The Amazon Wilderness Area and the Tropical Andes and Cerrado hotspots provide ecosystem services to the world via their biodiversity, their carbon stocks, and their water resources. It is difficult to estimate the economic value of these resources due to their intangible nature and the tendency of traditional economists to discount goods and services that cannot be monetized in a traditional market (Costanza et al. 1997). One method of valuating ecosystem services is to estimate their replacement costs; simply put, how much would it cost human society to replace those good and services or, if they are irreplaceable, how much wealth has been lost? (Balmford et al. 2002). Regardless of how difficult it is to measure precisely, there is overwhelming agreement that ecosystem services are extremely valuable to society at global and continental scales alike, although market mechanisms and human nature tend to discount or even disregard that value when individual decisions are made at the local scale (Andersen 1997). The growing concern over global climate change and biodiversity extinction has stimulated efforts to estimate the value of ecosystem services and to create mechanisms whereby communities that choose to conserve natural habitats are compensated by other communities that enjoy the benefits of those services (Turner et al. 2003).
THE VALUE OF BIODIVERSITY
Biodiversity conservation is the most problematic ecosystem service to valuate, even though biodiversity has been the foundation for the world's economy since the origin of human civilization. All food staples are domesticated varieties of wild plants and animals, and most modern pharmaceuticals are also derived from natural products. Thus, one of the most compelling arguments for conserving biodiversity is the potential for new food sources (Heiser 1990), as well as new medicines and pesticides (Reid et al. 1993, Ortholand & Gane 2004). Even in today's global economy, species from natural ecosystems provide subsistence income to a large segment of the earth's human inhabitants; fish, wildlife, fruit, and fibers contribute enormous value to the world's economy (Gowdy 1997, Pimentel et al. 1997).
Unfortunately, it is difficult to harness markets that would pay for the potential benefit of biodiversity conservation (Pearce 1994). There are three principal constraints to levying fees for biodiversity conservation:
Users are incapable of paying for the goods and services because they have no economic resources and/or the goods and services are part of the “public commons” in which traditional use makes it difficult to collect fees.
It is impossible to place a value on an undiscovered benefit (i.e., a potential new crop or drug). Stated simply, we don't know who owns the resource, how much it might be worth, or who might be interested in acquiring that resource.
It is not plausible to extract fees for knowledge that was acquired in the past and is now in the public domain (i.e., the historical legacy of biodiversity). Past discoveries and domestications illustrate the value of biodiversity, but commercial users are unwilling to pay for something that has been available at no cost for centuries.
Constraint One: Lack of Financial Resources
Fish and wildlife resources illustrate the first constraint. Fishing is the most important and stable component of the Amazonian economy, providing employment and sustenance to an overwhelming majority of its residents, either directly by subsistence fishing or indirectly by commercial and sport fishing (Figure 4.1). The commercial fishing industry in the Brazilian Amazon produces at least $100 million in annual revenues while providing more than 200,000 direct jobs; these statistics do not include related sectors such as boat building, tourism, mechanical shops, and other services (Almeida et al. 2001, Ruffino 2001). There is much concern about the sustainability of current fishing practices, particularly on the main trunk of the Amazon River where human population is relatively dense (Goulding & Ferreira 1996, Ruffino 2001, Jesús & Kohler 2004). Remote regions with fewer human residents still have relatively robust fish populations (Chernoff et al. 2000, Silvano et al. 2000, Reinert & Winter 2002). IIRSA investments in hydrovias will probably lead to higher population densities along rivers and to an increase in overfishing if appropriate management procedures are not implemented. Unfortunately, most Amazonian fishermen are impoverished and would probably never be convinced to pay for the right to fish even though most of them have an innate understanding of the link between forest and wetland conservation. Over the long term, fish farming may offer a more sustainable—and lucrative— alternative to the commercial exploitation of native fisheries (see Text Box 4).
Calculating the economic value for terrestrial wildlife populations is much more difficult. Large mammals are subject to overharvesting in areas with moderately dense human populations and are usually the first species to be exterminated in settlement zones, a process that will be exacerbated when IIRSA investments increase human populations along roads. This is a classic management issue. Only when a resource becomes severely limited will users agree to restrictions or pay for management to ensure the survival of the resource (i.e., hunting/fishing licenses). Studies that have assessed the economic value of mammal populations have primarily considered what it would cost to replace wildlife harvests if a management plan were to be implemented to reduce harvests (Bodmer et al. 1994). A few international donor agencies and private individuals are willing to subsidize the conservation of wildlife resources to promote their sustainable use as a food source and to protect biodiversity particularly within indigenous reserves (Noss & Cuellar 2001). However, this type of international assistance is typically limited to a few million dollars per year and would not generate the revenues necessary to counter the very strong economic forces driving the expansion of the agricultural frontier.
Constraint Two: Unknown Benefits
The second constraint that makes it difficult to monetize the value of biodiversity is that many of its benefits are still unknown to science and society. Such is the case with chemical compounds derived from natural products. Pharmaceuticals have been viewed as an important potential income source for biodiversity conservation (Reid et al. 1993, Rosenthal 1997); this expectation stems from the historical use of plants for many modern medicines and the large revenues that some of these drugs have generated. Given this background, all Amazonian nations now impose strict controls on biodiversity research in an effort to guarantee the intellectual property rights of nations and individual peoples. The term “biopiracy” is routinely (and usually erroneously) applied to efforts by pharmaceutical companies to screen natural products for chemical or biological potential.
Text Box 4
Aquaculture: A Solution to Poverty
Aquaculture, also known as fish farming, is an economically viable option for the sustainable use of the Amazon's most abundant natural resource—water—and would provide multiple social benefits as well. The cultivation of native herbivorous fish such as the giant pacú or tambaquí is one of the most efficient ways to produce protein, yielding an average of 4,500 kg/ha per year in tropical regions under ideal conditions (Peralta & Teichert-Coddington 1989). In the past, aquaculture had to compete locally with commercial fishing of wild stocks, and nationally with efficient marine fisheries (Jesús & Kohler 2004). Also, development projects tended to stress self-sufficiency and encouraged peasant farmers to grow food for the fish, thus limiting fish production to the poor yields of shifting agriculture. However, IIRSA investments can change this failed paradigm by linking the high rainfall areas of the Andean piedmont with the soy and maize granaries of central Brazil and the port facilities of the Pacific coast or the main trunk of the Amazon in Brazil. The new transportation links could create a value-added production chain worth hundreds of millions of dollars in export income for Bolivia, Brazil, and Peru. Even more important, aquaculture can easily be undertaken on small family farms and is economically competitive with the cultivation of illicit drug crops. The global demand for fish will likely continue, and the ongoing degradation of marine fisheries makes aquaculture one of the most robust growth industries on the planet. Amazonian fish farming could become a truly sustainable economic activity that is compatible with conservation and provides the long-sought solution for rural poverty.
