Childress, Senior Land Administration Specialist at the World Bank.

FINDINGS

The study revealed that large-scale users, agrarian reformists, conservation interests, and others are racing to claim property rights in the Amazon. With illegal occupation, fraudulent and inconsistent land records, and flawed land laws, the resulting land administration is chaotic. Some actions have begun to bring more order to land administration. An effort to re-inspect and document land records, called recadastre, has uncovered illegal occupation, but is incomplete. Creation of new protected areas has slowed illegal occupation, however these areas still face threats of encroachment. And other factors contribute to the problem: the federal budget process gives land administration low priority and inconsistent support, with predictable results.

The study suggested the creation of a new social and political pact to reform land administration. The reformed system of administration would seek to reclaim illegally occupied lands, rationally identify and allocate lands suitable for agrarian reform, recognize and regularize rights of good-faith occupiers, and expand and consolidate protected areas. The pact would lead to local agreements among a broad range of interest groups and officials, backed by federal enforcement. The goal would be a fair, transparent, and workable allocation, recorded in a multipurpose land information system.

RESULTS

Some of the study's recommendations were reflected in a land regularization program which has brought more order in the Amazon.

CHALLENGE

There is enough land in the Amazon region to satisfy Brazilian society's demands for economic development, environmental management of a resource base of global importance and the challenges of agrarian reform. Yet Brazil has been unable to create a fully coherent and manageable land policy and administration system for the region which permits sustainable development goals to be achieved while reconciling special interests and uses. Instead, resource waste, private appropriation of the public domain and social conflict have characterized land relations in the region.

As the region becomes increasingly accessible for a variety of economic activities, and more central to Brazil's economy, the resolution of the land questions looms large as a foundational element for reconciling and ordering economic development, resource management and social priorities. A better understanding of the dynamics of land grabbing and land speculation as well as of the impact of current policies and of the institutions mandated to implement them could help to influence and design new policies to better manage the race for property rights in the Amazon.

APPROACH

Along with other donors, PROFOR helped finance a study focusing on land management policies in the Brazilian Amazon. The study was conducted by Malcolm Childress, Senior Land Administration Specialist at the World Bank.

FINDINGS

The study revealed that large-scale users, agrarian reformists, conservation interests, and others are racing to claim property rights in the Amazon. With illegal occupation, fraudulent and inconsistent land records, and flawed land laws, the resulting land administration is chaotic. Some actions have begun to bring more order to land administration. An effort to re-inspect and document land records, called recadastre, has uncovered illegal occupation, but is incomplete. Creation of new protected areas has slowed illegal occupation, however these areas still face threats of encroachment. And other factors contribute to the problem: the federal budget process gives land administration low priority and inconsistent support, with predictable results.

The study suggested the creation of a new social and political pact to reform land administration. The reformed system of administration would seek to reclaim illegally occupied lands, rationally identify and allocate lands suitable for agrarian reform, recognize and regularize rights of good-faith occupiers, and expand and consolidate protected areas. The pact would lead to local agreements among a broad range of interest groups and officials, backed by federal enforcement. The goal would be a fair, transparent, and workable allocation, recorded in a multipurpose land information system.

RESULTS

Some of the study's recommendations were reflected in a land regularization program which has brought more order in the Amazon.

CHALLENGE

There is enough land in the Amazon region to satisfy Brazilian society's demands for economic development, environmental management of a resource base of global importance and the challenges of agrarian reform. Yet Brazil has been unable to create a fully coherent and manageable land policy and administration system for the region which permits sustainable development goals to be achieved while reconciling special interests and uses. Instead, resource waste, private appropriation of the public domain and social conflict have characterized land relations in the region.

As the region becomes increasingly accessible for a variety of economic activities, and more central to Brazil's economy, the resolution of the land questions looms large as a foundational element for reconciling and ordering economic development, resource management and social priorities. A better understanding of the dynamics of land grabbing and land speculation as well as of the impact of current policies and of the institutions mandated to implement them could help to influence and design new policies to better manage the race for property rights in the Amazon.

APPROACH

Along with other donors, PROFOR helped finance a study focusing on land management policies in the Brazilian Amazon. The study was conducted by Malcolm Childress, Senior Land Administration Specialist at the World Bank.

FINDINGS

The study revealed that large-scale users, agrarian reformists, conservation interests, and others are racing to claim property rights in the Amazon. With illegal occupation, fraudulent and inconsistent land records, and flawed land laws, the resulting land administration is chaotic. Some actions have begun to bring more order to land administration. An effort to re-inspect and document land records, called recadastre, has uncovered illegal occupation, but is incomplete. Creation of new protected areas has slowed illegal occupation, however these areas still face threats of encroachment. And other factors contribute to the problem: the federal budget process gives land administration low priority and inconsistent support, with predictable results.

The study suggested the creation of a new social and political pact to reform land administration. The reformed system of administration would seek to reclaim illegally occupied lands, rationally identify and allocate lands suitable for agrarian reform, recognize and regularize rights of good-faith occupiers, and expand and consolidate protected areas. The pact would lead to local agreements among a broad range of interest groups and officials, backed by federal enforcement. The goal would be a fair, transparent, and workable allocation, recorded in a multipurpose land information system.

RESULTS

Some of the study's recommendations were reflected in a land regularization program which has brought more order in the Amazon.