Note to users. If you're seeing this message, it means that your browser cannot find this page's style/presentation instructions -- or possibly that you are using a browser that does not support current Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing, and what you can do to make your experience of our site the best it can be.

Published Online August 9, 2007
Science DOI: 10.1126/science.1146324

Reports

Submitted on June 11, 2007
Accepted on July 20, 2007

Land-Use Allocation Protects the Peruvian Amazon

Paulo J. C. Oliveira 1, Gregory P. Asner 1*, David E. Knapp 1, Angélica Almeyda 2, Ricardo Galván-Gildemeister 3, Sam Keene 4, Rebecca F. Raybin 1, Richard C. Smith 3

1 Department of Global Ecology, Carnegie Institution of Washington, Stanford, CA, 94305 USA.
2 Department of Global Ecology, Carnegie Institution of Washington, Stanford, CA, 94305 USA. ; Department of Anthropological Sciences, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, 94305 USA.
3 Instituto del Bien Común, Av. Petit Thouars 4377, Miraflores, Lima 18 Perú.
4 Department of Electrical and Computing Engineering, Boston University, 8 Saint Mary's Street, Boston, MA 02215 USA.

* To whom correspondence should be addressed.
Gregory P. Asner , E-mail: gpa{at}stanford.edu

Disturbance and deforestation have profound ecological and socio-economic effects on tropical forests, but their diffuse patterns are difficult to detect and quantify at regional scales. We expanded the Carnegie forest damage detection system to show that, between 1999 and 2005, disturbance and deforestation rates throughout the Peruvian Amazon averaged 632 km2 yr-1 and 645 km2 yr-1, respectively. However, only 1-2% occurred within natural protected areas, indigenous territories contained only 11% of the forest disturbances and 9% of the deforestation, and recent forest concessions effectively protected against clear-cutting. Although the region shows recent increases in disturbance and deforestation levels, and leakage into forests surrounding concession areas, land-use policy and remoteness are serving to protect the Peruvian Amazon.


THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES:
Forest transition in Vietnam and displacement of deforestation abroad.
P. Meyfroidt and E. F. Lambin (2009)
PNAS 106, 16139-16144
   Abstract »    Full Text »    PDF »
Measuring the effectiveness of protected area networks in reducing deforestation.
K. S. Andam, P. J. Ferraro, A. Pfaff, G. A. Sanchez-Azofeifa, and J. A. Robalino (2008)
PNAS 105, 16089-16094
   Abstract »    Full Text »    PDF »
Colloquium Paper: Where does biodiversity go from here? A grim business-as-usual forecast and a hopeful portfolio of partial solutions.
P. R. Ehrlich and R. M. Pringle (2008)
PNAS 105, 11579-11586
   Abstract »    Full Text »    PDF »
On the protection of "protected areas".
L. N. Joppa, S. R. Loarie, and S. L. Pimm (2008)
PNAS 105, 6673-6678
   Abstract »    Full Text »    PDF »


To Advertise     Find Products

Science. ISSN 0036-8075 (print), 1095-9203 (online)