Legal, scientific, and economic factors, however, have brought about a dramatic reduction in the research and collection of natural products by pharmaceutical companies over the past 15 years (see Text Box 5). Most biodiversity-based pharmaceutical research is now restricted to countries with an Anglo-Saxon legal tradition, where protection of intellectual property rights favor the researcher, or where research is supported by government agencies and academic research institutions that renounce any claim to the discovery (Rosenthal 1997). In addition, major corporations outsource research to universities or rely on public domain information from government-supported entities (Ortholand & Gane 2004). As an example of industrial and academic priorities, a March 2004 issue of Science magazine dedicated to drug discovery made no mention of biodiversity-related pharmaceutical research.
Simultaneously, the advent of molecular biology and mass screening protocols (combinational chemistry) changed the way chemicals were developed. Some researchers have compared combinational chemistry to a shotgun approach, as opposed to a rifle approach: natural compounds have passed through millennia of natural selection and provide a direct ecological benefit (i.e., resource competition, protection from predation) to the organism that produced them. Thus, the chance that they will yield a compound with biological activity is much greater than the chance offered by thousands of compounds produced via random nonbiological processes. Many academics now view combinational chemistry as a mistake, and a review of new pharmaceutical compounds revealed that between 60 percent and 70 percent are still derived from natural compounds (Newman et al. 2003).
Pharmaceutical researchers have since modified their research protocols; the current trend is to use natural product libraries combined with synthetic methods. However, the new methodology has not revitalized the collection of natural products in tropical forests. Research is more focused, and biodiversity assays concentrate on blank spots in the taxonomic database. Patent protection for natural products will not necessarily benefit conservation or indigenous groups, because new compounds will most likely be based on synthetic modifications of natural compounds (Figure 4.2).
Thus, even though the importance of natural products and the intrinsic value of biodiversity have been reaffirmed as an economic asset, the cost associated with research, drug development, and the mechanics of the marketplace make it unlikely that civil society will be able to require pharmaceutical companies to monetize that value in any meaningful way. Even if the countries of the Andes and Amazon were willing to open their forests for unlimited pharmaceutical prospecting, it is unlikely that the major pharmaceuticals would make any significant investments, and certainly not on the scale necessary to create an economic incentive to conserve the Amazon.
Text Box 5
The False Promise of Bioprospecting
Bioprospecting by the pharmaceutical industry has fallen off dramatically in recent years, in part due to new technology and in part due to the controls that developing countries have placed on natural product research. Access to biological resources in the Andes, for example, is regulated by a common strategy adopted by the Community of Andean Nations. These regulations are meant to foster pharmaceutical exploration by guaranteeing the intellectual property rights of member countries and indigenous communities. However, no Andean government has been willing to grant exploration rights since the early 1990s due to the political controversy such a permit would generate.
Simultaneously, advances in molecular biology and computer modeling have allowed pharmaceutical researchers to replace natural product screening with a method known as “combinational chemistry,” which generates huge numbers of new synthetic compounds that are assessed by mass screening systems. Pharmaceutical companies still use extensive natural product libraries that have been compiled over decades, or even centuries, of scientific research, but they now do so in combination with the new synthetic methods. Thus, patent protection for these products will not benefit developing countries or indigenous groups, because new compounds will most likely be based on a synthetic modification of documented natural compounds.
Constraint Three: Historical Legacies
Agriculture and forestry illustrate the third constraint in monetizing the value of biodiversity conservation. Plants and animals make an indisputable economic contribution to the agricultural and timber industries, and academic research has provided ample evidence that biodiversity has great value as a genetic resource for crops and domestic animals.59 But the crops that form the foundation of modern agricultural systems are an historical legacy. The high Andes are home to many wild relatives of domesticated plant and animal species, including potato, squash, and beans, as well as the New World camelids (llamas and alpacas). Today's technologically advanced farmers have no incentive to pay for the conservation of the biodiversity that they have been using for centuries. Agronomists and geneticists continue to conduct research on wild plant relatives, but this research depends on public subsidies, and discoveries are usually placed in the public domain.60 Any attempt to garner economic support from the agronomic research sector would most likely stifle research—similar to the way efforts to gain support from the pharmaceutical industry restricted natural products research—and would constitute a net economic loss to the world's economy.
An economic sector that clearly and unequivocally depends on biodiversity in the Amazon is ecotourism.61 The revenues from ecotourism are difficult to estimate because most countries have multiple tourist options and do not separate out the portion related to the Amazon, or even ecotourism, but a conservative estimate would put this number near $100 million annually.62 Tourism is particularly beneficial because it generates direct benefits at both the national and local levels, creating business opportunities for small and medium-sized enterprises that provide employment for both skilled and unskilled labor. There are several geographic centers of the tourist industry in the Amazon situated near or within protected areas.63 However, due to its decentralized nature and small profit margins, the tourist sector is most likely not able (or willing) to pay for the ecological services that are necessary to conserve the Amazon. User fees for national parks are currently quite low and should be increased to provide more direct funding to the national park services. Similarly, some sort of local tax could be developed so that tourist revenues contribute to local government.64 The most important contribution that tourism can make to conservation is job creation at the local level, which generates a vested interest to conserve the forest ecosystem (Figure 4.3).
The greatest negative impact from IIRSA investments is likely to be the loss of biodiversity. Unfortunately, biodiversity's real value will remain intangible, so assigning it economic value is not likely to convince economists and politicians—much less individual landholders acting in their own economic interest. Efforts to assign economic value on the basis of erroneous assumptions or hopeful scenarios may raise expectations that cannot be met and diminish the validity of other, more convincing arguments that are presented on their own merits. It may be more convincing to frame the conservation of biodiversity as a moral obligation—to preserve a heritage bequeathed either by a deity or as the end result of millions of years of evolution. In this context, the two most accurate words that describe the value of biodiversity are “priceless” and “irreplaceable.”
CARBON STOCKS AND CARBON CREDITS
The Amazon is a vast reservoir of carbon with approximately 76 gigatonnes (Gt) 65 stored in its above-ground biomass. If released into the atmosphere, these carbon emissions would equal approximately 20 years of fossil fuel consumption. At current valuation in international markets ($5–10 per tonne of CO2), the Amazon's carbon store has a value between $1.5 and $3 trillion in potential carbon credits (see Appendix Table A.1).66 This calculation is the most straightforward assessment of the ecosystem service value that the Amazon Wilderness Area provides through carbon storage. It is not a realistic calculation, however, because the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) of the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention of Climate Change (UNFCCC)67 does not recognize the conservation of standing natural forest as a carbon offset. However, at the latest Conference of the Parties in Nairobi, Kenya (COP-12), signatories to the UNFCCC made a commitment to explore financial incentives and policy frameworks to reduce emissions from deforestation (RED) after 2013 or, in other words, to compensate countries for conserving natural forest ecosystems.
