Propensity of farmers to conserve forest within REDD + projects in areas affected by armed-conflict Augusto Castro-Nunez a,b,c, ⁎, Ole Mertz a , Marcela Quintero c a Department of Geosciences and Natural Resource Management, Faculty of Science, University of Copenhagen, Oster Voldgade 10, 1350 Copenhagen, Denmark b Directorate of Forest and Climate Change, ONF International, Carrera 47a # 91-91, Bogotá, D.C., Colombia c International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT), Km 17 recta Cali-Palmira, Cali, Colombia abstract article info Article history: Received 12 November 2015 Received in revised form 19 February 2016 Accepted 22 February 2016 Available online 3 March 2016 The implementation of carbon-storage efforts in countries experiencing armed conflicts or confronting illegal ac- tivities (such as illicit crop cultivation) will permit additional tropical forests to be protected for climate change mitigation. Yet, despite these potential gains, the appropriate design and application of forest conservation and climate change mitigation approaches such as the mechanism for Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) in such contexts remain little studied. Unanswered questions relate to the propen- sity of farmers in conflict affected areas to conserve forests for climate change mitigation. Such questions include, for what reasons and under what circumstances would such farmer participate in climate change mitigation ac- tivities? In this paper we address these questions by developing an econometric Logit model to understand fac- tors influencing the propensity to conserve forest of farmers from 14 villages in Colombia. These villages are located in a region recognized as a stronghold of guerrilla insurgencies and as the center for illegal crop cultiva- tion. The region was selected as it is also the proposed target area for piloting Colombian government REDD+ activities. A household survey (n = 90) showed that four explanatory variables are significantly related to the ‘propensity to conserve forest’. ‘Harvest of non-timber forest products’ (specifically bush meat) positively influ- ences a farmer's propensity to conserve forest. In contrast, higher ‘percentage of forest area’, ‘deforestation for (the production of) subsistence crops’ and ‘harvest of wood product’, each have a negative influence. Overall, re- sults show an already high propensity to conserve forest among farmers (70% of respondents) and indicate their growing propensity toward the conservation of primary forest and management of degraded lands and second- ary forest. These results might be attributable to efforts undertaken to reduce the causes of armed-conflicts and ecosystem deterioration, such as enhancement of land tenure security and farmer associations' rules to reduce deforestation. They might also be linked to communities' positive attitudes toward water resources conservation. We conclude that most farmers will not oppose forest conservation as long as it is compatible with their respec- tive livelihood priorities. © 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Keywords: Forests conservation REDD + Climate change Armed-conflicts Peacebuilding Colombia 1. Introduction Developing countries are gradually integrating climate change miti- gation approaches into their public policies. These include efforts such as Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+), which seeks to incentivize the implementation of national policy measures to halt deforestation and forest degradation (Agrawal et al., 2011). However, based on UCDP (2014) and Themnér and Wallensteen (2013), we estimate that some 39% of countries participat- ing in any of the three available REDD + funds (UN-REDD, Forest Carbon Partnership Facility and Forest Investment Program) are experiencing, or are emerging from, armed-conflicts 1 which, to some extent, are relat- ed to unclear land tenure regimes and unbalanced land-use competition (de Jong et al., 2007). Consequently, despite the imminence of climate change impacts on ecosystems and human life, it appears that priority should be given to first tackle the causes of armed-conflicts. Nonethe- less, integration of policies around peacebuilding and land-based cli- mate change mitigation remain limited, even where these might apply in the same areas. Synergies between land-based climate change mitigation and peacebuilding efforts may be possible in some, but not all, conflict Forest Policy and Economics 66 (2016) 22–30 ⁎ Corresponding author at: Department of Geosciences and Natural Resource Management, Faculty of Science, University of Copenhagen, Oster Voldgade 10, 1350 Copenhagen, Denmark. 1 In this study, armed conflict is defined as a contested incompatibility that concerns government or territory (or both) where the use of armed force between two parties, of which at least one is the government of a state, results in at least 25 battle deaths in a year (Themnér and Wallensteen, 2013; UCDP, 2014). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2016.02.005 1389-9341/© 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Forest Policy and Economics journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol