Integrity and Isolation of Costa Rica's National Parks and Biological Reserves
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Biological Conservation 109 (2003) 123–135 www.elsevier.com/locate/biocon Integrity and isolation of Costa Rica’s national parks and biological reserves: examining the dynamics of land-cover change G. Arturo Sa´ nchez-Azofeifaa,*, Gretchen C. Dailyb, Alexander S.P. Pfaffc, Christopher Buschd aDepartment of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Earth Observation Systems Laboratory, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada T6G 2E3 bDepartment of Biological Sciences, Center for Conservation Biology, 371 Serra Mall, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305-5020 USA cDepartment of International and Public Affairs, Department of Economics, and Center for Environmental Research and Conservation, Columbia University, 420 W, 118th Streeet, Room 1306, New York, NY 10027 USA dDepartment of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA Received 26 August 2001; received in revised form 11 February 2002; accepted 25 April 2002 Abstract The transformation and degradation of tropical forest is thought to be the primary driving force in the loss of biodiversity worldwide. Developing countries are trying to counter act this massive lost of biodiversity by implementing national parks and biological reserves. Costa Rica is no exception to this rule. National development strategies in Costa Rica, since the early 1970s, have involved the creation of several National Parks and Biological Reserves. This has led to monitoring the integrity of and interactions between these protected areas. Key questions include: ‘‘Are these areas’ boundaries respected?’’; ‘‘Do they create a functioning network?’’; and ‘‘Are they effective conservation tools?’’. This paper quantifies deforestation and secondary growth trends within and around protected areas between 1960 and 1997. We find that inside of national parks and biological reserves, deforestation rates were negligible. For areas outside of National Parks and Biological reserves we report that for 1-km buffer zones around such protected areas, there is a net forest gain for the 1987/1997 time period. Thus, it appears that to this point the boundaries of protected areas are respected. However, in the 10-km buffer zones we find significant forest loss for all study periods. This suggests that increasing isolation of protected areas may prevent them from functioning as an effective network. # 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: Costa Rica; Tropical deforestation; National parks; Biodiversity conservation 1. Introduction implementation of agreements and assessment of policy goals (Daily and Ellison, 2002). Monitoring will not The loss of biodiversity may be the single most only track global and regional deforestation trends, but important consequence of global environmental change will also permit more spatially disaggregated analysis of driven by land-use and land cover change. Finding regional landscape transformation and conservation relatively undisturbed ecosystems, as well as seeking a policies. place for biological resources within human-dominated Costa Rica’s history exemplifies the tension between ecosystems, will be increasingly difficult as the size and economic development and environmental conserva- resource demands of the human population continue to tion. While reported deforestation rates vary depending increase. Finding a balance between the twin needs for on the assumptions used by different analysts (Sa´ nchez- production and conservation will require comprehensive Azofeifa, 1996), there is agreement that the country has and fair policies, along with sound monitoring for had one of the highest tropical deforestation rates in the world. That rate averaged in the vicinity of 3.7% from the early 1970s until the early 1990s before dropping to * Corresponding author. Tel.: +1-780-492-1822; fax: +1-780-492- 2030. less than 1.5% at the end of the twentieth century E-mail address: [email protected] (G. Arturo Sa´ n- (Castro-Salazar and Arias-Murillo, 1998; FAO, 1990; chez-Azofeifa). Sanchez-Azofeifa et al., 2001). The tension arises from 0006-3207/02/$ - see front matter # 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. PII: S0006-3207(02)00145-3 124 G. Arturo Sa´nchez-Azofeifa et al. / Biological Conservation 109 (2003) 123–135 the fact that many population sectors derived benefits totaled over $115 million dollar over the past 10 years from this pattern of land use. From the Spanish arrival (Heindrichs, 1997). until the end of the 1950s and beginning of the 1960s, Given such a significant public investment, there is a thousands of hectares of forest were converted to crop- clear need for understanding how these areas have land and pasture (Sader and Joyce, 1988). Official poli- fared, how they interact, and whether they are effective cies prioritized demographic growth and new conservation tools. Our analyses are not sufficient for agricultural production systems (Harrison, 1991; Solor- conclusions regarding the latter. However, they do zano et al., 1991; Rosero-Bixby and Palloni, 1998; Sader