A variety of proposals are being discussed; most are predicated on reducing deforestation rates to levels below some historical benchmark, an option that has been endorsed by a coalition of tropical countries and environmental organizations.68 The exact nature of this proposed benchmark—usually referred to as a reference period—is the subject of considerable debate because countries have different deforestation histories. For example, deforestation peaked in the 1970s and 1980s in Ecuador and Peru, while reaching maximum levels in the 1980s in Brazil. In Bolivia and Colombia, the annual rate has been increasing over the past decade, whereas Guayana and Suriname have historically low levels of deforestation and would not benefit from any compensation scheme based on a historical reference period. This important debate will ultimately determine the dimension of future revenues from deforestation avoidance, as well as the social feasibility of programs to reduce deforestation.
Brazil is supporting RED and has proposed a compensation fund for developing countries that commit to reducing deforestation below historical levels. The fund would be administered as official development assistance, and deforestation commitments would be voluntary. However, other countries and most conservation organizations support market-based mechanisms that would directly reward countries that materially reduce carbon emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (Figure 4.4).
The current deforestation rate in the Amazon is estimated at 28,240 km2yr−1, which translates into approximately 1.3 Gt of annual CO2 emissions (Table 4.1). The economic value of carbon emissions can be calculated according to their replacement value in existing international markets. Approximately $13 billion would purchase an equivalent amount of industrial-based carbon credits; if that payment were repeated every year for 30 years, it would have a total value of $388 billion, which corrected for inflation and expressed in today's currency, would equal $134 billion (Table 4.1 and Appendix A.2). These figures provide an estimate of the value of the ecosystem services provided by the Amazon forest in the context of today's markets for CO2 emission reductions. This estimate is based on the current value of carbon credits, and if a RED mechanism is approved by the UNFCCC, then a surge of forest-based carbon projects could conceivably drive down prices. However, it is more likely that countries will increase their commitments to reduce emissions so as to combat global warming and that the price of carbon credits will increase in value.69
Although a market-based mechanism for monetizing carbon credits from the avoidance of deforestation may soon materialize, Amazonian countries will not necessarily be willing to participate in that market. Given social and demographic constraints, any initiative to completely halt land-use change—no matter how lucrative— would not be acceptable to the residents of the Amazon. However, a stepwise reduction in the annual rate of deforestation might be socially and politically feasible. For example, the first 5 percent reduction in annual deforestation rates would generate a modest $647 million, but similar 5 percent annual reductions made over 30 years would rapidly increase the annual payment and eventually generate about $10 billion annually, for a total value of $195 billion or $41 billion in inflation adjusted currency (see Appendix, Table A.3).
Because the payments are spread over many years they could be framed as a “rent” for carbon storage rather than payment for a capital asset sequestered in the forest.70 This would avoid debates over sovereignty, as well as hard-wire these agreements with an ongoing commitment to meet deforestation reduction targets to maintain payments.
The CDM requires a rigorous monitoring system to quantify the carbon that is sequestered via existing reforestation and afforestation mechanisms (CDM R/A). Similarly, whatever compensation scheme is adopted for deforestation avoidance will require comprehensive monitoring that is accepted by local communities, national governments, and international markets. One important issue that must be resolved is “leakage,” a technical term used to refer to emissions that aren't really reduced or that are merely displaced from one region to another. Unfortunately, there is considerable empirical evidence that protected areas merely exclude deforestation from certain areas, while the overall national or regional rate of deforestation remains the same.
Two methods have been proposed to manage leakage. The most straightforward approach would be to certify compliance at the national level so that regional decreases and increases in deforestation automatically cancel each other out in a national bookkeeping system. National reductions would be real, easily verifiable, and could be commercialized in international markets without any difficulty. The second approach involves local-scale projects that attempt to stop deforestation in a circumscribed target area. Leakage is monitored by documenting deforestation in a larger buffer zone adjacent to the target area (also known as a reference case). Local-scale emission reductions can only be certified if the deforestation rate in the reference case is held constant or (even better) if it decreases.
This second methodology is currently being used in so-called voluntary projects where investors accept that their efforts are not yet certifiable under the strict guidelines of the Kyoto Protocol and the UNFCCC. Nonetheless, they pursue their investments because they are confident that they will lower deforestation rates and reduce carbon emissions, while simultaneously conserving biodiversity and promoting sustainable development.71 Most analysts believe that local-scale projects must eventually be combined with a broader societal commitment to lower deforestation at the national level.
Local-scale deforestation avoidance initiatives will be particularly challenging to implement on the agricultural frontiers in the eastern and southern Amazon, where deforestation is occurring in highly fragmented landscapes via the incremental reduction of forest patches distributed among tens of thousands of individual land holders. In contrast, much of the western Amazon is wilderness. Current deforestation in the Andean Amazon is approximately 5,000 km2 per year, and the complete cessation of deforestation would represent an annual payment of about $2.3 billion in carbon credits. This would amount to $68.8 billion if paid every year for 30 years, equivalent to $23.3 billion dollars at its net present value (see Appendix, Table A.2).
The present, however, is not the future, and a baseline derived from historical deforestation rates might not provide sufficient economic compensation to effectively avoid deforestation. For instance, IIRSA highway investments will alter the dynamic of land use change on the Andean piedmont as agroindustrial enterprises and peasant farmers respond to the economic opportunities of inexpensive land and improved access to Pacific Rim markets. Annual deforestation rates under a business-as-usual scenario will increase and probably approach the rates of change now observed in Santa Cruz, Bolivia, and Acre, Brazil (see Figure 2.2). If a deforestation reduction agreement were implemented as part of a reformed IIRSA, carbon credits could be calculated by comparing the land use change in a RED scenario (5 percent annual reduction in deforestation rates) with the potential land use change in a business-as-usual scenario (2.5 percent annual increase in deforestation rates).72 Annual payments from such an agreement would start at about $172 million but would eventually reach $4 billion in Year 30, and equal about $68 billion over the life of a 30-year agreement (see Appendix, Table A.4). Obviously, these projections are based on several large assumptions— most importantly the willingness of the region's landholders to forgo standard economic alternatives and participate in deforestation reduction initiatives.
Regardless of the models used for calculating carbon stocks or the potential value for reductions in carbon emissions in international markets, the Amazon has demonstrable economic value as a carbon reserve. Environmental studies commissioned for IIRSA projects have not addressed the potential impact of deforestation on global and national carbon emissions, or the potential economic benefits from a deforestation avoidance policy. A policy to reduce deforestation would provide economic resources that could be used to subsidize sustainable development. It could also provide cash payments directly to local government and communities to support key social services, and in so doing provide a powerful incentive for forest conservation.
