MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401205778 · doi:10.1088/1748-9326/ad6a27

National agroforestry program in Mexico faces trade-offs between reducing poverty, protecting biodiversity and targeting forest loss

2024· article· en· W4401205778 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Pablo Gonzalez-Moctezuma, Jeanine M. Rhemtulla

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Research Letters · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFaculty of Forestry, University of British ColumbiaUniversity of British Columbia Graduate SchoolSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPovertyBiodiversityDistribution (mathematics)ReforestationGeographyBusinessSocioeconomicsAgricultural economicsNatural resource economicsEconomicsEconomic growthForestryEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract National reforestation initiatives with ambitious targets and multiple objectives are becoming the norm across the Global South. The extent to which these large-scale initiatives are actually achieving their multiple and potentially conflicting objectives, however, is largely unknown. Sembrando Vida , a national initiative in Mexico implemented in 2019, pays smallholder farmers to plant agroforests in order to reduce poverty and forest loss, and protect biodiversity. We assessed to what degree program recruitment met its stated objectives via its selection of participating municipalities and households. Because program data are not publicly available, we consolidated and harmonized >14 million policy payments (totaling ∼$4 billion USD) to smallholder farmers, thus creating the first spatiotemporal dataset of program outcomes. We found that ∼450k rural households in ∼1000 municipalities across the country participated in the program consistently from 2019 to 2022. The program was reasonably well targeted to achieve its poverty reduction objectives. Significantly more households (ANOVA, p < 0.001) were enrolled in high-poverty (10.4%) than low-poverty (4.9%) municipalities, despite more money being transferred in absolute terms to low-poverty municipalities. The program did not reach some regions that best fit its three goals. Using a zero-inflated negative binomial model, we showed that the distribution of participating households was more likely to address poverty (coefficient = 0.51, p < 0.001 at household level) and forest cover loss (0.1, p = 0.01) than to restore areas important for biodiversity (−0.08, p = 0.02). Finally, we conducted a spatial analysis showing that there is technically sufficient rural land (4.29 Mha) and households (491k) to maximize the potential of all policy objectives simultaneously, but this would require that the program operate in only 83 municipalities across 10 states. Our results highlight the challenges in reaching high poverty regions while meeting multiple other objectives when scaling up forest landscape restoration.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.692

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.244 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Research LettersSame topicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207