Deforestation has been a major concern of the developed world for much of the last three decades. Forest depletion and concern with rising levels of greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere have led to a body of research which focuses on the macroeconomic effects of deforestation, generally at the national or world level. My research deals with the microeconomic causes of deforestation by using household level data to determine the effects of labor allocation on forest clearing.

Until the early 1970's the Northern Ecuadorian Amazon was sparsely inhabited, mostly by native groups. However, the discovery of oil in the area in the late 1960's encouraged the building of infrastructure in the area. This facilitated the migration of many people who had previously resided in more densely populated areas of Ecuador. Migrants settled along the oil roads and began encroaching on the forest as they set up small farms. This in turn has led to high levels of deforestation in this ecologically sensitive area of the world.

This paper investigates the economic and non-economic factors affecting the OFE and land clearing/use choices of migrant settler households in the Northern Ecuadorian Amazon (NEA) rainforest, an area of extraordinary biodiversity that has been undergoing rapid deforestation since the discovery of oil in 1967. Land clearing/use and household labor allocation are interrelated but have not been examined together in previous empirical studies. I use detailed data from a probability sample of over 700 farm households to assess the impact of OFE on land clearing and land use. Because participation in OFE is a choice variable, I utilize an instrumental variables framework with community level fixed effects. I find that households who take part in more OFE do not deforest significantly less than other households, nor do they allocate their land to different uses than households who choose not to participate. Thus policies to promote more OFE, such as the expansion of road networks, increases in educational opportunities, and improved access to electricity, will not solve the problem of deforestation.

“The Determinants and Effects of the Off-Farm Work Choice: a Study of the Northern Ecuadorian Amazon,” Dissertation, UNC-CH 

Abstract:

The immediate agents of tropical deforestation in the developing world are primarily migrant colonist farmers. One approach for confronting deforestation suggested in the literature has been off-farm employment (OFE), since it takes household labor away from the farm, reducing pressures on the land while also increasing farm household incomes—a win-win solution. It has thus come to be promoted by policymakers and economists as a way to address deforestation in environmentally sensitive areas. Nevertheless, research on the impact of OFE on land use and deforestation at the household level continues to be sparse.

This dissertation investigates the economic and non-economic factors affecting the OFE and land clearing/use choices of migrant settler households in the Northern Ecuadorian Amazon (NEA) rainforest, an area of extraordinary biodiversity that has been undergoing rapid deforestation since the discovery of oil in 1967. Land clearing/use and household labor allocation are interrelated but have not been examined together in previous empirical studies. In this dissertation, I use detailed data from a probability sample of over 700 farm households to assess the factors that affect the choices of men and women to engage in OFE and the impact of that OFE on land clearing and land use.

Following development of the theoretical model of the farm household, bivariate probit analysis with household level fixed effects is used to determine the individual characteristics that affect participation in farm work and OFE. Because participation in OFE is a choice variable, the analysis of the impact of OFE on land clearing/use utilizes an instrumental variables framework with community level fixed effects. I find that households who take part in more OFE do not deforest significantly less than other households, nor do they allocate their land to different uses than households who choose not to participate.

Thus policies to promote more OFE, such as the expansion of road networks, increases in educational opportunities, and improved access to electricity, will not solve the problem of deforestation. In the concluding chapter I offer further suggestions for policy as well as on improving data collection and extending the empirical model.

“Development and Inequality: A New Specification of the Kuznets Hypothesis,” Working Paper, UNC-CH 

Abstract:

There has been much research done in an attempt to prove or disprove the Kuznets hypothesis –a traditional relationship between inequality and development. All of the literature to date deals with the relationship between income inequality and per capita income; however, the use of per capita income as a measure of economic development is, at best, incomplete. A recent alternative measure of development, the Human Development Index (HDI), expands the definition of development by considering other indicators of a country’s level of development in addition to income. In this paper, I explore the relationship between income inequality and the level of development utilizing the HDI as the measure of development. I also show that the change from the traditional GDP model to a new HDI based model changes the shape of the Kuznets curve significantly when compared to the most current research.