Agricultural development with rainforest conservation: methods for seeking best bet alternatives to slash‐and‐burn, with applications to Brazil and Indonesia

Thomas P. Tomich, Meine van Noordwijk, Stephen A. Vosti and Julie Witcover

Agricultural Economics, 1998, vol. 19, issue 1-2, 159-174

Abstract: Forests continue to fall for agricultural purposes throughout the humid tropics, with immediate and potentially large consequences for climate change and biodiversity loss‐issues of key interest to the international community. Some of the actors directly responsible for forest conversion fell trees to meet food security needs and alleviate poverty‐issues of urgent interest to them and also to national policymakers. This multiplicity of groups with differing (often conflicting) interests in the multifarious goods and services produced by tropical forests complicates the search for alternative agricultural activities for forest margins since these alternatives must satisfy such divergent objectives. This paper sets out a conceptual framework for comparing the impacts of different land use systems and agricultural practices at the margins of tropical rainforests in terms of the concerns and objectives of two key interest groups: small‐scale farmers seeking livelihoods at the forest margins and the ‘international’ interests in the global public goods and services supplied by tropical rainforests. This framework should be useful to a third key group, the national and regional policymakers who must consider these and other policy objectives and then decide on courses of action. The paper identifies data needs and analytical methods capable of supplying an empirical base for this conceptual framework, based on quantifiable indicators. It then presents preliminary results of the application of this conceptual framework in Indonesia and Brazil in association with a global, collaborative, multidisciplinary research program. Even using preliminary order‐of‐magnitude estimates (to be replaced by more precise measurements as they become available), this conceptual framework presents results in ways that allow researchers and policymakers to select clear ‘best bets’ for development, when they exist, and to assess tradeoffs and options for complementary policy action and research efforts, when they do not.

Date: 1998
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (11)

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-0862.1998.tb00523.x

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bla:agecon:v:19:y:1998:i:1-2:p:159-174

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.blackwell ... bs.asp?ref=0169-5150

Access Statistics for this article

Agricultural Economics is currently edited by W.A. Masters and G.E. Shively

More articles in Agricultural Economics from International Association of Agricultural Economists Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().