Effects of ecotourism on forest loss in the Himalayan biodiversity hotspot based on counterfactual analyses.

Ecotourism is developing rapidly in biodiversity hotspots worldwide, but there is limited and mixed empirical evidence that ecotourism achieves positive biodiversity outcomes. We assessed whether ecotourism influenced forest loss rates and trajectories from 2000 to 2017 in Himalayan temperate forests. We compared forest loss in 15 ecotourism hubs with nonecotourism areas in 4 Himalayan countries. We used matching statistics to control for local-level determinants of forest loss, for example, population density, market access, and topography. None of the ecotourism hubs was free of forest loss, and we found limited evidence that forest-loss trajectories in ecotourism hubs were different from those in nonecotourism areas. In Nepal and Bhutan, differences in forest loss rates between ecotourism hubs and matched nonecotourism areas did not differ significantly, and the magnitude of the estimated effect was small. In India, where overall forest loss rates were the lowest of any country in our analysis, forest loss rates were higher in ecotourism hubs than in matched nonecotourism areas. In contrast, in China, where overall forest loss rates were highest, forest loss rates were lower in ecotourism hubs than where there was no ecotourism. Our results suggest that the success of ecotourism as a forest conservation strategy, as it is currently practiced in the Himalaya, is context dependent. In a region with high deforestation pressures, ecotourism may be a relatively environmentally friendly form of economic development relative to other development strategies. However, ecotourism may stimulate forest loss in regions where deforestation rates are low.

Efectos del Ecoturismo sobre la Pérdida de Bosques en el Punto Caliente de Biodiversidad en el Himalaya con base en Análisis Contrafactuales Resumen El ecoturismo está desarrollándose rápidamente en los puntos calientes de biodiversidad en todo el mundo, pero existe evidencia empírica mixta y limitada de los resultados positivos que se logran con el ecoturismo. Valoramos si el ecoturismo influyó sobre las tasas de pérdida forestal y sus trayectorias entre el 2000 y el 2017 en los bosques templados del Himalaya. Comparamos la pérdida forestal en quince focos ecoturísticos con la pérdida forestal en las áreas sin ecoturismo de cuatro países del Himalaya. Utilizamos estadística correspondiente para controlar las determinantes a nivel local de la pérdida del bosque, por ejemplo, la densidad poblacional, el acceso al mercado y la topografía. Ninguno de los focos ecoturísticos estaba libre de pérdida forestal, además de que encontramos evidencia limitada de que las trayectorias de la pérdida forestal en los focos ecoturísticos eran diferentes a las trayectorias en las áreas sin ecoturismo. En Nepal y en Bután, las diferencias en la pérdida forestal entre los focos ecoturísticos y las áreas sin ecoturismo correspondidas no difirieron significativamente y la magnitud del efecto estimado fue menor. En la India, donde las tasas generales de pérdida forestal fueron las más bajas de cualquier país en nuestro análisis, las tasas de pérdida forestal fueron más altas en los focos ecoturísticos que en las áreas sin ecoturismo correspondidas. Como contraste, en China, donde las tasas generales de pérdida forestal fueron más altas, las tasas de pérdida forestal fueron más bajas en los focos ecoturísticos que en donde no existe el ecoturismo. Nuestros resultados sugieren que el éxito del ecoturismo como estrategia de conservación del bosque, a como se práctica actualmente en el Himalaya, depende del contexto. En una región con presiones altas de deforestación, el ecoturismo puede ser una forma de desarrollo económico relativamente amigable con el ambiente comparado con otras estrategias de desarrollo. Sin embargo, el ecoturismo puede estimular la pérdida forestal en regiones en las que las tasas de deforestación son bajas.

Effects of national forest-management regimes on unprotected forests of the Himalaya.

