Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-6587cd75c8-ptrpl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-23T22:53:12.027Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

2 - The economics of land conversion, open access and biodiversity loss

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 August 2009

By
Edward B. Barbier
Edited by
Andreas Kontoleon ,
Unai Pascual  and
Timothy Swanson
Edward B. Barbier
Affiliation:
John S. Bugas Professor of Economics, Department of Economics and Finance, University of Wyoming, USA
Andreas Kontoleon
Affiliation:
University of Cambridge
Unai Pascual
Affiliation:
University of Cambridge
Timothy Swanson
Affiliation:
University College London
Get access

Summary

Introduction

In developing economies, especially those without oil and natural gas reserves, the most important source of natural wealth is agricultural land. In these economies, the agricultural land base is expanding rapidly through conversion of forests, wetlands and other natural habitat (Barbier 2005). During 1980–1990 over 15 million hectares of tropical forest were cleared annually and the rate of deforestation averaged 0.8 per cent per year (FAO 1993). Although over 1990–2000 global tropical deforestation slowed to less than 12 million ha per year, or an annual rate of 0.6 per cent, this trend reflects less deforestation mainly in Latin America and Asia. Forest clearing increased over 1990–2000 in Africa to over 4.8 million ha annually, or 0.8 per cent per year. Whereas deforestation has declined in Tropical South America, Central Africa and Southeast Asia, it has risen significantly in Tropical Southern, West and East Sahelian Africa (FAO 2001).

López (1998a, 1998b) identifies most of sub-Saharan Africa, parts of East and Southeast Asia and the tropical forests of South America as regions with ‘abundant land’ and open access resource conditions that are prone to agricultural expansion. This expansion is mainly due to the high degree of integration of rural areas with the national and international economy as well as population pressures. The poor intensification of agriculture in many tropical developing countries, where use of irrigation and fertiliser is low, is also an important factor (FAO 1997, 2003).

