Conditional cash transfers to alleviate poverty also reduced deforestation in Indonesia

Social Transfers for Exclusive Breastfeeding (STEB) Intervention in Lao People's Democratic Republic: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Children in Lao People's Democratic Republic (Lao PDR) receive suboptimal nutrition because of low breastfeeding rates, undermining their developmental potential. While major public health campaigns have attempted to increase breastfeeding rates, they have been largely unsuccessful. One explanation for these unsuccessful interventions is the economic and financial constraints faced by mothers. A potential solution for alleviating these pressures is providing social transfers to support breastfeeding; defined as a cash or in-kind transfer. Capitalizing on key strategies used in previous social transfer programs, we will assess the effectiveness of social transfer intervention for increasing exclusive breastfeeding rates in Vientiane, Lao PDR.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to conduct a randomized controlled trial (RCT) designed to assess whether social transfers can increase exclusive breastfeeding rates in Vientiane Capital, Lao PDR.

METHODS

A prospective, parallel cluster-RCT was conducted among 300 mothers who recently gave birth and initiated breastfeeding. Enrolling 100 participants for each intervention arm provided us with 80% power to detect an increase in exclusive breastfeeding from the anticipated 21% in the control arm to 40% in either of the 2 intervention arms. Mother-infant dyads were enrolled at approximately 1 month post partum. Follow-up visits will occur at 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, and 3 years post partum; with the ambition to extend the follow-up period. Mother-infant dyads were enrolled between August 2022 and April 2023 with follow-up until 3 years post partum (2026). A local study team comprised of 2 nurses and 2 laboratory technicians is responsible for enrollment and follow-up of participants. Participants were randomly assigned to one of three groups during the baseline, 1-month visit: (1) control group, no social transfer; (2) intervention group 1, an unconditional social transfer at 6 months post partum; and (3) intervention group 2, a social transfer at 6 months post partum conditional upon mothers exclusively breastfeeding. All groups received educational materials supporting mothers to exclusively breastfeed. The primary end point will be exclusive breastfeeding at 6 months post partum. Secondary end points will include exclusive and complementary breastfeeding duration, childhood wasting and stunting, child growth, maternal and infant stress, predictors of early breastfeeding cessation, intestinal inflammation, anemia, maternal weight loss, maternal blood pressure, maternal anxiety, and GRIT personality score. Questionnaires and physical examinations were used to collect information.

RESULTS

As of November 2023, the study has enrolled 300 participants. Study participation is ongoing until December 2026 at minimum. Over the study lifetime, 93% have completed all visits.

CONCLUSIONS

We see potential for a long-term program that may be implemented in other low- or lower-middle-income countries with only minor modifications. The RCT will be used as a basis for observational studies and to investigate the impact of human milk on child fecal microbiota and growth.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05665049; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05665049.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/54768.

Is the EU shirking responsibility for its deforestation footprint in tropical countries? Power, material, and epistemic inequalities in the EU's global environmental governance

This paper critically examines the European Union's (EU) role in tropical deforestation and the bloc's actions to mitigate it. We focus on two EU policy communications aimed at the challenge: stepping up EU action to protect and restore the world's forests and the EU updated bioeconomy strategy. In addition, we refer to the European Green Deal, which articulates the bloc's overarching vision for sustainability and transformations. We find that by casting deforestation as a production problem and a governance challenge on the supply side, these policies deflect attention from some of the key drivers of tropical deforestation-the EU's overconsumption of deforestation-related commodities and asymmetric market and trade power relations. The diversion allows the EU unfettered access to agro-commodities and biofuels, which are important inputs to the EU's green transition and bio-based economy. Upholding a 'sustainability image' within the EU, an overly business-as-usual approach has taken precedence over transformative policies, enabling multinational corporations to run an ecocide treadmill, rapidly obliterating tropical forests. Whereas the EU's plan to nurture a bioeconomy and promote responsible agro-commodities production in the global South are relevant, the bloc is evasive in setting firm targets and policy measures to overcome the inequalities that spring from and enable its overconsumption of deforestation-related commodities. Drawing on degrowth and decolonial theories, we problematise the EU's anti-deforestation policies and highlight alternative ideas that could lead to more just, equitable and effective measures for confronting the tropical deforestation conundrum.