Globally, deforestation continues, and although protected areas effectively protect forests, the majority of forests are not in protected areas. Thus, how effective are different management regimes to avoid deforestation in non-protected forests? We sought to assess the effectiveness of different national forest-management regimes to safeguard forests outside protected areas. We compared 2000-2014 deforestation rates across the temperate forests of 5 countries in the Himalaya (Bhutan, Nepal, China, India, and Myanmar) of which 13% are protected. We reviewed the literature to characterize forest management regimes in each country and conducted a quasi-experimental analysis to measure differences in deforestation of unprotected forests among countries and states in India. Countries varied in both overarching forest-management goals and specific tenure arrangements and policies for unprotected forests, from policies emphasizing economic development to those focused on forest conservation. Deforestation rates differed up to 1.4% between countries, even after accounting for local determinants of deforestation, such as human population density, market access, and topography. The highest deforestation rates were associated with forest policies aimed at maximizing profits and unstable tenure regimes. Deforestation in national forest-management regimes that emphasized conservation and community management were relatively low. In India results were consistent with the national-level results. We interpreted our results in the context of the broader literature on decentralized, community-based natural resource management, and our findings emphasize that the type and quality of community-based forestry programs and the degree to which they are oriented toward sustainable use rather than economic development are important for forest protection. Our cross-national results are consistent with results from site- and regional-scale studies that show forest-management regimes that ensure stable land tenure and integrate local-livelihood benefits with forest conservation result in the best forest outcomes.

Using residents' perceptions to improve park-people relationships in Chatthin Wildlife Sanctuary, Myanmar.

The complex and context-specific relationships that local residents have with neighboring protected areas present many challenges for protected area (PA) management. While long-term, interdisciplinary approaches may be necessary to fully understand park-people relationships within a particular PA, the reality is that management decisions for the majority of PAs in the world are made by protected area staff with little or no external assistance. One potential entry point for management to understand park-people relationships and improve management is through understanding people's perceptions of PAs. This paper presents a study from Chatthin Wildlife Sanctuary in central Myanmar designed to explore the impact of using residents' attitudes to directly inform management strategies. We conducted a survey to determine attitudes and determinants of attitudes toward CWS. In response to the survey, the warden made changes to the Sanctuary's management strategy to accommodate local needs and perceptions. Four years later, we repeated the survey to explore the effects of the management changes on people's perceptions and found that people were significantly more likely to like the sanctuary, less likely to mention problems, and more likely to mention benefits. People's negative perceptions of management conflicts and crop damage decreased and their positive perceptions of conservation and ecosystem service benefits and extraction benefits increased. This study demonstrates that residents' perceptions can be used by management as a starting point to improve park-people relationships through feasible and targeted interventions that are meaningful to local communities and their relationships with PAs.

The environmental history of Chatthin Wildlife Sanctuary, a protected area in Myanmar (Burma).

We reconstructed the history of Chatthin Wildlife Sanctuary (CWS) to understand how social and economic events, and policy changes affected the sanctuary's condition. We surveyed 25 villages surrounding CWS to evaluate past and present ecological conditions, compare the results with historical accounts and identify causal relationships. During the first half of the 20th century, the primary threat was the government's reduction of old growth forest to supply fuel wood for the British-built railway. The railroad opened the area to colonization, but the villagers' impact on timber and wildlife was low. From 1945 to 1988, villagers became the primary force of landscape degradation. The post-war windfall of firearms increased hunting pressure, and populations of large mammal started to decline. With the economic decline of the 1970s and 1980s, the community's demand for game and forest products intensified, and the large mammal fauna was reduced from eleven to four species. From 1988-2003, the forests surrounding the sanctuary were fragmented and degraded. The absence of large predators rendered the park safe for livestock, and the combined effects of grazing and removal of forest products seriously degraded habitat within CWS. Major threats to CWS during the past two decades have resulted from land use decisions in which government-planned economic enterprises caused encroachment by villagers. Stabilization and recovery of this sanctuary will require management compatible with human needs, including expanded buffer zones, better core area protection, community forestry projects, and probably relocation of villages within the park.