Type
Chapter
Information
Biodiversity Economics
Principles, Methods and Applications
 , pp. 57 - 91
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Alston, L. J., Libecap, G. D. and Mueller, F. 1999. Titles, Conflict, and Land Use: the Development of Property Rights and Land Reform on the Brazilian Amazon Frontier. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Angelsen, A. 1999. Agricultural expansion and deforestation: modelling the impact of population, market forces and property rights. Journal of Development Economics. 58. 185–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Appendini, K. 1998. Changing agrarian institutions – interpreting the contradictions. In Cornelius, W. A. and Myhre, D. (eds.). The Transformation of Rural Mexico: Reforming the Ejido Sector. San Diego, CA: Center for US-Mexican Studies, University of California. 25–38.Google Scholar
Baland, J-M. and Platteau, J-P. 1996. Halting Degradation: Is there a Role for Rural Communities?Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Barbier, E. B. 2002. Institutional constraints and deforestation: an application to Mexico. Economic Inquiry. 40 (3). 508–519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barbier, E. B. 2004. Explaining agricultural land expansion and deforestation in developing countries. American Journal of Agricultural Economics. 86 (5). 1347–1353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barbier, E. B. 2005. Natural Resources and Economic Development. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barbier, E. B. and Burgess, J. C. 1996. Economic analysis of deforestation in Mexico. Environment and Development Economics. 1 (2). 203–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barbier, E. B. and Burgess, J. C. 1997. The economics of tropical forest land use options. Land Economics. 73 (2). 174–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barbier, E. B. and Burgess, J. C. 2001a. The economics of tropical deforestation. Journal of Economic Surveys. 15 (3). 413–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barbier, E. B. and Burgess, J. C. 2001b. Tropical deforestation, tenure insecurity and unsustainability. Forest Science. 47 (4). 497–509.Google Scholar
Barbier, E. B. and Cox, M. 2004. An economic analysis of shrimp farm expansion and mangrove conversion in Thailand. Land Economics. 80 (3). 389–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barbier, E. B. and Sathirathai, S. (eds.). 2004. Shrimp Farming and Mangrove Loss in Thailand. London: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Besley, T. 1995. Property rights and investment incentives: theory and evidence from Ghana. Journal of Political Economy. 103 (5). 903–937.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bohn, H. and Deacon, R. T. 2000. Ownership risk, investment, and the use of natural resources. American Economic Review. 90 (3). 526–549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bromley, D. W. 1989. Property relations and economic development: the other land reform. World Development. 17. 867–877.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bromley, D. W. 1991. Environment and Economy: Property Rights and Public Policy.Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Brown, K. and Pearce, D. W. (eds.). 1994. The Causes of Tropical Deforestation: The Economic and Statistical Analysis of Factors Giving Rise to the Loss of the Tropical Forests.London: UCL Press.Google Scholar
Brown, P. 1997. Institutions, inequalities, and the impact of agrarian reform on rural Mexican communities. Human Organization. 56 (1). 102–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burger, J., Ostrom, E., Norgaard, R. B., Policansky, D. and Goldstein, B. D. (eds.). 2001. Protecting the Commons: a Framework for Resource Management in the Americas. Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
Cornelius, W. A. and Myhre, D. (eds.). 1998. The Transformation of Rural Mexico: Reforming the Ejido Sector. San Diego, CA: Center for US-Mexican Studies. University of California.Google Scholar
Cropper, M., Griffiths, C. and Mani, M. 1999. Roads, population pressures, and deforestation in Thailand. 1976–1989. Land Economics. 75 (1). 58–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deacon, R. T. 1999. Deforestation and ownership: evidence from historical accounts and contemporary data. Land Economics. 75 (3). 341–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deininger, K. W. and Minten, B. 1999. Poverty, policies and deforestation: the case of Mexico. Economic Development and Cultural Change. 47 (2). 313–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dierberg, F. E. and Kiattisimkul, W. 1996. Issues, impacts and implications of shrimp aquaculture in Thailand. Environmental Management. 20 (5). 649–666.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Erftemeijer, P. L. A. and Lewis, R. R. Ⅲ. 2000. Planting mangroves on intertidal mudflats: habitat restoration or habitat conversion? In V. Sumantakul, et al. (eds.). Enhancing coastal ecosystem restoration for the 21st Century. Proceedings of the Regional Seminar for East and Southeast Asian Countries: ECOTONE Ⅷ, Ranong, and Phuket, , Thailand, 23–28 May 1999. Bangkok, Thailand, Royal Forestry Department. 156–165.Google Scholar
Feder, G. and Feeny, D. 1991. Land tenure and property rights: theory and implications for development policy. World Bank Economic Review. 5 (1). 135–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feder, G. and Onchan, T. 1987. Land ownership security and farm investment in Thailand. American Journal of Agricultural Economics. 69. 311–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feder, G., Onchan, T., Chalamwong Y. and Hongladarom, C. 1988. Land policies and farm performance in Thailand's forest reserve areas. Economic Development and Cultural Change. 36 (3). 483–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feeny, D. 1988. Agricultural expansion and forest depletion in Thailand, 1900–1975. In Richards, J. F. and Tucker, R. (eds.). World Deforestation in the Twentieth Century. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. 112–143.Google Scholar
Feeny, D. 2002. The co-evolution of property rights regimes for man, land, and forests in Thailand, 1790–1990. In Richards, J. F. (ed.). Land Property and the Environment. San Francisco, CA: Institute for Contemporary Studies Press. 179–221.Google Scholar
Flaherty, M. and Karnjanakesorn, C. 1995. Marine shrimp aquaculture and natural resource degradation in Thailand. Environmental Management. 19 (1). 27–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO). 1993. Forest Resources Assessment 1990: Tropical Countries. Rome: FAO Forestry Paper 112.
Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations. 1997. State of the World's Forests 1997. Rome: FAO.
Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations. 2001. Forest Resources Assessment 2000: Main Report. Rome: FAO Forestry Paper 140.
Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations. 2003. State of the World's Forests 2003. Rome: FAO.
Freeman, A. M. Ⅲ. 2003. The Measurement of Environmental and Resource Values: Theory and Methods, 2nd ed. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.Google Scholar