Ten facts about land systems for sustainability

Land use is central to addressing sustainability issues, including biodiversity conservation, climate change, food security, poverty alleviation, and sustainable energy. In this paper, we synthesize knowledge accumulated in land system science, the integrated study of terrestrial social-ecological systems, into 10 hard truths that have strong, general, empirical support. These facts help to explain the challenges of achieving sustainability in land use and thus also point toward solutions. The 10 facts are as follows: 1) Meanings and values of land are socially constructed and contested; 2) land systems exhibit complex behaviors with abrupt, hard-to-predict changes; 3) irreversible changes and path dependence are common features of land systems; 4) some land uses have a small footprint but very large impacts; 5) drivers and impacts of land-use change are globally interconnected and spill over to distant locations; 6) humanity lives on a used planet where all land provides benefits to societies; 7) land-use change usually entails trade-offs between different benefits-"win-wins" are thus rare; 8) land tenure and land-use claims are often unclear, overlapping, and contested; 9) the benefits and burdens from land are unequally distributed; and 10) land users have multiple, sometimes conflicting, ideas of what social and environmental justice entails. The facts have implications for governance, but do not provide fixed answers. Instead they constitute a set of core principles which can guide scientists, policy makers, and practitioners toward meeting sustainability challenges in land use.

Substitution of social sustainability concerns under the Covid-19 pandemic

Think tanks and political leaders have raised concerns about the implications that the Covid-19 response and reconstruction might have on other social objectives that were setting the international agenda before the Covid-19 pandemic. We present evidence for eight consecutive weeks during April-May 2020 for Austria, testing the extent to which Covid-19 concerns substitute other social concerns such as the climate crisis or the protection of vulnerable sectors of the society. We measure behavior in a simple donation task where participants receive €3 that they can distribute between themselves and a list of charitable organizations, which vary between treatments. We consider initially a list of eight charities, including a broad set of social concerns. Results show that introducing the WHO Covid-19 Solidarity Response Fund significantly reduces the sum of donations to the original eight charities. This derives from two effects: First, introducing the Covid-19 Solidarity Response Fund does not significantly change aggregate donations. Second, results point to a high support to the WHO Covid-19 Fund. Overall, our results indicate that donations to diverse social concerns are partially substituted by donations to the Covid-19 fund; yet, this substitution does not fully replace all other social concerns. Results are robust to a 10-fold increase in endowment, with decisions made over €30.

Carbon emissions reductions from Indonesia's moratorium on forest concessions are cost-effective yet contribute little to Paris pledges

International initiatives for reducing carbon emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+) could make critical, cost-effective contributions to tropical countries' nationally determined contributions (NDCs). Norway, a key donor of such initiatives, had a REDD+ partnership with Indonesia, offering results-based payments in exchange for emissions reductions calculated against a historical baseline. Central to this partnership was an area-based moratorium on new oil palm, timber, and logging concessions in primary and peatland forests. We evaluate the effectiveness of the moratorium between 2011 and 2018 by applying a matched triple difference strategy to a unique panel dataset. Treated dryland forest inside moratorium areas retained, at most, an average of 0.65% higher forest cover compared to untreated dryland forest outside the moratorium. By contrast, carbon-rich peatland forest was unaffected by the moratorium. Cumulative avoided dryland deforestation from 2011 until 2018 translates into 67.8 million to 86.9 million tons of emissions reductions, implying an effective carbon price below Norway's US$5 per ton price. Based on Norway's price, our estimated cumulative emissions reductions are equivalent to a payment of US$339 million to US$434.5 million. Annually, our estimates suggest a 3 to 4% contribution to Indonesia's NDC commitment of a 29% emissions reduction by 2030. Despite the Indonesia-Norway partnership ending in 2021, reducing emissions from deforestation remains critical for meeting this commitment. Future area-based REDD+ initiatives could build on the moratorium's outcomes by reforming its incentives and institutional arrangements, particularly in peatland forest areas.

