Potential environmental benefits from woodfuel transitions in Haiti: Geospatial scenarios to 2027
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Woodfuels constitute nearly 80% of Haiti's primary energy supply.Forests are severely degraded and the nation has long been considered an archetypal case of woodfuel-driven deforestation.However, there is little empirical evidence that woodfuel demand directly contributes to deforestation, but may contribute to degradation.We use MoFuSS (Modeling Fuelwood Sustainability Scenarios), a dynamic landscape model, to assess whether current woodfuel demand is as impactful as it is often depicted by simulating changes in land cover that would result if current demand continues unabated.We also simulate several near-term interventions focused on woodfuel demand reduction to analyze the land cover impacts of different energy trajectories.We find that current demand may contribute to moderate levels of degradation, but it is not as severe as is typically portrayed.Under a business-as-usual scenario, the simulated regenerative capacity of woody biomass is insufficient to meet Haiti's increasing demand for wood energy and, as a result, between 2017 and 2027 stocks of above-ground (woody) biomass could decline by 4% ± 1%.This is an annual loss of 302 ± 29 kton of wood and would emit 555 ± 54 kton CO 2 yr -1 .Aggressive interventions to reduce woodfuel demand could slow or even reverse woodfuel-driven degradation, allowing woody biomass to recover in some regions.We discuss the policy implications and propose steps to reduce uncertainty and validate the model.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".