indicate that National Parks and Biological Reserves and Joyce, 1988; Sanchez-Azofeifa, 2000; Sanchez-Azo- may lower local deforestation rates, as to this point feifa et al., 1999). Thus, as indicated in the national these areas have fared quite well. Further, our analyses Strategy for Sustainable Development (ECODES), if suggest that ecological services requiring a park net- 50-year land-use/land-cover trends had continued, pri- work appear threatened, and the spatial linkages mary forest commercial timber would have been deple- between parks are threatened by land-cover change. ted by 1995 (Quesada-Mateo, 1990). Specifically, this paper addresses the following ques- However, the trends changed. While precise knowl- tions: (1) what is the status of protection of native edge of why this occurred will require more research, habitats in Costa Rica? (2) what are the contemporary there are some clear candidate factors. Econometric (1986–1997) rates of deforestation within protected analysis of deforestation over space and time suggests areas’ boundaries? (3) what are the long-term (1960– that both reduction of forest stocks on productive lands 1997) rates of tropical deforestation in areas surround- and changes in development strategies were significant ing national parks and biological reserves? (4) what are factors (Kerr et al., 2000). Consider that some land in the long-term deforestation rates in proposed biological Costa Rica is productive for coffee, while other land is corridors? and (5) given the current level of degradation not. Clearing may be rapid on good coffee land, but of the proposed corridors, would they allow for con- when that is cleared the deforestation rate is likely to nectivity between parks? fall. Additionally, production and employment that does not involve forest clearing can reduce deforestation pressure. Urban population and employment have 2. The conservation areas increased, as have both the attention given to and the revenue derived from eco-tourism. The former draws In response to rapid land-cover change during the people away from forest clearing, while the latter creates first part of the twentieth century, over the past 30 years direct monetary returns from the conservation of intact the Costa Rican government has been creating a com- forest, and can even lead to reforestation. prehensive protected areas system (Table 1). Between The government has taken an active role in changing 1974 and 1978 the area covered by National Parks and development strategies. Steps taken by government Biological Reserves expanded from 3 to 12% of the bodies include the establishment and consolidation of a national territory (Table 1). Currently, Costa Rica has national park system, limited programs promoting sus- 25% of the national territory dedicated to conservation, tainable management of tropical forests, and financial which involves the prohibition of productive activities compensation of private landowners for environmental that could damage renewable or non-renewable resour- services derived from their land (Castro-Salazar and ces (Castro-Salazar and Arias-Murillo, 1998). Arias-Murillo, 1998). Public payments for environ- Though the current conservation network is extra- mental services in Costa Rica are estimated to have ordinary in extent, it does not cover all of the different Table 1 Establishment dates and characteristics of 132 protected areas in Costa Rica Category Number Area (km2) No./decade % Of National Territory Before 1960 60s 70s 80s 90s National Parks 24 5415 1 1 11 1 10 10.6 Biological Preserves 9 396 – – 5 2 2 0.8 National Wildlife Refuges 39 1810 – – – 9 30 3.5 Forestry Reserves 12 2915 – 2 6 1 3 5.7 Protection Zones 31 1786 – – 10 11 10 3.5 Wetlands 14 504 – – 1 1 12 1.0 Special categories 3 16 – 1 1 – 1 <0.1 Total 132 12,842 1 4 34 25 68 25.1 G. Arturo Sa´nchez-Azofeifa et al. / Biological Conservation 109 (2003) 123–135 125 ‘‘life zones’’ (Powell et al., 2000, Table 2). A life zone is either ‘‘Level-1’’ or ‘‘Level-2’’. Level-1 denotes areas defined by a combination of elevation, relative humidity under absolute protection such as national parks and and biotemperature; life zones differ in the nature of the biological reserves, where no land-cover change is climax vegetation they produce [see Holdridge (1967) allowed. Level-2 conservation areas comprise a mix of for a clear explanation of the concept of life zones and conservation areas with more relaxed regulations con- application to Costa Rica]. Generally, when considering cerning land cover change. Level-2 conservation areas the benefits of additional protected areas, it will be include, in general, forest reserves and wildlife refuges. worth analyzing the gains to covering unique habitats, Though a steady process to consolidate National given all of the habitats already covered in the network. Parks and Biological reserves has been in place over the This might include protecting pieces of additional life last 30 years, the integrity of forests within Costa Rica’s zones. It might also mean protecting forests that con- protected areas cannot be taken for granted (Busch et nect existing components of the reserve network, as the al., 2000).