Reg Environ Change
DOI 10.1007/s10113-013-0433-7
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
National and regional determinants of tropical deforestation
in Colombia
Dolors Armenteras • Edersson Cabrera •
Nelly Rodrı́guez • Javier Retana
Received: 29 August 2012 / Accepted: 25 February 2013
Ó Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013
Abstract Global tropical deforestation continues to occur
at high rates despite political attention. National-level for-
est baselines are being established all over the world to
guide the implementation of several policy mechanisms.
However, identifying the direct and indirect drivers of
deforestation and understanding the complexity of their
interlinkages are often difficult. We first analyzed defores-
tation between 1990 and 2005 at the national level and
found an annual deforestation rate of 0.62 %. Next, we
performed separate analyses for four natural regions in
Colombia and found annual deforestation rates between
0.42 and 1.92 %. Using general linear models, we identified
several direct causes and underlying factors influencing
deforestation at the national level: rural population density,
cattle, protected areas, and slope. Significant differences in
deforestation rates and causes were found across regions. In
the Caribbean region, drivers of loss are urban population,
unsatisfied basic needs, slope, and precipitation and four
land use variables (illicit crops, pastures, cattle, and fires).
In the Orinoco region, crops are the main driver of forest
loss, and in the Amazonian region, deforestation is
D. Armenteras (&)  N. Rodrı́guez
Laboratorio de Ecologı́a del Paisaje y Modelación de
Ecosistemas, Departamento de Biologı́a, Facultad de Ciencias,
Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Edificio 421,
Bogotá D.C, Colombia
e-mail: darmenterasp@unal.edu.co
E. Cabrera
Proyecto REDD, Instituto de Hidrologı́a,
Meteorologı́a y Estudios Ambientales (IDEAM),
Carrera 10 No. 20-30, Bogotá D.C, Colombia
N. Rodrı́guez  J. Retana
CREAF i Unitat d’Ecologı́a, Universitat Autònoma
de Barcelona, 08193 Bellaterra, Barcelona, Spain
primarily due to fires related to the colonization front.
Policy mechanisms will have to take into account regional
patterns to successfully balance development and forest
preservation in Colombia.
Keywords Tropical forest  Deforestation  Drivers 
Heterogeneity  Regional  Colombia
Introduction
Global forest loss rates are reported at 0.6 % per year for
the 2000–2005 period (Hansen et al. 2010), with an esti-
mated area of global forest cover loss between 2000 and
2005 of 1,011,000 km2. The destruction of tropical forests
remains a critical environmental issue given the unique
ecosystem services these forests provide and the high
biodiversity they host. Of all forest types, the humid
tropical forests cover the largest area (approximately
11,564,000 km2 in the year 2000), but these are being
destroyed at an average rate of 2.4 % of forest cover per
year (Hansen et al. 2010). Loss rates differ around the
world and rates are inconsistent throughout the tropical
moist forest biome. Achard et al. (2002) reported annual
deforestation rates between 1990 and 1997 of 0.38 % for
Latin America, 0.43 % for Africa, and 0.91 % for South-
east Asia as well as a global rate figure of 0.52 %.
A similarly variable picture emerges when examining
the causes and main agents that drive tropical deforestation
around the globe (Rudel and Roper 1997; Geist and
Lambin 2002; Rudel 2006; Kindermann et al. 2008; Carr
et al. 2009). When analyzed from a social science per-
spective, population pressures (as an underlying driving
force or indirect driver) and shifting cultivation (as a
proximate cause or direct driver) are often identified as the
123