For example, there are approximately 1,000 municipalities in the Amazon lowlands, and if the annual income from a stepwise reduction in emissions from deforestation (see Appendix A.3) were equally distributed among those municipalities to support social services, in the Year 2020, it would translate into approximately $6.5 million per year to each municipality. A more sophisticated distribution model would be needed to compensate municipalities based on the degree of threat and historical deforestation rates and to incorporate some degree of geographic equality, but the numbers are sufficiently large to be taken seriously by local and national elected officials.
WATER AND REGIONAL CLIMATE
It has become cliché to state that the most important natural resource is fresh water and that the world's largest reserve of fresh water is the Amazon basin. Assigning value to that resource, however, is difficult because the law of supply and demand fixes the value of any resource, and water supply in the Amazon surpasses demand by several orders of magnitude. It is not inconceivable that some day in the not too distant future, large tankers will load water at the mouth of the Amazon for transport to other parts of the globe. However, until this scenario becomes a reality, it will be difficult to convince traditional economists to valuate the water of the Amazon rivers as a commodity. Another approach is to demonstrate how the climate over the Amazon contributes to global climate stability and how deforestation will affect the climate of the Amazon and other regions of the planet.
There is broad consensus among climatologists that extensive deforestation will reduce precipitation and increase temperatures in the Amazon. These impacts will exacerbate changes caused by global warming and will be linked to climate change in other parts of the world (Avissar & Werth 2005, Feddema et al. 2005). The long-distance effects or “teleconnections” of Amazonian deforestation are modulated by a phenomenon known as the Hadley Circulation, in which warm air rises at the equator, moves toward the poles, descends at higher latitudes, and returns toward the equator along the surface of the earth. Recent models show that deforestation in the Amazon is linked to reduced precipitation in the lower Midwest of the United States during the spring and summer growing seasons (Avissar & Werth 2005).
In addition to these global processes, meteorologists have also documented a weather system that directly links the western Amazon with the Rio Plata basin (Figure 4.5), one of the most important agricultural regions on earth. In this system, a major gyre originates with the Atlantic trade winds and passes over the Amazon before curving southward as it nears the Andes to form the South American Low Level Jet (SALLJ) (Nogués-Paegle et al. 2002, Marengo et al. 2004a). The impact of the SALLJ is most noticeable during the austral summer when the region of maximum rainfall is displaced to the beginning of the South American monsoon (Nogués-Paegle et al. 2002) and migrates northwest–southeast across the Amazon basin (Hastenrath 1997) into the seasonally dry regions of subtropical South America. Together with convective processes, the SALLJ provides much of the annual precipitation in south-central and southern Brazil as well as northern Argentina and Paraguay (Berbery & Barros 2002, Marengo et al. 2004a).
A shift in the climate regime of the Amazon would affect this moisture transport system from the Amazon to La Plata and potentially reduce precipitation associated with the SALLJ. Because the La Plata basin is the mainstay of both the Argentine and Paraguayan economies and constitutes the largest component of the Brazilian agricultural sector with an estimated annual gross production of crops and livestock of $100 billion,73 this shift would likely affect agricultural production. In addition, the region is heavily dependent on hydroelectric energy, so a reduction in precipitation would also affect urban economies (Berri et al. 2002). The potential effect on the high Andes would be even more pronounced because 100 percent of the precipitation in the Andes originates from the Amazon.
The amount of precipitation in the Rio Plata basin that originates in the Amazon has not yet been quantified, but even a 1 percent drop in agricultural production would reverberate through the national economies of the Southern Cone. Several GCMs show that if the Amazon suffers increasing drought, the Rio Plata will become wetter (Milly et al. 2005). This apparent contradiction has two possible explanations: the lost Amazonian water will be replaced by rains that originate over the South Atlantic (Berbery & Collini 2000), or global warming will cause an increase in SALLJ events, increasing precipitation over southern Brazil and northern Argentina via local convective systems (Marengo et al. 2004b).
Future research will eventually resolve the uncertainty of these global and regional climate models. In the meantime, the precautionary principle and the logic of risk management should be applied to public policy. The relationship between Amazonian deforestation, precipitation, and the region's economies has not been effectively communicated to the region's policymakers and the general public. Public support for IIRSA is largely based on the assumption that it will lead to greater economic growth, and questioning of IIRSA has largely revolved around its potential impact on the conservation of biodiversity. However, the potential economic impact caused by a reduction in ecosystem services should motivate policymakers to reevaluate the net benefits that will accrue from IIRSA investments in the Amazon.
AndersenL. E. 1997A Cost-benefit Analysis of Deforestation in the Brazilian AmazonTexto para Discussão, no. 455Río de JanieroIPEA, Instituto de Pesquisas Econoimicas AplicadaGoogle Scholar
Banco do Brasil 2007PROEX – Programa de Financiamento às Exportações.Online. Available: http://www.bb.com.br/appbb/portal/gov/ep/srv/fed/AdmRecPROEXFin.jspGoogle Scholar
BarthemR. B. M.Goulding 1997The Catfish Connection: Ecology, Migration, and Conservation of Amazon PredatorsNew YorkColumbia University PressGoogle Scholar
BerryM. C. 1975The Alaska Pipeline: The Politics of Oil and Native Land ClaimsBloomington, INIndiana University PressGoogle Scholar
