4.5 Article

Understanding and modelling the ambiguous impact of off-farm income on tropical deforestation

Journal

JOURNAL OF LAND USE SCIENCE
Volume 17, Issue 1, Pages 658-676

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/1747423X.2022.2146220

Keywords

Smallholder farms; land allocation; multiple objective optimization; robust optimization

Funding

  1. German Research Foundation [KN586/19-1, PA3162/1]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study proposes a concept to integrate off-farm income into a land allocation model, taking into account the impact of reallocating on-farm labor on tropical deforestation. The study found that off-farm income can reduce farmers' dependency on deforestation-related agricultural income, leading to less deforestation. The effect of labor reallocation has a slightly greater impact on reducing deforestation compared to the income effect.
Few land-allocation models consider the impact of off-farm income on tropical deforestation. We provide a concept to integrate off-farm income in a mechanistic multiple-objective land-allocation model, while distinguishing between farms with and without re-allocation of on-farm labor to obtain off-farm income. On farms with re-allocation of labor we found that off-farm income reduced farmers' financial dependency on deforestation-related agricultural income leading to less tropical deforestation. The influence of off-farm income covered two aspects: availability of additional income and re-allocation of on-farm labor to off-farm activities. The labor effect tended to reduce deforestation slightly more than the income effect. On farms without re-allocation of on-farm labor we showed how farmers can use off-farm income to purchase additional labor to accelerate deforestation. Our study highlights the importance of considering off-farm income in land-use models to better understand, model and possibly curb tropical deforestation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available