Land Use Policy 28 (2011) 227–241 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Land Use Policy journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/landusepol Deforestation dynamics and policy changes in Bolivia’s post-neoliberal era Daniel Redo a,∗ , Andrew C. Millington a , Derrick Hindery b a Department of Geography, Texas A&M University, 810 O&M Building, College Station, TX 77843, USA b Department of International Studies and Geography, University of Oregon, 345 Prince Lucien Campbell Hall, Eugene, OR 97403-1251, USA article info Article history: Received 5 October 2009 Received in revised form 8 April 2010 Accepted 8 June 2010 Keywords: Land reform Fire policy Land change Deforestation Bolivia Evo Morales abstract This work compares the effects of neoliberal and post-neoliberal land-use policies on forest cover along the Corredor Bioceánico of southeastern Bolivia to determine if rates of agriculturally driven forest clearance have changed since the Morales’ administration came to office in 2005. Satellite image analysis, supported by semi-structured interviews with farmers and representatives of key institutions, shows that deforesta- tion for commercial agriculture in Santa Cruz continues and has increased in certain “hotspots”. Previous research has shown that the environmental effects of neoliberalism on forest cover are varied, but more broadly, reduced state intervention has meant less environmental regulation and greater deforestation, while strong government is better able to curtail deforestation. Although neoliberal policies triggered an unprecedented level of forest clearing in Bolivia, rates have generally continued to increase and can be indirectly linked to the administration’s new agrarian reform and pro-environmental regulations. This trend is counterintuitive and stems from unanticipated responses such as deforestation through fire to prove productive use under the reform’s socio-economic function requirements. Given increased regu- lation and enforcement of forest clearing and burning under Morales, in contrast to the neoliberal era, our analyses suggest that rates will continue to increase under the current political climate, which has further polarized the opposition in Santa Cruz. © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Introduction Over the last two decades concerted effort has been devoted to identifying the determinants of land-use and land-cover change (LULCC). One major conclusion that has arisen is that they are diverse, and no other facet has received more attention than trop- ical deforestation (e.g., Rudel, 2007; Keys and McConnell, 2005; Walker, 2004; Angelsen and Kaimowitz, 1999). Contemporary research, whether quantitative or qualitative, or comprehensive or case-specific, rebukes a single causation theory of land change and illustrates that causes are numerous, and knotted amid an intricate web of underlying drivers and proximate causes (Ostrom, 2007; Ostrom and Nagendra, 2006; Lepers et al., 2005; Geist and Lambin, 2002). A key, but understudied strand (Rindfuss et al., 2008) is institutional 1 policy reform as it plays a decisive role in explaining deforestation dynamics, particularly during periods of societal and ∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 601 434-6006. E-mail address: dredo81@tamu.edu (D. Redo). 1 Following Jepson et al. (in press), the term “institution” is defined as the formal and informal rules that shape access to natural resources. While often synonymous with property rights in the social science literature, the term can encompass prop- erty rights as well as contracts and policies. In this case, we focus on the policy aspect of institutions referring to the rules-in-use and their reformation and enforcement. political change (Kuemmerle et al., 2009; Brannstrom et al., 2008; Achard et al., 2006). By enabling or restraining particular crops or forms of agriculture, the agricultural frontier can expand, contract, or stagnate, thereby modulating the spatial distribution and rate of forest cover change. The transition from import-substitution industrialization (ISI) to neoliberalism in Bolivia after the economic crises of the early- 1980s is a prime example of how policy reforms can affect deforestation rates. Pacheco (2006) has compared the effects of this shift on agricultural expansion and changes in forest cover in low- land Bolivia up to 2000 and concluded that forest loss increased as policy changed. As we write, 9 years later, there has been a second major shift in government land-use policies. Under neoliberalism, maximizing earning was paramount and achieved at the expense of the environment. In December 2005, the Movimiento al Socialismo (MAS) party led by Evo Morales was elected to office, representing a quasi-transition from right-center neoliberal economic policies (e.g., structural adjustment) implemented by previous adminis- trations to what we term post-neoliberalism. We define this as a hybrid blend of social democracy adopting elements of both neoliberal economics and socialist politics; thus, it should not be viewed as a different set of policies that have replaced neoliber- alism, but instead as a shift to alternative or, in some cases, to the maintenance of neoliberal policies (Macdonald and Ruckert, 2009). Bolivia’s post-neoliberalism is based on four related tenets: 0264-8377/$ – see front matter © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2010.06.004