International trade and the survival of mammalian and reptilian species

The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) bans international trade in species threatened with extinction. We investigate the effects of these bans on species’ endangerment, as assessed by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). Our analysis exploits changes in CITES bans between 1979 and 2017. We find that CITES bans lead to subsequent improvements in mammalian species’ IUCN status, relative to species in which trade was not banned. These effects are primarily due to improvements in the status of commercially targeted species. On the other hand, CITES bans lead to deteriorations in reptilian species’ IUCN status. We find that major spikes in trade volume occurred in anticipation of the bans on reptilian species but not in anticipation of those on mammalian species.

No aggregate deforestation reductions from rollout of community land titles in Indonesia yet

In Indonesia, 60 million people live within 1 km of state forest. The government of Indonesia plans to grant community titles for 12.7 million hectares of land to communities living in and around forests. These titles allow for using nontimber forest products, practicing agroforestry, operating tourism businesses, and selective logging in designated production zones. Here, we estimate the early effects of the program’s rollout. We use data on the delineation and introduction date of community forest titles on 2.4 million hectares of land across the country. We find that, contrary to the objective of the program, community titles aimed at conservation did not decrease deforestation; if anything, they tended to increase forest loss. In contrast, community titles in zones aimed at timber production decreased deforestation, albeit from higher baseline forest loss rates.

Causal assumptions and causal inference in ecological experiments

Causal inferences from experimental data are often justified based on treatment randomization. However, inferring causality from data also requires complementary causal assumptions, which have been formalized by scholars of causality but not widely discussed in ecology. While ecologists have recognized challenges to inferring causal relationships in experiments and developed solutions, they lack a general framework to identify and address them. We review four assumptions required to infer causality from experiments and provide design-based and statistically based solutions for when these assumptions are violated. We conclude that there is no clear demarcation between experimental and non-experimental designs. This insight can help ecologists design better experiments and remove barriers between experimental and observational scholarship in ecology.

What Drives Household Deforestation Decisions? Insights from the Ecuadorian Lowland Rainforests

Tropical forests, and more concretely, the Amazon Basin and the Chocó-Darién, are highly affected by deforestation activities. Households are the main land-use decision-makers and are key agents for forest conservation and deforestation. Understanding the determinants of deforestation at the household level is critical for conservation policies and sustainable development. We explore the drivers of household deforestation decisions, focusing on the quality of the forest resources (timber volume potential) and the institutional environment (conservation strategies, titling, and governmental grants). Both aspects are hypothesized to influence deforestation, but there is little empirical evidence. We address the following questions: (i) Does timber availability attract more deforestation? (ii) Do conservation strategies (incentive-based programs in the Central Amazon and protected areas in the Chocó-Darién) influence deforestation decisions in household located outside the areas under conservation? (iii) Does the absence of titling increase the odds of a household to deforest? (iv) Can governmental grants for poverty alleviation help in the fight against deforestation? We estimated a logit model, where the dependent variable reflects whether or not a household cleared forest within the farm. As predictors, we included the above variables and controlled by household-specific characteristics. This study was conducted in the Central Amazon and the Chocó-Darién of Ecuador, two major deforestation fronts in the country. We found that timber volume potential is associated with a higher odds of deforesting in the Central Amazon, but with a lower odds in the Chocó-Darién. Although conservation strategies can influence household decisions, the effects are context-dependent. Households near the incentive-based program (Central Amazon) have a lower odds of deforesting, whereas households near a protected area (Chocó-Darién) showed the opposite effect. Titling is also important for deforestation reduction; more attention is needed in the Chocó-Darién where numerous households are living in untitled lands. Finally, governmental grants for poverty alleviation showed the potential to generate positive environmental outcomes.

Ensuring a Post-COVID Economic Agenda Tackles Global Biodiversity Loss

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused dramatic and unprecedented impacts on both global health and economies. Many governments are now proposing recovery packages to get back to normal, but the 2019 Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services Global Assessment indicated that business as usual has created widespread ecosystem degradation. Therefore, a post-COVID world needs to tackle the economic drivers that create ecological disruptions. In this perspective, we discuss a number of tools across a range of actors for both short-term stimulus measures and longer-term revamping of global, national, and local economies that take biodiversity into account. These include measures to shift away from activities that damage biodiversity and toward those supporting ecosystem resilience, including through incentives, regulations, fiscal policy, and employment programs. By treating the crisis as an opportunity to reset the global economy, we have a chance to reverse decades of biodiversity and ecosystem losses.