(BOA) Board on Agriculture, Committee on Sustainable Agriculture & the Environment in the Humid Tropics, National Research Council 1993Sustainable Agriculture and the Environment in the Humid TropicsWashington, DCNational Academy PressGoogle Scholar
Bolivia Forestal 2007Preliminar: Exportaciones forestales del 2006 superan los 170 Millones de $US.Cámara Forestal81Online. Available: http://www.cfb.org.bo/NoticiasBF/8.01/boletin.notaBF03.htm. June 1, 2007Google Scholar
Brito-CarreirasJ. M. J. M.Cardoso-Pereira M. L.Campagnolo Y. E.Shimabukuro 2005A land cover map for the Brazilian Legal Amazon using SPOT-4 VEGETATION data and machine learning algorithmsAnais XII Simpósio Brasileiro de Sensoriamento Remoto. April 16–21. Goiânia, Brasil. INPE. pp. 457–464. Online. Available: http://marte.dpi.inpe.br/col/ltid.inpe.br/sbsr/2004/11.19.14.07/doc/457.pdf. May 1, 2007Google Scholar
CadmanJ. D. 2000The Environmental Aspects of Six Hydro Reservoirs in the Amazon Basin.Submission to the World Commission on Dams, no. ENV061. Online. Available: http://www.dams.org/kbase/submissions/showsub.php?rec=ENV061. January, 13, 2007Google Scholar
CamposM. M.Francis F.Merry 2005Stronger by Association: Improving the Understanding of How Forest-Resource Based SME Associations can Benefit the PoorLondonInstituto de Pesquiza Ambiental da Amazônia & The International Institute for Environment and DevelopmentGoogle Scholar
ChinaView 2006CNPC to purchase EnCana's oil business in Ecudaor.Online. Available: http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2005-09/15/content_3497826.htm. March 14, 2007Google Scholar
ChurchillS. P. D.Griffin M.LewisIII 1995Moss diversity of the tropical Andes.In ChurchillS. P. H.Balslev E.Forero J. L.Luteyn (Eds.)Biodiversity and Conservation of Neotropical Montane Forestspp335346 Bronx, NYNew York Botanical GardenGoogle Scholar
CochraneT. A. T. J.Killeen O.Rosale 2007Agua, Gas y Agroindustria: La Gestion Sostenible de la Riego Agrícola en Santa Cruz, BoliviaLa Paz, BoliviaConservation InternationalGoogle Scholar
ColinvauxP. A. 1993Pleistocene biogeography and diversity in tropical forests of South America.In GoldblattP. (Ed.)Biological Relationships between Africa and South Americapp473499New Haven, CTYale University PressGoogle Scholar
ColliG. R. 2005As origens e a diversificação da herpetofauna do Cerrado.In ScariotA. J. C.Souza-Silva J. M.Felfili (Eds.)Cerrado: Ecologia, Biodiversidade e Conservaçãopp247264BrasíliaMinistério do Meio AmbienteGoogle Scholar
CowellA. 1990The Killing of Chico MendesEpisode 4. The Decade of Destruction: A Unique Chronicle of the Destruction of the Amazonian Rainforest. PBS Frontline Documentary Series. VideotapeGoogle Scholar
DalyD. C. D. J.Mitchell 2000Lowland vegetation of tropical South America: An overview.In LentzD. (Ed.)Imperfect Balance: Landscape Transformations in the pre-Columbian Americaspp391454New YorkColumbia University PressGoogle Scholar
DauberE. 2003Modelo de Simulación para Evaluar las Posibilidades de Cosecha en el Primer y Segundo Ciclo de Corta en Bosques Tropicales de BoliviaDocumento Técnico 128/2003Santa Cruz, BoliviaProyecto BOLFORGoogle Scholar
EmmonsL. H. 1997Neotropical Rainforest Mammals: A Field Guide2d edChicagoChicago University PressGoogle Scholar
EspinozaG. B.Richards 2002Fundamentals of Environmental Impact AssessmentWashington, DCInter-American Development Bank (IDB) & Inter-American Association of Sanitary and Environmental Engineering (AIDIS)Google Scholar
FabeyM. 1997Free-Trade-Zone Status Turns Amazon Port into Boom Town.Global Logistics & Supply Chain StrategiesOnline. Available: http://www.glscs.com/archives/2.97.FTZ.htm?adcode=90. October 13, 2006Google Scholar
FearnsideP. M. 2005bIndigenous peoples as providers of environmental services in Amazonia: Warning signs from Mato Grosso.In HallA. (Ed.)Global Impact, Local Action: New Environmental Policy in Latin Americapp187198LondonUniversity of London School of Advanced Studies, Institute for the Study of the AmericasGoogle Scholar
FearnsideP. M. Graça 2006BR-319: Brazil's Manaus-Porto Velho highway and the potential impact of a migration corridor to Central Amazonia, Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas da Amazônia-INPA, Manaus, Amazonas, Brazil.Ecological Society of AmericaMérida mexicoGoogle Scholar
FoglemanV. M. 1990Guide to the National Environmental Policy Act. Interpretations, Applications, and ComplianceNew YorkQuorum BooksGoogle Scholar
GlaserB. W. I.Woods (Eds.)2004Amazonian Dark Earths: Explorations in Space and TimeBerlinSpringer-VerlagGoogle Scholar
Global Mapping International 2006World Language Mapping SystemCDROM, Colorado Springs, COGlobal Mapping InternationalGoogle Scholar
GoeschlT. D. C.Igliori 2004Property Rights, Conservation and Development: An Analysis of Extractive Reserves in the Brazilian Amazon, Natural Resources Management(FEEM) Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei. Working Paper no. 60.04. Online. Available: http://www.feem.it/Feem/Pub/Publications/WPapers/default.htmGoogle Scholar
Gomez-RomeroE. T.Tamariz-Ortiz 1998Uso de la tierra y patrones de deforestacion en la zona de Iquitos.In KalliolaR. S.Flores-Paitan (Eds.)Geoecologia y Desarrollo AmazonicoSulkavaFinnreklama OyGoogle Scholar
GouldingM. 1980The Fishes and the Forest: Explorations in the Amazonian Natural HistoryBerkeleyUniversity of California PressGoogle Scholar
GouldingM. E. G.Ferreira 1996Pescarias Amazônicas, Porteção de Habitas e Fazendas nas Várzeas:Uma Visão Ecológica e EconômicaRelatório Banco Mundial. Brasília: BIRDGoogle Scholar
GouldingM. R.Barthem E.Ferreira 2003The Smithsonian Atlas of the AmazonWashington, DCSmithsonian Institution PressGoogle Scholar
GroganJ. E. P.Barreto A.Veríssimo 2002Mahogany in the Brazilian Amazon: Ecology and perspectives on managementBelém, Brazil(IMAZON) Amazon Institute of People and the EnvironmentGoogle Scholar
HaggettP. A. D.Cliff A.Frey 1977Locational Analysis in Human GeographyNew YorkWileyGoogle Scholar
HallA. 2004Extractive Reserves: Building Natural Assets in the Brazilian Amazon.Working Paper Series, no. 74Amherst, MA(PERI) Political Economy Research InstituteGoogle Scholar
HanaiM. 1998Formal and garimpo mining and the environment in Brazil.In WarhurstA. (Ed.)Mining and the Environment: Case Studies from the Americaspp181197OttowaInternational Development Research CenterOnline. Available: http://reseau.crdi.ca/en/ev-31006-201-1-DO_TOPIC.htmlGoogle Scholar
