4.6 Article

Reconciling Forest Conservation and Logging in Indonesian Borneo

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 8, 期 8, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0069887

关键词

-

资金

  1. Arcus foundation
  2. CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Combining protected areas with natural forest timber concessions may sustain larger forest landscapes than is possible via protected areas alone. However, the role of timber concessions in maintaining natural forest remains poorly characterized. An estimated 57% (303,525 km(2)) of Kalimantan's land area (532,100 km(2)) was covered by natural forest in 2000. About 14,212 km(2) (4.7%) had been cleared by 2010. Forests in oil palm concessions had been reduced by 5,600 km(2) (14.1%), while the figures for timber concessions are 1,336 km(2) (1.5%), and for protected forests are 1,122 km(2) (1.2%). These deforestation rates explain little about the relative performance of the different land use categories under equivalent conversion risks due to the confounding effects of location. An estimated 25% of lands allocated for timber harvesting in 2000 had their status changed to industrial plantation concessions in 2010. Based on a sample of 3,391 forest plots (161 km; 100 ha), and matching statistical analyses, 2000-2010 deforestation was on average 17.6 ha lower (95% C. I.: -22.3 ha--212.9 ha) in timber concession plots than in oil palm concession plots. When location effects were accounted for, deforestation rates in timber concessions and protected areas were not significantly different (Mean difference: 0.35 ha; 95% C. I.: -0.002 ha-0.7 ha). Natural forest timber concessions in Kalimantan had similar ability as protected areas to maintain forest cover during 2000-2010, provided the former were not reclassified to industrial plantation concessions. Our study indicates the desirability of the Government of Indonesia designating its natural forest timber concessions as protected areas under the IUCN Protected Area Category VI to protect them from reclassification.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据