main factors behind deforestation (Geist and Lambin
2002). In 2001, Latin American population had doubled
due to a decline in mortality, improved health and
economic development (Carr et al. 2009). A cross-national
study of deforestation causes (Rudel and Roper 1997)
concluded that tropical deforestation was better explained
by the interaction of multiple factors, among which eco-
nomic forces were predominant, followed by infrastructure
and road development. In Latin America, demographic
factors associated with population growth with lower rural
fertility and high rates of both rural-to-urban migration and
also rural-to-rural migration pushing colonization fronts
further into the forest have shown an important influence
on deforestation (Geist and Lambin 2002; Grau and Aide
2008; Carr et al. 2009). Most of the forest loss to agri-
culture in Latin America has already been done, and recent
forest conversion mostly occurs in marginal lands (Carr
et al. 2005). Recent studies have also emphasized the
increasing global food demand (particularly in Southeast
Asia) (Grau and Aide 2008) and urban growth as a major
driver in the twenty-first century (Defries et al. 2010).
Environmental factors, including geology, topography,
and soil quality, and climatic factors, such as drought, are
also believed to strongly affect deforestation (Geist and
Lambin 2001; Chomitz and Thomas 2003). However, most
deforestation studies that mention environmental factors
focus primarily on soil-related features (Fearnside 1984;
Geist and Lambin 2001). In Amazonia, the intensity of the
dry season is one of the most important environmental
factors influencing deforestation (Laurance et al. 2001).
Similar results have been found in Bolivia, where drier
forests were more prone to deforestation than wetter ones
(Steininger et al. 2001). Although it is currently recognized
that multiple factors drive deforestation, these factors must
not only be identified, but their interactions must also be
analyzed to fully understand the causes of deforestation in
a given country (Geist and Lambin 2002). More recent
studies (Rudel 2007; Butler and Laurance 2008) suggest
that whereas some common patterns are detected, a mul-
tiple-factor approach that also considers variation over time
is required (Rudel 2007).
For global studies, the country-level unit of analysis
might be adequate. However, national-level analyses of
rates and drivers of deforestation (both direct and indirect)
might oversimplify reality in many tropical countries,
leading to political responses that might be applicable
according to local conditions in some parts of the territory
but not in others. Many of the recent deforestation studies
in Latin American countries are focused on specific regions
within these countries (Redo et al. 2009; Calvo-Alvarado
et al. 2009; Portillo-Quintero et al. 2012; Monzón-Alva-
rado et al. 2012; Stevens et al. 2011; López and Sierra
2010; Zeledon and Kelly 2009; Forrest et al. 2008; Huang
123
D. Armenteras et al.
et al. 2007) and many of those studies that are at the
national level (Herrador Valencia et al. 2011; Angulo 2011;
Huang et al. 2009; Wright and Samaniego 2008) do not
incorporate differences among regions and thus do not take
into consideration how climatic drivers vary across the
country or affect deforestation more substantially in some
areas, whereas human-related drivers predominate in oth-
ers. These studies also often do not look at the interlinkages
among direct and indirect drivers, and some authors argue
that countries remain relatively cohesive socioeconomic
units (Rudel and Roper 1997). For Colombia, some
regional similarities in deforestation drivers were proposed
suggesting a similar effect across regions of soil, accessi-
bility, and forest and secondary vegetation (Etter et al.
2006). However, this study was based on a model of
deforestation build from one single time step and left out
several important factors such as population density. In this
paper, we assess the drivers of deforestation at the national
level in Colombia, a megadiverse country with two global
biodiversity hotspots that is currently facing many devel-
opment challenges (Jarvis et al. 2010), experimenting rapid
economic growth (Cotte Poveda and Pardo Martı́nez 2011)
and with current processes driving deforestation that
include illicit cultivation (Dávalos et al. 2011). Taking
into account Colombia’s biophysical, socioeconomic, and
demographic heterogeneity, we also explore the sub-
national variation in deforestation and its causes within the
country’s four main natural lowland regions.
Methods
Study area
Colombia is located at the northwestern tip of South
America (centered at 12.2676 North, 4.135° South, 66.509°
East, and 79.0 255° West). It is the only South American
country to have coasts on both the Pacific Ocean
(1,350 km) and the Caribbean Sea (over 1,600 km)
(Fig. 1a). It is the fourth largest country (1,141,748 km2) in
South America after Brazil, Argentina, and Peru. Whereas
the western part of Colombia is mostly mountainous (45 %
of the territory) and densely populated, a major part of the
country consists of plains lying below 500 m. Colombia’s
environment is dominated by tropical rainforest in the
Andes, Amazon, and Pacific basins (52.2 %), followed by
savannah in the Orinoco basin (13.9 %), cropland in the
Andes, grassland, and shrubland in the Caribbean basin but
also present in the rest of the territory (9 %) (IDEAM et al.
2007). The territory can be divided into six large natural
regions based on topography, climate, and soil type: the
Caribbean (Atlantic) littoral region, the Pacific region
(including the Chocó Biogeographic rainforest), the
Tropical deforestation in Colombia
Orinoco region (including the plains of the Orinoco River
Basin, a large savannah lying in the basin of the Orinoco
River), the Amazonian region (including the Amazonian
forests), the Andean region (not covered in this study
because there are some recent analysis of deforestation
patterns and drivers that widely discussed it; Armenteras
et al. 2011; Rodrı́guez et al. 2011), and also the Insular
region neither covered in this paper.
The four regions considered here, that is, the Amazonia,
the Caribbean, the Orinoco, and the Pacific exhibit differ-
ent ecologies, flora, and fauna and have been subjected to
different uses (IDEAM et al. 2007). They differ in climate
as well, with the Orinoco and Caribbean regions being
relatively dry (dry season rainfall \50 mm per month), the
Amazonian region being wetter with an annual precipita-
tion over 2,000 mm/year and the Pacific region comprising
Fig. 1 a Geographical
characteristics of Colombia.
b Natural regions and land
cover of Colombia
an extremely wet area (rainfall over 10,000 mm/year) in
the western part of the country (Armenteras-Pascual et al.
2011). The Amazonian region contains the largest extent of
forest in Colombia and is sparsely populated, but it has one
of the most active colonization fronts in the country
(Rodrı́guez et al. 2011). The Orinoco is a scarcely popu-
lated, relatively flat region that is dominated by grasslands
and pastures with a few areas of small-scale agriculture and
a considerable gallery forest associated with its extensive
river network. The Caribbean region is a highly trans-
formed region dominated by pastures with few remnants of
natural vegetation and only a few patches of dry forest.
Finally, the Pacific region has a humid to superhumid
tropical climate and is considered one of the wettest
regions of the world with annual precipitation ranging from
4,000 mm up to more than 10,000 mm in some locations
123