HarperG. J. M. K.Steininger Y.Talero M.Sanabria T. J.Killeen L. A.Solorzano 2007Deforestation Assessments Across the Andes.Online. Available: http://science.conservation.org/portal/server.pt?open=512&objID=755&&PageID=128505&mode=2&in_hi_userid=124186&cached=true. May 1, 2007Google Scholar
HechtS. B. A.Cockburn 1989The Fate of the Forest: Developers, Destroyers, and Defenders of the AmazonLondonVersoGoogle Scholar
HezelF. X. 2001The New Shape of Old Island CulturesHonoluluUniversity of Hawaii PressGoogle Scholar
(IBGE) Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estadística 2006Síntese de Indicadores Sociais 2006.Online. Available: http://www.ibge.gov.br/home/estatistica/populacao/condicaodevida/indicadoresminimos/sinteseindicsociais2006/default.shtm. May 5, 2007Google Scholar
(IDB) Inter-American Development Bank 2006Building a New Continent: A Regional Approach to Strengthening South American InfrastructureWashingtonIDBOnline. Available: http://www.iadb.org/publications/Reports.cfm?language=en&parid=4. May, 15, 2007Google Scholar
(IPCC) Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2007Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis, Summary for PolicymakersContribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovenmental Panel on Climate ChangeGenevaIPCCOnline. Available: http://www.ipcc.ch/SPM2feb07.pdf. April 1, 2007Google Scholar
IUCN Commission on National Parks & Protected Areas & World Conservation Monitoring Centre 1994Guidelines for Protected Area Management CategoriesGland, SwitzerlandIUCNGoogle Scholar
KabatP. M.Claussen P. A.Dirmeyer J. H. C.Gash L.Bravo de Guenni M.Meybeck R. A.PielkeSr. C. J.Vorosmarty R. W. A.Hutjes S.Lutkemeier (Eds.)2004Vegetation, Water, Humans and the Climate: A New Perspective on an Interactive SystemBerlinSpringer VerlagGoogle Scholar
KaimowitzD. A.Angelsen 1998Economic Models of Tropical Deforestation: A ReviewBogorCenter for International Forestry ResearchGoogle Scholar
KalliolaR. S.Flores-Paitan 1998Geoecologia y desarolla Amazonico: Estudio integrado en la zona de Iquitos, PeruAnnales Universitatis Turkuensis, Ser A IITurku, FinlandTurku UniversityGoogle Scholar
KaltnerF. J. G. F. P.Azevedo I. A.Campos A. O. F.Mundim 2005Liquid Biofuels for Transportation in Brazil: Potential and Implications for Sustainable Agriculture and Energy in the 21st CenturySubmitted report by Fundação Brasileira para o Desenvolvimento Sustentável. Commissioned by The German Technical Cooperation. (GTZ) Online. Available: http://www.fbds.org.br/IMG/pdf/doc-116.pdf. April 2007Google Scholar
KilleenT. J. S. G.Beck E.Garcia 1993Guía de Arboles de BoliviaLa Paz, BoliviaHerbario Nacional de Bolivia & Missouri Botanical GardenGoogle Scholar
KilleenT. J. M.Douglas T.Consiglio P. M.Jørgensen 2007aWet spots and dry spots in the Andean Hotspot, the link between regional climate variability and biodiversity.Journal of BiogeopgraphyIn pressGoogle Scholar
KilleenT. J. V.Calderon L.Soria B.Quezada M. K.Steininger G.Harper L. A.Solórzano C. J.Tucker 2007bThirty Years of Land-Cover Change in Bolivia.AMBIOIn pressGoogle Scholar
LehmannJ. D. C.Kern B.Glaser W. I.Woods 2003Amazonian Dark Earths: Origin, Properties, ManagementDordrecht, The NetherlandsKluwerGoogle Scholar
LugoA. E. 2002Homoegeocene in Puerto Rico.In ZarinD. J. J. R R.Alavalapati F. E.Putz M.Schmink (Eds.)Working Forests in the Neotropics: Conservation through Sustainable Managementpp266276New YorkColumbia University PressGoogle Scholar
MacArthurR. H. E. O.Wilson 1967The Theory of Island BiogeographyPrinceton, NJPrinceton University PressGoogle Scholar
MachadoR. M. B.Ramos-Neto M. B.Harris R.Lourival L. M. S.Aguiar 2004Análise de lacunas de proteção da biodiversidade no Cerrado.InAnais IV Congresso Brasileiro de Unidades de Conservaçãopp2938Curitiba, BrasilBrasil Fundação O Boticário de Proteção à NaturezaGoogle Scholar
MachadoR. B. M. B. R.Neto J. M. C.Silva R. B.Cavalcanti 2007Cerrado deforestation and its effects on biodiversity conservation.In KlinkC. A. R. B.Cavalcanti R.Defries (Eds.)Cerrado Land-Use and Conservation: Balancing Human and Ecological NeedsApplied Advances in Biodiversity Science, no. 8Washington, DCCenter for Applied Biodiversity Science, Conservation International (CI)(In press)Google Scholar
MalhiY. J.Wright 2005Late twentieth-century patterns and trends in the climate of tropical forest regions.In MalhiY. O. L.Phillips (Eds.)Tropical Forests & Global Atmospheric Changepp316OxfordOxford University PressGoogle Scholar
MannC. 20051491: New Revelations of the Americas before ColumbusNew YorkKnopfGoogle Scholar
MargulisS. 2004Causes of Deforestation in the Brazilian AmazonBrasiliaWorld BankGoogle Scholar
MaslinM. 2005The longevity and resilience of the Amazon rainforest.In MahliY. O. L.Phillips (Eds.)Tropical Forests & Global Atmospheric Changepp167183OxfordOxford University PressGoogle Scholar
MayleF. E. M. E.Bush 2005Amazonian ecosystems and atmospheric change since the last gl;acial maximum.In MalhiY. O. L.Phillips (Eds.)Tropical Forests & Global Atmospheric Changepp183191OxfordOxford University PressGoogle Scholar
MertesL. A. K. E. M. L.Novo D. L.Daniel Y. E.Shimabukuro J. E.Richey T.Krug 1996Classification of Rios Solimoes-Amazonas wetlands through application of spectral mixture analysis to landsat thematic mapper data.VIII Simposio Brasileiro de Sensoriamento RemotoSalvador, BrazilGoogle Scholar
MoriS. A. G. T.Prance 1990Lecythidaceae - part II: The zygomorphic-flowered New World genera (Couroupita, Corythophora, Bertholletia, Couratari, Eschweilera, & Lecythis).Flora Neotropica Monographno. 21Bronx, NYNew York Botanical GardenGoogle Scholar
NairU. S. D. K.Ray R. O.Lawton R. M.Welch R. A.PielkeSr. J.Calvo The impact of deforestation on orographic cloud formation in a complex tropical environment.In BruijnzeelL. A. J.Juvik F. N.Scatena L. S.Hamilton P.Bubb (Eds.)Mountains in the Mist: Science for Conserving and Managing Tropical Montane Cloud ForestsHonoluluUniversity of Hawaii PressIn PressGoogle Scholar
OrtizE. 2005Conservation Biology of Brazil-nut Rich ForestsWashingtonSmithsonian InstitutionGoogle Scholar
PachecoP. 1998Estilos de Desarrollo, deforestación y Degradación de Los Bosques en Las Tierras Bajas de BoliviaLa PazCIFOR, CEDLA, Fundacion TIERRAGoogle Scholar
PartidárioM. R. 1999Strategic environmental assessment: Principles and potential.In PettsJ. Handbook on Environmental Impact Assessmentpp6073LondonBlackwellGoogle Scholar
PartidárioM. R. R.Clark 2000Perspectives on Strategic Environmental AssessmentBoca Raton, FLCRC PressGoogle Scholar
