Quantifying the costs and benefits of forest conversion through slash-and-burn cultivation and conventional logging

• Published in: Trees, Forests and People (Online) Forests and People (Online), 2024-03, Vol.15, p.100504, Article 100504
• Main Authors: Nhiuane, Osório, Lisboa, Sá Nogueira, Popat, Meizal, Sitoe, Almeida
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Agriculture; Deforestation; Financial viability; Forest degradation; Forestry activities; Smallholder farmers
• ISSN: 2666-7193; 2666-7193
• DOI: 10.1016/j.tfp.2024.100504

•Slash-and-burn cultivation and conventional logging - timber, charcoal - reveal profitable activities in the short term.•In the medium and long term entails socioeconomic and environmental costs that may worsen the poverty of local communities.•Slash-and-burn is an attractive land-use option as farmers get double economic benefits when converting forests to croplands.•Agricultural production is an attractive option for the local community and a difficult land option to prevent. Food insecurity, deforestation, and forest degradation are significant challenges to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals in sub-Saharan Africa. Slash-and-burn cultivation and conventional logging (timber and charcoal production) are two interrelated activities that lead to forest loss and undermine food security. However, the environmental and economic incentives to clear or conserve the forest have yet to be discovered. To address this gap, our study collected costs and benefits data to assess financial profitability and viability related to forest conversion to slash-and-burn cultivation options (e.g., mono-cropping of maize and intercropping between maize, cassava and pigeon peas) and forestry exploitation (logging and charcoal production) practices in smallholders in Zambézia province, central Mozambique. Conventional logging was the highest cost activity (1662 US$ ha−1) compared to charcoal production (278 US$ ha−1) and cropping systems. Estimated total costs for cropping ranged from 302 US$ ha−1 to 508 US$ ha−1. Cropping systems appear more profitable in the first year of investment (30 to 1495 US$ ha−1) than forestry activities. On the other hand, the estimated profits for logging and charcoal production are negative at 15 US$ ha−1 and 782 US$ ha−1, respectively. Regarding viability, cropping systems showed the highest indicators compared to forestry activities. Based on the financial assessment, cropping systems seem attractive land use options with the fastest and highest financial returns and the lowest production costs. As such, it is not easy to prevent them. The long-term implications of increasing deforestation to the detriment of the cropping system can translate into rapid ecosystem degradation that can worsen livelihoods.