Fig. 1 continued
(Fig. 1b). This region is also sparsely populated and is
globally recognized as one of the world’s most biologically
and culturally diverse areas, containing indigenous and
Afro-American reserves (Mittermeier et al. 1998; Myers
et al. 2000). Colombia currently has 1,103 municipalities
that have an area ranging from the 1,557 ha the smallest
(Sabaneta, Andes) to the largest with 6,556.000 ha (Vich-
ada, Amazonia).
Deforestation dataset
National forest/non-forest data for 1990 and 2005 were
obtained from the official project ‘‘Scientific and institu-
tional capacity building to support Reducing Emissions
from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD) projects in
Colombia’’ (IDEAM 2011). This project used remote
123
D. Armenteras et al.
sensing data in the form of over 240 Landsat multi-
spectral satellite images made using Thematic Mapper
(TM, missions 4 and 5) and Enhanced Thematic Mapper
Plus (ETM?, mission 7) from 1990 to 2005. The Landsat
data were originally orthorectified using national
standards (MAGNA SIRGAS, Datum SIRGAS, Spheroid
1980, latitude of origin 4°3500 46.32150100 N, and longitude
of origin 74°040 39.028501W). A semi-automated digital
classification protocol was carried out in which an auto-
mated tool (CLASliteÒ) was integrated with the tradi-
tional approach (supervised classification into ERDAS
Imagine (Leica Geosystems 2005) along with on-screen
visual interpretation. The images with minimum cloud
cover (less than 10 %) available were used for the con-
struction of the 1990 and 2005 forest maps, which were
scaled to 1:100,000.
Tropical deforestation in Colombia
We calculated the rate of deforestation of each munic-
ipality at the national or regional level (Rm, in %) based on
the forest maps as follows (Fearnside 1993):
Rm ¼ ððA1990m  A2005m Þ=ðFA1990  tÞÞ  100
where A1990m and A2005m are the total forest areas within
the municipality in 1990 and 2005, respectively, and t is the
time interval in years (in this study, t = 15). FA1990 is the
total forest area in 1990 either throughout Colombia or in
each of the natural regions considered (obtaining different
rates for each of them). The sum of Rm across all munic-
ipalities equals the total deforestation rate (either for the
region considered or for the whole of Colombia).
Datasets used for independent variables
Of the 1,103 municipalities of Colombia, we filtered out
those belonging to the Andes (as deforestation drivers
specific for the Andes have been explained and discussed
in detail elsewhere; Armenteras et al. 2011) and those for
which forest cover data were unavailable for more than
20 % of the area, leaving 315 Colombian municipalities in
the final analysis (15 for the Pacific, 41 for Orinoquia, 204
for Caribbean, and 55 for Amazonia). The main groups of
deforestation contained 15 variables (Table 1) selected as
possible explanatory factors at the regional level repre-
sented demographic, socioeconomic, land use, and physical
environmental features (both abiotic and biotic). The
variables used were integrated in a GIS database using the
municipality as the basic spatial analysis unit. When we
conducted the analysis at the regional level, we included all
municipalities with more than 50 % of their territory in the
region being considered.
The demographic and socioeconomic information we
compiled included data on unsatisfied basic needs and the
number of inhabitants (rural and urban). These data were
obtained from the 1985, 1993, and 2005 population cen-
suses (Departamento Administrativo Nacional de Estadı́s-
tica-DANE). Data on crops, cattle, pastures, and mining
were obtained from the Geoportal of the Agustin Codazzi
Geographic Institute (Sistema de Información Geográfica
para la Planeación y el Ordenamiento Territorial Nacional
SIGOT, Instituto Geográfico Agustı́n Codazzi—IGAC
2011). Digital maps (1:500,000) of national protected
areas, indigenous reserves, municipalities, road networks,
and human settlements were also obtained from the Agu-
stin Codazzi National Institute of Geography (IGAC 2005).
IGAC also provided us with the digital elevation model
based on the Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM,
90 m resolution) from which a map of slope (in degrees)
was derived. Climatic variables such as the annual pre-
cipitation were derived from WORLDCLIM (Hijmans
et al. 2005) and averaged for the area of each one of the
municipalities. For fire data, we used the fire hotspot series
for Colombia from the Moderate Resolution Imaging
Spectroradiometer (MODIS) Collection 5.1 active fire
dataset (Davies et al. 2009). Spatial annual data on illicit
crops were provided from the yearly global illicit crop
monitoring program of the United Nations Office on Drugs
and Crime, represented in Colombia by the Integrated
System for Illicit Crops Monitoring project, or SIMCI
(Sistema Integral de Monitoreo de Cultivos Ilicitos
(UNODC 2009).
Statistical analyses
General linear models (GLMs) were used to explore the
relationships between deforestation and the different
demographic (urban population and rural population),
socioeconomic (unsatisfied basic needs), land use (crops,
pastures, illicit crops, mining, fires, and protected areas),
and physical environmental variables (road density, slope,
water scarcity in dry years, temperature, and precipitation).
GLMs go a step beyond the multivariate regression model
by allowing for linear transformations or linear combina-
tions of multiple dependent variables, including both
quantitative and qualitative variables (Halekoh and
Højsgaard 2004). We specified four different GLM models
for deforestation: one for the total territory of Colombia,
and one for each one of three natural regions within the
country: Amazonia, Orinoquia, and Caribbean. The model
for the Pacific region was not computed given the low
number of municipalities with data available in this region
(N = 15). All parameters were estimated by maximum
likelihood. To normalize the data, several variables (urban
population, rural population density, crops, pastures, cattle,
illicit crops, and protected area) were log-transformed.
Statistical analyses were carried out using STATISTICA
6.0 (Statsoft, 2001).
Results
National and regional deforestation rates in Colombia
According to the forest/non-forest map for the whole of
Colombia, forest loss between 1990 and 2005 totaled
5,116,071 ha (Fig. 2), which indicates a deforestation rate
of 341,071 ha/year. The national figure for this 15-year
period represents forest losses of 1,886,769 ha (3.9 %) in
Amazonia, 753,893 ha (4.99 %) in the Caribbean region,
507,337 ha (3.24 %) in the Orinoco region, and 472,863 ha
(6.32 %) in the Pacific region (Fig. 3). Colombia as a
whole exhibits an annual deforestation rate of 0.62 %. The
annual rate varies considerably among regions, with values
of 0.42 % in the Pacific region, 0.49 % in Amazonia,
123
 D. Armenteras et al.

0.83 % in the Orinoco region, and 1.92 % in the Caribbean

region. Differences in the annual deforestation rate per
municipality (Fig. 4) in the four natural regions were sig-
nificant (ANOVA test, P \ 0.01), with an average annual
deforestation rate per municipality of 0.0090 % (±0.0016)
in the Caribbean region, 0.0091 % (±0.00016) in
Amazonia, 0.0204 % (±0.00552) in the Orinoco region,
and 0.0285 % (±0.00914) in the Pacific region.

National and regional drivers of deforestation

in Colombia
Fig. 3 Total deforestation (in thousand ha) per region (black bars)
The best combination of explanatory variables used in this and the percentage of each region deforested (gray quadrats and
lines) between 1990 and 2005 in the four natural regions of Colombia
paper of deforestation for Colombia at the national level
(R2 = 0.27, P \ 0.001, N = 978; Table 2) included the areas), and one physical environmental variable (slope).
effects of one demographic variable (rural population Rural population density, cattle, and slope affected nega-
density), two land use variables (cattle and protected tively the deforestation rate, indicating that forest loss
Fig. 2 Deforestation between
1990 and 2005 in the natural
regions of Colombia