PattonJ. L. M. N. F.da Silva 1998Rivers, refuges, and ridges: The geography of speciation of Amazonian mammals.In HowardD. J. S. H.Berlocher Endless Forms: Species and Speciationpp202213OxfordOxford University PressGoogle Scholar
PearceD. W. 1994Economic Value BiodiversityLondonJames & Jame, EarthscanGoogle Scholar
PenningtonT. 1997The Genus Inga – BotanyLondonRoyal Botanic Gardens, KewGoogle Scholar
PenningtonR. T. M.Lavin D. E.Prado C. A.Pendry S. K.Pell 2005Climate change and speciation in Neotropical seasonally forest plants.In MalhiY. O. L.Phillips Tropical Forests & Global Atmospheric Changepp191198OxfordOxford University PressGoogle Scholar
PowersM. 2002Illegal loggers invade primordial indigenous natives.Environment News ServiceOnline. Available: http://www.ensnewswire.com/ens/aug2002/2002-08-09-01.asp. August 9, 2002Google Scholar
PranceG. T. 1972ChrysobalanaceaeFlora Neotropica Monograph, no. 9New YorkPublished for Organization for Flora Neotropica by HafnerGoogle Scholar
PranceG. T. 1989Chrysobalanaceae: SupplementFlora Neotropica. Monograph, no. 9SNew YorkOrganizaiton for Flora NeotropicaGoogle Scholar
(PROMPEX) Peruvian Export Promotion Agency 2006Boletines Sectoriales de Exportación: Enero – Marzo 2006.Online.Available: http://www.prompex.gob.pe/Prompex/Portal/Sector/DefaultSector.aspx?.menuId=3Google Scholar
PutzF. E. M. A.Pinard T. S.Fredericksen M.Peña-Claros 2004Forest science and the BOLFOR experience: Lessons learned about natural forest management in Bolivia.In ZarinD. J. J. R. R.Alavalapati F. E.Putz M.Schmink Working Forests in the Neotropics: Conservation through Sustainable Managementpp6496New YorkColumbia University PressGoogle Scholar
RatterJ. A. S.Bridgewater J. F.Ribeiro 2006Biodiversity patterns of the woody vegetation of the Brazilian Cerrados.In PenningtonR. T. G.Lewis J. A.Ratter Neotropical Savannas and Dry Forests: Plant Diversity, Biogeography and ConservationBoca Raton, FLCRC PressGoogle Scholar
RedwoodIII.J. 2002World Bank Approaches to the Brazilian Amazon: The Bumpy Road toward Sustainable Development.Latin America and Caribbean Region Sustainable Development Working Paper, no. 13. Washington: The World BankOnline. Available:http://wbln0018.worldbank.org/.../b8234d558447e77e85256ccd005dbbc5/$FILE/redwood%Google Scholar
ReidW. V. S. A.Laird R.Gamez A.Sittenfeld D. H.Janzen M. A.Gollin C.Juma 1993A new lease on life.In ReidW. V. S. A.Laird C. A.Meyer R.Gamez A.Sittenfeld D. H.Janzen M. A.Gollin C.Juma Biodiversity Prospecting: Guidelines for Using Genetic and Biochemical Resources Sustainably and Equitablypp152WashingtonWorld Resources InstituteGoogle Scholar
Reuters 2007South American Heads Meet in Brazil.January 7. Online. Available at http://www.reuters.com/news/video/videoStory?videoId=30147Google Scholar
RicardoF. A.Rolla 2006Mineração em Unidades de Conservação na Amazônia BrasileiraSão PauloInstituto SocioambientalGoogle Scholar
RiceD. C. A.Sugal S. M.Ratay G. A. B.da Fonseca 2001Sustainable Forest Management: A Review of Conventional WisdomAdvances in Applied Biodiversity Science, no. 3Washington DCCenter for Applied Biodiversity Science at Conservation InternationalGoogle Scholar
RosenfeldA. B. D. L.Gordon M.Guerin-McManus 1997Reinventing the Well Approaches to Minimizing the Environmental and Social Impact of Oil Development in the TropicsWashington, DCConservation InternationalGoogle Scholar
RosenthalJ. P. 1997Equitable sharing of biodiversity benefits: Agreements on genetic resources.InInvesting In Biological Diversity: Proceedings of the Cairns Conferencepp253274ParisOrganisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)Google Scholar
RuffinoM. L. 2001Strategies for Managing Biodiversity in Amazonian FisheriesManaus, BrazilThe Brazilian Environmental and Renewable Natural Resources Institute (IBAMA)Online. Available: http://www.unep.org/bpsp/HTML%20files/TS-Fisheries2.htmlGoogle Scholar
RylandsA. B. M.Fonseca R.Machado R.Cavalcanti 2005Brazil.In SpaldingM. S.Chape M.Jenkins The State of the World's Protected AreasCambridgeUnited Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and World Conservation Monitoring Centre (WCMC)Google Scholar
SchaeferS. 2000Fishes of Inundated Tropical Savannas: Diversity and Endemism in the Serrania Huanchaca of Eastern BoliviaFinal report sponsored by The American Museum Center for Biodiversity and Conservation. Online. Available: http://184.108.40.206/scholar?hl=en&lr=&q=cache:h-ivoaIKpAJ:research.amnh.org/ichthyology/bolivia.pdf+Schaefer+Fishes+Tropical+inundatedGoogle Scholar
SchwartzmanS. 1985Banking on disaster.Multinational Monitor67Online. Available: http://www.multinationalmonitor.org/hyper/issues/1985/0615/schwartzman.htmlGoogle Scholar
SmithD. N. T. J.Killeen 1998A comparison of the structure and composition of montane and lowland tropical forest in the Serranía Pilón Lajas, Beni, Bolivia.In DallmeierF. J. A.Comiskey Forest Biodiversity in North, Central and South America and the Caribbean: Research and MonitoringMan and the Biosphere Series, no. 22pp681700Carnforth, UKUNESCO, The Parthenon Publishing GroupGoogle Scholar
StebbinsG. L. 1950Variation and evolution in plantsNew YorkColumbia University PressGoogle Scholar
StewardJ. H. 1948Handbook of South American Indians. Vol. 3. The Forest TribesWashington, DCBureau of American Ethnography & The Smithsonian InstitutionGoogle Scholar
StotzD. F. J. W.Fitzpatrick T. A.ParkerIII D. K.Moskovits 1996Neotropical Birds: Ecology and ConservationChicagoUniversity of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar
TierneyP. 2000Darkness in El Dorado: How Scientists and Journalists Devastated the AmazonNew YorkWW Norton and CompanyGoogle Scholar
TreeceD. 1988Brutality and Brazil: The Human Cost of Cheap Steel.Multinational Monitor92Online. Available: http://multinationalmonitor.org/hyper/issues/1988/02/mm0288_08.html#nameGoogle Scholar
TrollC. 1968The Cordilleras of the Tropical Americas: Aspects of Climatic, Phytogeographical and Agrarian EcologyBonnFerd DümmlersGoogle Scholar
(UNFCCC) United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change 2006Background Paper for the Workshop on Reducing Emissions from Deforestation in Developing Countries30 August – 1 September 2006. Rome, Italy. Online. Available: http://unfccc.int/methods_and_science/lulucf/items/3757.phpGoogle Scholar