Gibson, C. C. 2001. Forest resources: institutions for local governance in Guatemala. In Burger, J., Ostrom, E., Norgaard, R. B., Policansky, D. and Goldstein, B. D. (eds.). Protecting the Commons: A Framework for Resource Management in the Americas. Washington, DC: Island Press. 71–90.Google Scholar
Goss, J., Burch, D. and Rickson, R. E. 2000. Agri-food restructuring and Third World transnationals: Thailand, the CP Group and the global shrimp industry. World Development. 28 (3). 513–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goss, J., Skladany, M. and Middendorf, G. 2001. Dialogue: shrimp aquaculture in Thailand: a response to Vandergeest, Flaherty and Miller. Rural Sociology. 66 (3). 451–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heal, G. 1982. The use of common property resources. In Smith, V. K. and Krutilla, J. V. (eds.). Explorations in Natural Resource Economics. Baltimore, MD : Johns Hopkins University Press. 72–106.Google Scholar
Jones, G. A. and Ward, P. M. 1998. Privatizing the commons: ejido and urban development in Mexico. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research. 22 (1). 76–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaimowitz, D. and Angelsen, A. 1998. Economic Models of Tropical Deforestation: A Review. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research.Google Scholar
Kaosa-ard, M. and Pednekar, S. S. 1998. Background report for the Thai Marine Rehabilitation Plan 1997–2001. Report submitted to the Joint Research Centre of the Commission of the European Communities and the Department of Fisheries, Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives. Bangkok: Thailand Development Research Institute.
Kongkeo, H. 1997. Comparison of intensive shrimp farming systems in Indonesia, Philippines, Taiwan and Thailand. Aquaculture Research. 28. 89–796.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kooten, van G. C., Sedjo, R. A. and Bulte, E. H. 1999. Tropical deforestation: issues and policies. Chapter 5 in Folmer, H. and Tietenberg, T. (eds.). The International Yearbook of Environmental and Resource Economics 1999/2000. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. 199–248.Google Scholar
Larson, B. A. and Bromley, D. W. 1990. Property rights, externalities, and resource degradation: locating the tragedy. Journal of Development Economics. 33. 235–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, R. R. Ⅲ., Erftemeijer, P. L. A., Sayaka, A. and Kethkaew, P. 2000. Mangrove rehabilitation after shrimp aquaculture: a case study in progress at the Don Sak National Forest Reserves, Surat Thani, Southern Thailand. Mimeo. Mangrove Forest Management Unit, Surat Thani Regional Forest Office, Surat Thani, Thailand: Royal Forest Department.
López, R. 1997. Environmental externalities in traditional agriculture and the impact of trade liberalization: the case of Ghana. Journal of Development Economic. 53. 17–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
López, R. 1998a. Agricultural intensification, common property resources and the farm-household. Environmental and Resource Economics. 11 (3–4). 443–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
López, R. 1998b. Where development can or cannot go: the role of poverty-environment linkages. In Pleskovic, B. and Stiglitz, J. E. (eds.). Annual Bank Conference on Development Economics 1997. Washington, DC: The World Bank. 285–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
North, D. C. 1990. Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ostrom, E. 1990. Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ostrom, E. 2001. Reformulating the commons. In Burger, J., Ostrom, E., Norgaard, R. B., Policansky, D. and Goldstein, B. D. (eds.). Protecting the Commons: A framework for Resource Management in the Americas. Washington, DC: Island Press. 17–44.Google Scholar
Panayotou, T. and Sungsuwan, S. 1994. An econometric analysis of the causes of tropical deforestation: the case of Northeast Thailand. In Brown, K. and Pearce, D. W. (eds.). The Causes of Tropical Deforestation: The Economic and Statistical Analysis of Factors giving Rise to the Loss of the Tropical Forests. London: University College London Press.Google Scholar
Raine, R. M. 1994. Current land use and changes in land use over time in the coastal zone of Chathaburi province, Thailand. Biological Conservation. 67. 201–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richards, M. 1997. Common property resource institutions and forest management in Latin America. Development and Change. 28. 95–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sarukhán, J. and Larson, J. 2001. When the commons become less tragic: land tenure, social organization, and fair trade in Mexico. In J. Burger, E. Ostrom, R. B. Norgaard, D. Policansky, and B. D. Goldstein (eds.). Protecting the Commons: a Framework for Resource Management in the Americas. Washington, DC: Island Press. 45–70.
Sathirathai, S. 1998. Economic valuation of mangroves and the roles of local communities in the Conservation of the resources: case study of Surat Thani, South of Thailand. Final report submitted to the Economy and Environment Program for Southest Asia (EEPSEA), Singapore.
Sathirathai, S. and Barbier, E. B. 2001. Valuing mangrove conservation in Southern Thailand. Contemporary Economic Policy. 19 (2). 109–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singh, I., Squire, L. and Strauss, J. (eds.). 1986. Agricultural Household Models: Extensions, Applications and Policy. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Stevenson, N. J., Lewis, Ⅲ R. R. and Burbridge, P. R. 1999. Disused shrimp ponds and mangrove rehabilitation. In Streever, W. Dordrecht (ed.). An International Perspective on Wetland Rehabilitation, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. 277–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomson, J. T., Feeny, D.H and Oakerson, R. J. 1992. Institutional dynamics: the evolution and dissolution of common property resource management. In Daniel, W. Bromley (ed.). Making the Commons Work: Theory, Practice, and Policy. San Francisico, CA: Institute for Contemporary Studies Press. 129–160.Google Scholar
Thongrak, S., Prato, T.Chiayvareesajja, S. and Kurtz, W. 1997. Economic and water quality evaluation of intensive shrimp production systems in Thailand. Agricultural Systems. 53. 121–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tokrisna, R. 1998. The use of economic analysis in support of development and investment decision in Thai aquaculture: with particular reference to marine shrimp culture. A paper submitted to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) 2002. Global Environment Outlook 3. London: Earthscan Publications.
United Nations Environment Programme-World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC). 2000. Global Biodiversity: Earth's Living Resources in the 21st Century. Cambridge: World Conservation Press.
Vandergeest, P., Flaherty, M. and Miller, P. 1999. A political ecology of shrimp aquaculture in Thailand. Rural Sociology. 64 (4). 573–596.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
World Bank 1989. Mexico – Agricultural Sector Report. Washington, DC: The World Bank.
World Bank 1994. Mexico Resource Conservation and Forest Sector Review. Washington, DC: The World Bank.
World Conservation Monitoring Centre (WCMC) 1992. Global Biodiversity: Status of the Earth's Living Resources. London: Chapman and Hall

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×