123
Tropical deforestation in Colombia
Fig. 4 Deforestation rates per
municipality in Colombia for
the period 1990–2005
increased in municipalities with lower rural population
density, fewer cattle, and flatter slopes. In contrast, higher
deforestation rates were found where there was presence of
more protected areas in the municipality.
We carried out separate analyses of the drivers of
deforestation for three natural regions. The best combina-
tion of explanatory variables for deforestation in Amazonia
(R2 = 0.57, P \ 0.001, N = 55; Table 3) included the
effects of only two variables: one demographic variable
(rural population density) and one concerning land use
(fire). The former had a negative effect on the deforestation
rate, indicating that lower rural population densities were
associated with higher deforestation rates. The latter
showed that fires had a positive effect on deforestation
rates.
The best model for deforestation in the Caribbean region
(R2 = 0.59, P \ 0.001, N = 204; Table 3) included the
effects of one demographic variable (urban population),
one socioeconomic variable (unsatisfied basic needs), four
land use variables (illicit crops, pastures, cattle, and fires),
and two physical environmental variables (slope and pre-
cipitation). Both the demographic and the socioeconomic
variables had positive effects on deforestation, indicating
that forest loss was higher in those municipalities with
higher urban densities and more unsatisfied basic needs.
The presence of pastures and illicit crops also positively
influenced deforestation rates, while cattle and fires had a
significant negative effect on deforestation. Regarding the
physical environmental variables, the deforestation rate
increased significantly with slope and precipitation,
123
 Table 1 Summary of the variables considered in the deforestation analysis and data sources

123
Type Short name Units Spatial Description Source(s) Variable
resolution range

Demographic Urban population Number of Municipality Change in urban population density DANE 1985, 1993, 2005 -0.82–12.65
inhabitants/ha between 1985 and 2005
Rural density Number of Municipality Change in rural population density DANE 1985, 1993, 2005 -0.35–1.15
inhabitants/ha between 1985 and 2005
Socio economic Unsatisfied basic needs (NBI) % Municipality Percentage of population with unsatisfied DANE 2005 0.17–1
basic needs in 2005. In Latin America,
most countries consider minimum
household conditions, access to sanitary
services, access to primary education
and minimum household economic
capacity as basic needs
Land use Crops ha 30 m Total change in crop area between 1985 Calculated from IDEAM 2007 0–68,043
and 2005 derived from satellite image
classification
Pastures ha 30 m Total change in pasture area Calculated from IDEAM 2007 0–286,948
Illicit crops ha 10 m Area of coca (Erythroxylum coca) crops UNDOC (2006) through the 0–7,445
Colombian Integrated System for
Illicit Crops Monitoring project
Cattle Number Municipality Head of cattle per municipality in 2006 MADR 0–471,907
Fire Number Municipality Number of fire hotpots detected per FIRMS 0–13,748
municipality between 2000 and 2005
Mining kg Municipality Total gold and silver production in 2005 SIGOT-IGAC 2011 0–7,374,340
Protected area ha 1: 100.000 Area of each municipality under special IGAC 2005 Calculated 0–3,864,528
management as either national protected
area or indigenous reserve
Road density km/ha 1: 100.000 Density of roads in each municipality IGAC 2005 Calculated 0–8.36
Physical environment Slope Degrees 90 m Average maximum slope for each Calculated IGAC 2005 0.01–10.01
municipality
Water scarcity in dry years Unit less Municipality Index of water scarcity in a dry year IDEAM, 2000 1–5
Elevation *m 90 m Altitude above sea level IGAC 2005 0–3675
2
Precipitation mm 1 km Total annual precipitation Worldclim 2005 365–8,434
DANE National Administrative Department of Statistics, UNDOC United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, MADR Agriculture and Rural Development Ministry, FIRMS Fire Information for
Resource Management System, SIGOT Geographic Information System for Planning and Territorial Development, IGAC Agustı́n Codazzi Geographical Institute, IDEAM Institute of
Meteorology and Environmental Studies, Worldclim global climate data
D. Armenteras et al.
Tropical deforestation in Colombia

Table 2 Statistics (F statistics used for testing the different variables deforestation rate (0.68 %) than Colombia (Urioste 2010).
and their significance P are given; the sign of the relationship between Most of the deforestation in Colombia occurred in transi-
each variable and the dependent variable is indicated in the last
tion zones between regions (Wassenaar et al. 2007;
column) of the general linear model for deforestation at the national
level as a function of variables representing demography (urban Armenteras et al. 2011; Rodrı́guez et al. 2011, 2012),
population and rural population), socioeconomy (unsatisfied basic reflecting intra-regional limits that tend to respond not to
needs), land use (crops, pastures, cattle, illicit crops, mining, fires, and political or administrative borders, but to geographical and
protected area), and the physical environment (road density, slope,
socioeconomic conditions. These deforestation hotspots
water scarcity in dry years, elevation, and precipitation)
tend to occur generally in lowland forests (except in the
F P Sign Caribbean region where forests remain only in highland
Intercept 3.6 0.057 - areas) with low population density, extreme poverty, low
ln urban population 0.3 0.588 ? income, and the presence of an illicit economy, a pattern
ln rural density 23.8 <0.001 - that is found elsewhere in the American tropics (Wassenaar
NBI 1.1 0.293878 ? et al. 2007).
ln crops 1.9 0.161314 ?
Our results suggest that, at the national level, defores-
ln pastures 2.9 0.084915 ?
tation is determined mainly by three drivers: human pop-
ulation density, land use, and slope. Lower rural densities,
Illicit crops 1.7 0.188 ?
fewer cattle, and lower slopes were associated with greater
ln cattle 53.6 <0.001 -
deforestation, suggesting that forest loss occurs to a greater
Fires 3.3 0.066 -
extent in remote areas with active colonization fronts and
Mining 0.9 0.344 ?
flatter topography. The results of this model are consistent
ln protected area 9.1 0.002 ?
with previous models in which deforestation is positively
Road density 0.8 0.370 ?
affected by impoverished populations without alternatives
Slope 11.6 <0.001 -
to clearing land as one of the early stages of the coloni-
Water scarcity 0.3 0.538072 ?
zation process (Rudel and Roper 1997). It is also in
Elevation 1.1 0.286 -
agreement with the fact that areas with lower and declining
Precipitation 0.9 0.336443 -
rural population and population density but with available
F and P values and the sign of the coefficient are shown agricultural land, do experience deforestation, as recently
Significant values at P \ 0.05 are in bold. n = 978 examined in a study of agricultural conversion for Latin
America (Carr et al. 2009). Further our results support the
importance of rural-to-urban migration in the region,
indicating that wetter and steeper municipalities had higher especially internal migrant colonists (Carr 2009). In gen-
forest loss. eral terms, deforestation in Colombia is occurring in flatter
The best combination of explanatory variables for areas, where cattle density and rural population density are
deforestation in the Orinoco region (R2 = 0.76, P \ 0.001, still low because settlements have not yet been established
N = 41; Table 3) included the effect of three land use (Rudel and Roper 1997) and also probably due to migration
variables (crops, illicit crops, mining) and one physical both to urban and frontier areas (Carr et al. 2009; Carr
environmental variable (elevation). All variables except 2009). Thus, Colombia as a whole is still at an early
mining had positive effects on the deforestation rate, developmental stage of natural resource extraction (the
indicating that the larger the area under cultivation (both exploitation phase).
legal and illegal) and the higher the elevation, the higher Despite the national trends described above, our results
the deforestation rate. In contrast, where more mining was confirm that the process of deforestation in Colombia is far
present, the deforestation rate was lower. from homogeneous and that spatial variability within the
country is high in terms of both the rate and the drivers of
deforestation. Deforestation rates in the years 1990–2005
Discussion were not uniform throughout the country. Variability in the
rate of forest loss is associated with the historical context of
Colombia had a higher deforestation rate (0.62 %) in the occupation and the geographical location of the regions,
period from 1990 to 2005 than the mean reported by FAO which influence the use of and the access to resources,
(2011) for South America for the years 1990–2010 respectively. We found that the main factors underlying
(0.45 %). Colombia’s annual net loss of forest is similar to deforestation clearly differ across different regions of
that reported for Bolivia (350,000 ha/year) and higher than Colombia (Table 3). The high heterogeneity of processes,
that reported for the neighboring country of Ecuador socio economic and demographic conditions, has also been
(74,300 ha/year), although this latter country has a higher found between countries in Latin America (Carr 2009).