VeigaM. M. 1997Mercury in Artisanal Gold Mining in Latin America: Facts, Fantasies and Solutions.UNIDO -Expert Group Meeting: Introducing new technologies for abatement of global mercury pollution deriving from artisanal gold miningVienna. July 1–3. Online. Available: http://www.facome.uqam.ca/. November 5, 2006Google Scholar
WanderlyI. F. R. L.Fonseca P. G.Pereira P.do A. C.Prado A.de A. B.Oliveira F. P.Barbosa F.Panciera 2007Implicações da Iniciativa de Integração da Infraestrutura Regional Sulamericana e projetos correlacionados na política de conservação no Brasil.InPolítica Ambiental, no. 3BrasíliaConservation InternationalOnline. Available: http://www.conservacao.org/publicacoes/index.php?t=5Google Scholar
WarhurstA. 1998Mining and the Environment: Case Studies from the AmericasOttowaInternational Development Research CenterGoogle Scholar
World Bank 1991Environmental Assessment SourcebookVol. 1Policies, Procedures, and Cross-sectoral Issues. World Bank Technical Paper Number 139Washington, DCWorld BankGoogle Scholar
World Bank 2003aA Common Framework: Converging Requirements of Multilateral Financial Institutions No. 1, Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)WashingtonWorld BankOnline. Available: http://www1.worldbank.org/harmonization/romehlf/Background/MFI%20Final%20Jan17%202003-Eng.pdf. May 15, 2007Google Scholar
World Bank 2006Finding Sustainable Ways to Extract Forest Products in the Amazon.Pilot Program Extractive Reserves ProjectOnline. Available: http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/COUNTRIES/LACEXT/BRAZILEXTN/0,,contentMDK:20754543~pagePK:141137~piPK:141127~theSitePK:322341,00.html. June 1, 2007Google Scholar
Tables A.1 through A.4 provide simple models that estimate the value of the carbon stored in Amazonian forests (Table A.1), the value of the carbon released each year via deforestation (Table A.2), the potential value of a 5 percent reduction in deforestation in the eight countries of the greater Amazon Wilderness Area compared against the documented baseline deforestation rates (Table A.3), and the potential value of a 5 percent reduction in deforestation for four Andean countries when compared to a Business as Usual Scenario (Table A.4). Tables A.5 through A.7 provide statistics on protected areas and indigenous lands.
 59 Few major food crops have their origin in the Amazon tropical forest, with the notable exception of manihot; the peanut and pineapple come from peripheral areas. Rubber is an important industrial commodity from the Amazon, and its tree resources have yet to be fully appreciated.
 60 This is distinct from the multibillion dollar research industry related to modern cultivars that uses the existing gene pool to increase production and ward off pests; similarly, the use of molecular biology to create genetically modified organisms does not depend on bioprospecting.
 61 Ecotourism is defined in a broad sense here, including all tourist activities that incorporate some sort of visit to a natural habitat as a major attraction.
 62 Peru has an approximately $1 billion annual tourist industry that is dominated by Cuzco; about 47 percent of tourists also visit national parks. Venezuela's approximately $200 million industry is largely based on the Caribbean. Ecuador's $435 million tourist industry is dominated by the Galapagos, and about 1 percent of Brazil's $2 billion tourist revenues are generated from the Amazon. See the ecotourism statistical fact sheet at http://www.ecotourism.org.
 63 These areas are Yasuní and Loja in Ecuador; hotels and villages situated on the Amazonian tributaries near Iquitos and Puerto Maldonado in Peru; adjacent to national parks in the villages of Rurrenebaque, Villa Tunari, and Buenavista in Bolivia; and to a lesser extent the city of Leticia in Colombia; as well as the thriving tourist sector in Manaus and the Pantanal in Brazil.
 64 Current park entry fees in Bolivia are only $20 per tourist per visit; there are no local taxes, and most local enterprises avoid paying any of the national value-added sales tax (VAT). Similar situations occur in Peru and Ecuador, although it is more difficult for the larger, well-organized companies with links to international partners and with administrative offices in the urban centers to avoid paying at least some of the VAT.
 65 Gt = 109 t, which is equivalent to a Petagram (Pg) = 1015 grams (g); in plain English this would be 76 billion tonnes (the term tonne [1000 kg] is used to distinguish the metric unit from “ton” of the U.S. and Imperial systems). The value of 76 Gt is a conservative estimate; Saatchi et al. (2005) estimated the carbon reserves of the Amazon basin at 86 Gt, and Malhi et al. (2006) at 92 Gt. If carbon stocks from below-ground biomass and soils were included, this value would be 20–50 percent greater.
 66 Carbon credits are units in a market-based mechanism for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. They allow companies (and countries) to trade emissions and emission reductions. Carbon credits are calculated in tonnes of CO2 equivalents and can be traded in U.S. and European markets.
 67 The Kyoto Protocol is an agreement adopted in 1997 as an amendment to the UNFCCC. See http://unfccc.int/essential_background/convention/items/2627.php.
 68 The Coalition of Rainforest Nations presently includes Bolivia, Central African Republic, Chile, Costa Rica, Democratic Republic of Congo, Dominican Republic, Fiji, Gabon, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Solomon Islands, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Republic of Congo, and Vanuatu.
 69 Evidence for this potential increase is indicated by the recent interest of hedge funds in the future market of tradable carbon credits.
 70 Rent is also covered by the proposals for a temporary crediting scheme as occurs under CDM A/R projects.
 71 The Noel Kempff Climate Action Project in Bolivia is the most well known of these voluntary projects.
 72 This is a very conservative estimate of the potential growth in deforestation. In Santa Cruz, the globalization of the agricultural frontier led to increases in the annual rate of deforestation of 15 percent per year between 2001 and 2005 (Killeen et al. 2007b).
 73 This is a conservative estimated derived from several online sources for Argentina, Brazil, and Paraguay, including http://www.cideiber.com/infopaises/menupaises1.html, http://www.argentinaahora.com/extranjero/espaniol/bot_ppal/conozca_arg/produccion.asp, and http://www.ibge.gov.br/home/estatistica/economia/pamclo/2005/default.shtm.