4.3 Article

Road construction in the Peruvian Amazon:: process, causes and consequences

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION
卷 28, 期 3, 页码 199-214

出版社

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S0376892901000212

关键词

road construction; rain forest; deforestation; land use planning; Peru; Amazon

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In the north-western Peruvian Amazon, a new road has recently been constructed to link the city of Iquitos with the town of Nauta. The road crosses lands that are remarkably heterogeneous in terms of ecological conditions, comprising distinctive soil types from extremely poor to relatively fertile. Although this reality contributes to the land use potential and human carrying capacity of each place, deforestation of road margins appears equally intensive on all types of land. In the mid-1990s, two dead-end roads starting from both urban centres were characterized by distinctive zones of resource exploitation, with a road-free section of primary forest in between. A few years later, the separate road ends were linked by a dirt road that served only occasional traffic, but introduced significant new settlement. Various developmental trends evidence incoherent resource management and momentary public support in the region. By promoting diverse economic activities that reflect environmental conditions in the initial land use planning and land allocation, most sections along this road could be considered economically valuable for purposes such as sustainable forestry, tourism, agroforestry and, in suitable sites, intensive agriculture. To promote the more sustainable uses, thorough environmental legislation, administrative guidelines and follow-up based on an implicit mechanism of learning from previous experiences should be implemented. At the local level, there are some important initiatives to support such development, including ecological and economic zoning. However, these measures might be too late to prevent the destructive practices so common in many parts of Amazonia.

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

4.3
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