123
 D. Armenteras et al.

Table 3 Statistics (F statistics used for testing the different variables and their significance P are given; the sign of the relationship between each
variable and the dependent variable is indicated in the last column) of the general linear models for deforestation in three natural regions as a
function of variables representing demographics (urban population and rural population), socioeconomics (unsatisfied basic needs), land use
(crops, pastures, cattle, illicit crops, mining, fires, and protected area), and the physical environment (road density, slope, water scarcity in dry
years, elevation, and precipitation)
Region Amazonia Caribbean Orinoco
n = 55 n = 204 n = 41
Variable F P Sign F P Sign F P Sign

Intercept 1.2 0.270 - 41.9 \0.001 - 0.0 0.845 -

ln urban population 0.0 0.806 ? 8.9 0.003 ? 0.0 0.788 ?
ln rural density 4.8 0.033 - 2.4 0.119 - 0.2 0.641 -
NBI 0.2 0.627 - 17.2 <0.001 ? 0.0 0.855 -
ln crops 0.1 0.825 ? 0.6 0.439 - 4.7 0.038 ?
ln pastures 2.4 0.123 ? 9.6 0.002 ? 0.1 0.685 -
Illicit crops 2.1 0.154 ? 5.8 0.016 ? 12.9 0.001 ?
ln cattle 0.1 0.696 - 37.0 <0.001 - 1.9 0.180 -
Fires 4.9 0.031 ? 5.4 0.020 - 1.0 0.317 ?
Mining 0.5 0.473 - 0.0 0.844 - 5.1 0.031 -
ln protected area 0.1 0.771 ? 2.0 0.156 - 1.2 0.2732 ?
Road density 0.9 0.336 - 0.1 0.752 ? 0.7 0.396 ?
Slope 0.2 0.600 - 8.5 0.003 ? 3.2 0.085 -
Water scarcity 0.2 0.651 - 0.0 0.849 - 3.8 0.061 -
Elevation 0.4 0.485 ? 2.8 0.094 - 11.2 0.002 ?
Precipitation 0.01 0.907 - 16.9 <0.001 ? 1.8 0.187 -
F and P values and the sign of the coefficient are shown. The values of n for each region are as follows: Amazonia, 55; Caribbean, 204; Orinoco,
41. The model for the Pacific region was not computed given the low number of municipalities with data available in this region (n = 15)
Significant values at P \ 0.05 are in bold

Environmental and climatic conditions also vary across
regions within Colombia. In contrast to other regions such
as the Andes where there is evidence of intensive agri-
cultural activities and forest logging since pre-Hispanic
(Etter et al. 2008; Armenteras et al. 2011), the process of
immigration began recently (in the 1960s) in Amazonia,
and this region contains currently active colonization and
deforestation fronts. The Pacific region has experienced
selective logging for decades but, together with the Ori-
noco region, has also been subjected to pressures from
biofuel projects over the last 10 years (Janssen and Rutz
2011), which represents a set of newly emerging economic
and development opportunities that might already have
influenced deforestation in these regions, although popu-
lation density is low. Land use is described by as few as
three factors in the Orinoco region and two factors in
Amazonia either because other factors identified elsewhere
are not yet representative of the colonization process in
these regions (e.g., cattle grazing, roads, and soy planta-
tions in the Amazon) or because data are not available
(e.g., logging for both Orinoco and Amazon).
The Caribbean region is arguably the most transformed
region, with a long history of occupation and land use
traditionally driven by cattle grazing. This region has the
highest cattle productivity in Colombia (Viloria de la Hoz
2003). The establishment of commercial cattle ranching is
associated with the presence of fires that are used in tra-
ditional management practices (Armenteras-Pascual et al.
2011). The urban population in the Caribbean is high, with
higher population densities within an inland area of
100 km from the coast (217 inhabitants per km2, Roca and
Perez 2006). Both urban population size and unsatisfied
basic needs positively affect deforestation. Economic
activities such as pastures and illicit crops also increase
deforestation rates in the Caribbean region. Forest rem-
nants and thus deforestation hotspots are found in three
sub-regions (Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta, San Lucas, and
Perijá) where wetter and steeper slopes are found, whereas
flatter areas tend to be occupied either by cattle ranching or
agricultural activities (Roca and Perez 2006). When land is
scarce, highland areas in the Caribbean with steeper terrain
provide farmers the only opportunity to clear forest and
expand agriculture in these marginal lands, and thus, rural
populations tend to migrate to such areas. However, the
complex relationships between land use and climate in the
Caribbean region remain poorly understood.
The Amazonian and Orinoco regions are both
scarcely populated areas with small-scale agriculture, cattle

