Cited by 37Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource ManagementForest Management and PolicyRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications

Public policies and global forest conservation: Empirical evidence from national borders

Open access
Wuepper, David, Crowther, Thomas, Lauber, Thomas, Routh, Devin, Le Clec'h, Solen, Garrett, Rachael D., Börner, Jan·2024·Global Environmental Change

Abstract

Protecting the world’s remaining forests is a global policy priority. Even though the value of the world’s remaining forests is global in nature, much of the protection has to come from national policies. Here, we combine global, high resolution remote sensing data on forest outcomes (tree-cover loss, forest degradation, net primary production) and two complementary econometric research designs for causal inference to first quantify how much it matters in which country a forest is located, secondly, the role of public policies, and third, under which conditions such pubic policies tend to be most successful. We find considerable border discontinuities in remotely sensed forest outcomes around the world (in a regression discontinuity design) and these are largely explained by countries’ policies (using a differences-in-discontinuities design). We estimate that public policies reduce the risk of tree cover loss by almost 4 percentage points globally, but there is large variation around this. The best explanations we find for these heterogenous treatment effects are a country’s policy enforcement, its policy stringency, its property rights, and its rule of law (in that order). Our results motivate international cooperation to finance and improve (a) countries’ public policies for forest protection and (b) countries’ capacity to implement and enforce them well.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2023.102770

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Following previous studies, the study controls for border segment fixed effects and a linear polynomial of latitude and longitude to control for smoothly distributed spatial confounding factors.

    “Following previous studies, we control for border segment fixed effects, i.e., splitting the border into segment subsamples to ensure that only municipalities within the same segment are compared (cf.Supplementary Fig. SI8), and a linear polynomial of latitude and longitude to control for smoothly distributed spatial confounding factors 91,92 .”

    From Health benefits of reduced deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon (2024) · cites this paper as [92]

    Section 2.1 (p. 5) reports border fixed effects and latitude and longitude controls; Section 2.1.1 (p. 5) says the coordinates control for smoothly distributed spatial confounders. But the fixed effects are indexed by borders between pairs of contiguous countries, not by subsamples of border segments, and the paper does not describe comparisons of municipalities within the same segment. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 15

  1. Abman, R., 2018. Rule of law and avoided deforestation from protected areas. Ecol. Econ. 146, 282 -289. http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0959-3780(2300136-X/h0005)
  2. Abman, R., Carney, C., 2020. Land rights, agricultural productivity, and deforestation. Food Policy 94, 101841. http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0959-3780(2300136-X/h0010)
  3. Alix-García, J., Millimet, D.L., 2023. Remotely incorrect? accounting for nonclassical measurement error in satellite data on deforestation. J. Assoc. Environ. Resour. Econ. Forthcoming. 10 (5), 1335 -1367. http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0959-3780(2300136-X/h0020)
  4. Angelsen, A., 2010. Policies for reduced deforestation and their impact on agricultural production. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 107, 19639 -19644. http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0959-3780(2300136-X/h0025)
  5. Assunç ˜ ao, J., Gandour, C., Rocha, R., 2022. DETERring deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon: environmental monitoring and law enforcement. Applied Economics, American Economic Journal forthcoming. http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0959-3780(2300136-X/h0030)
  6. Balboni, C., Berman, A., Burgess, R., Olken, B.A., 2023. The economics of tropical deforestation. Annual Review of Economics 1 -50. http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0959-3780(2300136-X/h0035)
  7. Barbier, E.B., Damania, R., L ´ eonard, D., 2005. Corruption, trade and resource conversion. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 50, 276 -299. http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0959-3780(2300136-X/h0040)
  8. Bastin, J.-F., Finegold, Y., Garcia, C., Mollicone, D., Rezende, M., Routh, D., Zohner, C. M., Crowther, T.W., 2019. The global tree restoration potential. Science 365, 76 -79. http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0959-3780(2300136-X/h0045)
  9. Bonilla-Mejía, L., Higuera-Mendieta, I., 2019. Protected areas under weak institutions: evidence from Colombia. World Dev. 122, 585 -596. http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0959-3780(2300136-X/h0050)
  10. B ¨ orner, J., Baylis, K., Corbera, E., Ezzine-De-blas, D., Ferraro, P.J., Honey-Ros ´ es, J., Lapeyre, R., Persson, U.M., Wunder, S., 2016. Emerging evidence on the effectiveness of tropical forest conservation. PLoS One 11, e0159152. http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0959-3780(2300136-X/h0055)
  11. B ¨ orner, J., Schulz, D., Wunder, S., Pfaff, A., 2020. The effectiveness of forest conservation policies and programs. Ann. Rev. Resour. Econ. 12, 45 -64. http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0959-3780(2300136-X/h0060)
  12. Browne, C., di Battista, A., Geiger, T., Gutknecht, T., 2014. The executive opinion survey: the voice of the business community. The Global Competitiveness Report 2014 -2015, 69 -78. http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0959-3780(2300136-X/h0065)
  13. Burgess, R., Costa, F.J., Olken, B.A., 2023. National Borders and the Conservation of Nature. Working Paper. London School of Economics. http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0959-3780(2300136-X/h0070)
  14. Busch, J., Ferretti-Gallon, K., 2017. What drives deforestation and what stops it? A metaanalysis. Rev. Environ. Econ. Policy 11, 3 -23. http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0959-3780(2300136-X/h0075)
  15. Busch, J., Ferretti-Gallon, K., 2023. What drives and stops deforestation, reforestation, and forest degradation? an updated meta-analysis. Rev. Environ. Econ. Policy 17, 217 -250. http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0959-3780(2300136-X/h0080)

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wuepper, D., Crowther, T., Lauber, T., Routh, D., Le Clec'h, S., Garrett, R. D., & Börner, J.
Affiliations
  • University of Bonn (DE)
  • ETH Zurich (CH)
  • University of Zurich (CH)
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
Corresponding author
Wuepper, David
Venue
Global Environmental Change
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2024-01
Volume
84
Pages
102770
ISSN
0959-3780 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4390086707
Cited by
37
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 7
FWCI
3.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Global Environmental Change (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Socio-Environmental Systems Modeling (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Repository for Publications and Research Data (ETH Zurich) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • ETH Zürich Research Collection
Funders
  • HORIZON EUROPE European Research Council (101075824, 949932)
  • World Bank Group
  • Georg-August-Universität Göttingen
  • European Research Council
  • Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (390732324, EXC 2070)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Forest Management and Policy
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Remote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Keywords
forest conservation, public policy, tree cover loss, forest degradation, net primary productivity, national borders, policy enforcement, policy stringency, property rights, rule of law, international cooperation, forest protection

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review