Cited by 1,366Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource ManagementForest Management and PolicyLand Use and Ecosystem Services

An assessment of deforestation and forest degradation drivers in developing countries

Open access
Hosonuma, Noriko, Herold, Martin, De Sy, Veronique, De Fries, Ruth S, Brockhaus, Maria, Verchot, Louis, Angelsen, Arild, Romijn, Erika·2012·Environmental Research Letters

Abstract

Countries are encouraged to identify drivers of deforestation and forest degradation in the development of national strategies and action plans for REDD+. In this letter we provide an assessment of proximate drivers of deforestation and forest degradation by synthesizing empirical data reported by countries as part of their REDD+ readiness activities, CIFOR country profiles, UNFCCC national communications and scientific literature. Based on deforestation rate and remaining forest cover 100 (sub)tropical non-Annex I countries were grouped into four forest transition phases. Driver data of 46 countries were summarized for each phase and by continent, and were used as a proxy to estimate drivers for the countries with missing data. The deforestation drivers are similar in Africa and Asia, while degradation drivers are more similar in Latin America and Asia. Commercial agriculture is the most important driver of deforestation, followed by subsistence agriculture. Timber extraction and logging drives most of the degradation, followed by fuelwood collection and charcoal production, uncontrolled fire and livestock grazing. The results reflect the most up to date and comprehensive overview of current national-level data availability on drivers, which is expected to improve over time within the frame of the UNFCCC REDD+ process.

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 · 10.1088/1748-9326/7/4/044009

Cites

26 of 26 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?

  • About 80% of global deforestation is the result of agriculture, while other significant causes include mining, logging, and urban development.

    “About 80% percent of global deforestation is the result of agriculture (clearing land for pasture or crop production), while other significant causes include mining, logging, and urban development [353].”

    From Tackling climate change with machine learning (2023) · cites this paper as [353]

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: 1

  1. Boucher D H 2011 Brazil's Success in Reducing Deforestation UCS Tropical Forest and Climate Briefing #8 (Cambridge, MA: Union of Concerned Scientists) (online at: www.ucsusa.org/ assets/documents/global warming/Brazil-s-Success-in- Reducing-Deforestation.pdf)

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hosonuma, N., Herold, M., De Sy, V., De Fries, R. S., Brockhaus, M., Verchot, L., Angelsen, A., & Romijn, E.
Affiliations
  • Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (JP)
  • Wageningen University & Research (NL)
  • Center for International Forestry Research (ID)
  • Norwegian University of Life Sciences (NO)
Venue
Environmental Research Letters
Published
2012-10-08
Volume
7
Issue
4
Pages
044009
ISSN
1748-9326 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2114844474
Cited by
1,366
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 83 · 2025: 98 · 2024: 100 · 2023: 123 · 2022: 148 · 2021: 149 · 2020: 114 · 2019: 152 · 2018: 111 · 2017: 79 · 2016: 73 · 2015: 70 · 2014: 41 · 2013: 21 · 2012: 3
FWCI
35.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc-sa
Locations
  • Environmental Research Letters (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • Socio-Environmental Systems Modeling (acceptedVersion)
  • CGSPace A Repository of Agricultural Research Outputs (Consultative Group for International Agricultural Research) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • Publication Database GFZ (GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences) (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology
  • Direktoratet for Utviklingssamarbeid
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 › Global and Planetary Change › Land Use and Ecosystem Services
Keywords
deforestation drivers, REDD+, commercial agriculture, subsistence farming, logging, fuelwood collection, charcoal production, uncontrolled fires, livestock grazing, developing countries, tropical forests, National Forest Strategy

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