123
Tropical deforestation in Colombia
ranching, and active agricultural frontiers (including illegal
crops) in many municipalities (Barbosa and Fearnside
2005; Armenteras et al. 2006; Romero-Ruiz et al. 2009).
Oil palm expansion is starting to affect these areas. Indeed,
deforestation in the Orinoco region is strongly affected by
legal and illegal crops, which impact the integrity of gal-
lery forests, and also by some mining activities that could
impact montane forests in the higher parts of the basin. Our
results for Amazonia suggest that within this region,
deforestation occurs primarily in remote areas where set-
tlements have not yet been established and a floating col-
onist population moves around, creating new colonization
hotspots mainly using river networks (Armenteras et al.
2006; Etter et al. 2006). Fire remains a driver of defores-
tation, as has been reported elsewhere in the Amazonian
region (Cochrane and Barber 2009; Aragão et al. 2008) and
also in the Colombian Amazon (Armenteras and Retana
2012) where fire is an indicator of slash and burn activities
associated with deforestation and with early stages of
natural resource exploitation as found for other areas of the
Amazon where pastures and small-scale agricultural
activities (Müller et al. 2011; Egler et al. 2012; Armenteras
et al. 2013).
Despite the fact that in the national-level analysis, illicit
crops did not appear to have an effect on deforestation
(Table 2), they were found to be an important factor at the
regional level in two of three regions (Table 3), in agree-
ment with recent reports (Dávalos et al. 2011). Surpris-
ingly, this factor did not appear to be important in the
Amazonian region despite the extensive area under culti-
vation in this region. One possible explanation is that the
effect of illicit crops in Amazonia was not captured by our
model or either they have smaller impact on total defor-
estation than previously expected (see, for a similar con-
clusion, Armenteras et al. 2013). Alternatively, there might
be a link between rural population density, deforestation,
and an illegal economy such that, as Dávalos et al. (2011)
suggest, coca growing might be a consequence (attractor)
of poverty and not a cause of deforestation. Nevertheless,
the impact of the expansion of illegal crops on forest
fragmentation and deforestation has been proved in the past
in many areas of Latin America (Armenteras et al. 2006,
2009; Bradley and Millington 2008; Rodrı́guez et al. 2011).
Our results corroborate the conclusions of Aguiar et al.
(2007) for the Amazonian region, highlighting the high
regional heterogeneity in deforestation. Within Colombia,
a previous study based on static forest cover suggested that
important regional differences exist in past land use, but
suggested that within regions, deforestation is driven
mostly by common biophysical variables, distances to
towns, and the presence of roads, reflecting past clearing
events spanning several 100 years (Etter et al. 2006). The
results of our study add to our understanding of how
different regional amounts and rates of deforestation result
from current different drivers at the municipality level, and
thus, the implications for land use and conservation plan-
ning can be addressed at this geopolitical scale.
The overall conclusion of this study is that the factors
underlying deforestation vary across Colombia as a
reflection of environmental differences and also of differ-
ent stages of development, which are similar to the changes
over time that have been reported more broadly for Latin
America (Rudel et al. 2009). Thus, deforestation must be
analyzed bearing in mind intra-national variation, particu-
larly differences in the relative importance of multiple
factors from one region to another, to avoid misdirecting
national and regional policies designed to reduce defores-
tation and forest degradation. Adding to the complexity of
this issue, Colombia is currently promoting different levels
of development in agriculture, mining, energy, road infra-
structure, and technology, prioritizing each of these areas
differently in the different regions. There is also a need to
consider the fact that many of the variables used in this
study are dynamic over time and themselves are driven by
other factors, indirect drivers such as global economic
conditions that will affect the way cattle and crops respond.
Even including global market forces, much uncertainty
remains as to whether forest degradation and deforestation
must be addressed nationally or regionally, or whether
strategies to mitigate these problems should instead be
focused on active colonization fronts. The latter approach
might be appropriate if colonists are given the opportunity
to access alternative income sources through productive
lands and wealth creation in the private sector (Killeen
et al. 2011), reducing migration toward forest areas. Thus,
land tenure and access might be the key. Because global-
ization is introducing new drivers of deforestation (Rudel
et al. 2009; Killeen et al. 2011), such as biofuel production,
mining, and hydrocarbon extraction in Colombia, the
extent of the impact that these factors will have on forests
and how the country should cope with them both nationally
and regionally remain unknown.
Acknowledgments We thank the Instituto de Hidrologı́a, Meteo-
rologı́a y Estudios Ambientales (IDEAM) for providing the defor-
estation data maps from the national Colombia REDD (Reducing
Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation) project funded by
the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation and its team members
Maria Claudia Garcı́a, Maria Fernanda Ordoñez, Gustavo Galindo,
and Diana Vargas. We also thank the MODIS team for providing
continuous access to active fire datasets. Thanks to Carol Franco for
her continuous support in data handling. We also want to thank you
the anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and sugges-
tions to improve the quality of the paper. The research was funded
by the Universidad Nacional de Colombia through the postdoctoral
position of Nelly Rodrı́guez and a grant from the CONVOCATO-
RIA NACIONAL PARA EL FORTALECIMIENTO DE ALIAN-
ZAS ESTRATÉGICAS INTERINSTITUCIONALES. UN - 2012,
Project 12.
123

References
Achard F, Eva H, Stibig HJ, Mayaux P, Gallego J, Richards T,
Malingreau JP (2002) Determination of deforestation rates of the
world’s humid tropical forests. Science 297:999–1002
Aguiar AP, Camara G, Sobral MI (2007) Spatial statistical analysis of
land-use determinants in the Brazilian Amazonia: exploring
intra-regional heterogeneity. Ecol Model 209:169–188
Angulo CP (2011) Dinámica de la deforestación en Venezuela:
análisis de los cambios a partir de mapas históricos. Interciencia
36:578–587
Aragão LEOC, Malhi Y, Barbier N, Lima A, Shimabukuro Y,
Anderson L, Saatchi S (2008) Interactions between rainfall,
deforestation and fires during recent years in the Brazilian
Amazonia. Philos T R Soc B 363:1779–1785
Armenteras D, Rudas G, Rodrı́guez N, Sua S, Romero M (2006)
Patterns and causes of deforestation in the Colombian Amazon.
Ecol Indic 6:353–368
Armenteras D, Rodrı́guez N, Retana J (2009) Are conservation
strategies effective in avoiding the deforestation of the Colom-
bian Guyana Shield? Biol Conserv 142:1411–1419
Armenteras D, Rodrı́guez N, Retana J, Morales M (2011) Under-
standing deforestation in montane and lowland areas of the
Andes in Colombia. Reg Environ Change 11:693–705
Armenteras-Pascual D, Retana J, Molowny-Horas R, Roman-Cuesta
RM, Gonzalez-Alonso F, Morales-Rivas M (2011) Character-
ization of fire spatial patterns interactions with climate and
vegetation in Colombia. Agr For Meteorol 151:279–289
Armenteras D, Retana J (2012) Dynamics, patterns and causes of fires
in Northwestern Amazonia. PLoS One 7:e35288
Armenteras D, Rodrı́guez N, Retana J (2013) Landscape dynamics in
northwestern amazonia: an assessment of pastures, fire and illicit
crops as drivers of tropical deforestation. PLoS One 8(1):e54310.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0054310
Barbosa RI, Fearnside PM (2005) Fire frequency and area burned in
the Roraima savannas of Brazilian Amazonia. For Ecol Manag
204:371–384
Bradley AV, Millington AC (2008) Coca and colonists: quantifying
and explaining forest clearance under coca and anti-narcotics
policy regimes. Ecol Soc 13:31
Butler RA, Laurance WF (2008) New strategies for conserving
tropical forests. Trends Ecol Evol 23:469–472
Calvo-Alvarado J, McLennan B, Sánchez-Azofeifa A, Garvin T
(2009) Deforestation and forest restoration in Guanacaste, Costa
Rica: putting conservation policies in context. For Ecol Manag
258:931–940
Carr D (2009) Rural migration: the driving force behind tropical
deforestation on the settlement frontier. Prog Hum Geo 33:
1–31
Carr DL, Suter L, Barbieri A (2005) Population dynamics and tropical
deforestation: state of the debate and conceptual challenges.
Popul Environ 27:89–113
Carr DL, Lopez AC, Bilsborrow RE (2009) The population,
agriculture, and environment nexus in Latin America: country-
level evidence from the latter half of the twentieth century. Popul
Environ 30:222–246
Cochrane M, Barber CP (2009) Climate change, human land use and
future fires in the Amazon. Glob Change Biol 15:601–612
Cotte Poveda A, Pardo Martı́nez CI (2011) Trends in economic
growth, poverty and energy in Colombia: long-run and short-run
effects. Energy Sys 2:281–298
Chomitz KM, Thomas TS (2003) Determinants of land use in Amazonia:
a fine scale spatial analysis. Am J Agr Econ 85:1016–1028
Dávalos LM, Bejarano AC, Hall MA, Correa HL, Corthals AP,
Espejo OJ (2011) Forests and drugs: coca-driven deforestation in
123
D. Armenteras et al.
tropical biodiversity hotspots. Environ Sci Technol 45:
1219–1227
Davies DK, Ilavajhala S, Wong MM, Justice CO (2009) Fire
information for resource management system: archiving and
distributing MODIS active fire data. IEEE T Geosci Remote
47:72–79
Defries RS, Rudel T, Uriarte M, Hansen M (2010) Deforestation
driven by urban population growth and agricultural trade in the
twenty-first century. Nature Geosci 3:178–181
Egler M, Egler CAG, Franz B, Muylaert de Araujo MS, Freitas MAV
(2012) Indicators of deforestation in the Southern Brazilian Pre-
Amazon. Reg Environ Change. doi:10.1007/s10113-012-0331-4
Etter A, McAlpine C, Wilson L, Phinn S, Possingham H (2006)
Regional patterns of agricultural land use and deforestation in
Colombia. Agric Ecosyst Environ 114:369–386
Etter A, McAlpine C, Possingham H (2008) Historical patterns and
drivers of landscape change in Colombia since 1500: a
regionalized spatial approach. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 98:2–23
FAO (2011) State of the world’s forests. FAO, Rome. http://www.
fao.org/docrep/013/i2000e/i2000e.pdf
Fearnside PM (1984) Initial soil quality conditions on the Trans
Amazon Highway of Brazil and their simulation in models for
estimating human carrying capacity. Tropical Ecol 25:1–21
Fearnside PM (1993) Deforestation in Brazilian Amazonia: the effect
of population and land tenure. Ambio 22:537–545
Forrest JL, Sanderson EW, Wallace R, Lazzo TMS, Cerveró LHG,
Coppolillo P (2008) Patterns of land cover change in and around
Madidi National Park, Bolivia. Biotropica 40:285–294
Geist HJ, Lambin EF (2001) What drives tropical deforestation? A
meta-analysis of proximate and underlying causes of deforesta-
tion based on subnational case study evidence. LUCC Interna-
tional Project Office, LUCC Report Series no. 4, Louvain-la-
Neuve, Belgium. http://www.pik-potsdam.de/members/cramer/
teaching/0607/Geist_2001_LUCC_Report.pdf
Geist HJ, Lambin EF (2002) Proximate causes and underlying driving
forces of tropical deforestation. Bioscience 52:143–150
Grau HR, Aide M (2008) Globalization and land-use transitions in
Latin America. Ecol Soc 13:16
Halekoh U, Højsgaard S (2004) Generalized linear models. Master of
Applied Statistics, Tjele, Denmark
Hansen MC, Stehman SV, Potapov PV (2010) Quantification of
global gross forest cover loss. PNAS 107:8650–8655
Herrador Valencia D, Boada i Juncà M, Varga Linde D, Mendizábal
Riera E (2011) Tropical forest recovery and socio-economic
change in El Salvador: an opportunity for the introduction of
new approaches to biodiversity protection. Appl Geogr 31:
259–268
Hijmans RJ, Cameron SE, Parra JL, Jones PG, Jarvis A (2005) Very
high resolution interpolated climate surfaces for global land
areas. Int J Climatol 25:1965–1978
Huang C, Kim S, Altstatt A, Townshend JRG, Davis P, Song K,
Tucker CJ et al (2007) Rapid loss of Paraguay’s Atlantic forest
and the status of protected areas A Landsat assessment. Remote
Sens Environ 106(4):460–466
Huang C, Kim S, Song K, Townshend JRG, Davis P, Altstatt A,
Rodas O et al (2009) Assessment of Paraguay’s forest cover
change using Landsat observations. Global Planet Change
67(1–2):1–12
IDEAM, IGAC, IAvH, Invemar, Sinchi, IIAP (2007) Ecosistemas
continentales, costeros y marinos de Colombia. Instituto de
Hidrologı́a, Meteorologı́a y Estudios Ambientales, Instituto
Geográfico Agustı́n Codazzi, Instituto de Investigación de
Recursos Biológicos Alexander von Humboldt, Instituto de
Investigaciones Marinas y Costeras José Benito Vives de
Andréis, Instituto Amazónico de Investigaciones Cientı́ficas
Tropical deforestation in Colombia
Sinchi e Instituto de Investigaciones Ambientales del Pacı́fico
Jhon von Neumann. Bogotá, DC
Instituto de Hidrologı́a, Meteorologı́a y Estudios Ambientales
[IDEAM] (2011) Memoria Técnica Cuantificación de la Defor-
estación histórica para Colombia a nivel nacional, escalas gruesa
y fina. Bogotá, p 85 (in press)
Instituto Geográfico Agustı́n Codazzi [IGAC] (2005) 1:500.00
Official cartography
Instituto Geográfico Agustı́n Codazzi [IGAC] (2011) Sistema de
Información Geográfica para la Planeación y el Ordenamiento
Territorial Nacional SIGOT, Bogotá, Colombia
Janssen R, Rutz DD (2011) Sustainability of biofuels in Latin
America: risks and opportunities. Energ Policy. doi:10.1016/j.
enpol.2011.01.047
Jarvis A, Touval J, Schmitz MC, Sotomayor L, Hyman GG (2010)
Assessment of threats to ecosystems in South America. J Nat
Conserv 18:180–188
Killeen TJ, Schroth G, Turner W, Harvey CA, Steininger MA (2011)
Stabilizing the agricultural frontier: leveraging REDD with
biofuels for sustainable development. Biomass Bioenerg 35(12):
4815–4823
Kindermann G, Obersteiner M, Sohngen B, Sathaye J, Andrasko K,
Rametsteiner E, Schlamadinger B, Wunder S, Beach R (2008)
Global cost estimates of reducing carbon emissions through
avoided deforestation. PNAS 105:10302–10307
Laurance WF, Albernaz AKM, Da Costa C (2001) Is deforestation
accelerating in the Brazilian Amazon? Environ Conserv 28:
305–311
Leica Geosystems (2005) ERDAS Imagine 9.1. Leica Geosystems,
GIS and mapping division, Atlanta, GA
López S, Sierra R (2010) Tropical deforestation in the Ecuadorian
Chocó: logging practices and socio-spatial relationships. Geo-
grap Bull 51:3–22
Mittermeier RR, Myers N, Thomsen JJB, da Fonseca GAB, Olivieri S
(1998) Biodiversity hotspots and major tropical wilderness areas:
approaches to setting conservation priorities. Conserv Biol
12:516–520
Monzón-Alvarado C, Cortina-Villar S, Schmook B, Flamenco-
Sandoval A, Christman Z, Arriola L (2012) Land-use decision-
making after large-scale forest fires: analyzing fires as a driver of
deforestation in Laguna del Tigre National Park, Guatemala.
Appl Geogr 35:43–52
Müller R, Müller D, Schierhorn F, Gerold G, Pacheco P (2011)
Proximate causes of deforestation in the Bolivian lowlands: an
analysis of spatial dynamics. Reg Environ Change 2:445–459
Myers N, Mittermeier RA, Mittermeier CG, da Fonseca GA, Kent J
(2000) Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature
403:853–858
Portillo-Quintero C, Sanchez M, Valbuena C, Gonzalez YY, Larreal
JT (2012) Forest cover and deforestation patterns in the Northern
Andes (Lake Maracaibo Basin): a synoptic assessment using
MODIS and Landsat imagery. Appl Geog 35:152–163
Redo D, Joby Bass JO, Millington AC (2009) Forest dynamics and
the importance of place in western Honduras. Appl Geog
29:91–110
Roca AM, Perez GJ (2006) Geografı́a fı́sica y poblamiento en la
Costa Caribe colombiana. Documentos de trabajo sobre Eco-
nomı́a Regional No 73, Junio 2006. Banco de la República,
Colombia
Rodrı́guez N, Armenteras D, Retana J, Molowny-Horas R (2011)
Patterns and trends of forest loss in the Colombian Guyana.
Biotropica 44(1):123–132
Rodrı́guez N, Armenteras D, Retana J (2012) Land use and land cover
change in the Colombian Andes: dynamics and future scenarios.
J Land Use Sci. doi:10.1080/1747423X.2011.650228
Romero-Ruiz M, Etter A, Sarmiento A, Tansey K (2009) Spatial and
temporal variability of fires in relation to ecosystems, land tenure
and rainfall in savannas of northern South America. Glob
Change Biol 16:2013–2023
Rudel TK (2006) Shrinking tropical forests, human agents of change
and conservation policy. Conserv Biol 20:1604–1609
Rudel TK (2007) Changing agents of deforestation: from state-
initiated to enterprise driven processes, 1970–2000. Land Use
Policy 24:35–41
Rudel TK, Roper J (1997) The paths to rain forest destruction: cross-
national Patterns of tropical deforestation, 1975–90. World Dev
25:53–65
Rudel TK, Defries R, Asner GP, Laurance WF (2009) Changing
drivers of deforestation and new opportunities for conservation.
Conserv Biol 23(6):1396–1405
Statsoft (2001) STATISTICA 6.0 package. Statsoft. Tulsa, USA
Steininger MK, Tucker CJ, Townshend JRG, Killeen TJ, Desch A,
Bell V, Ersts P (2001) Tropical deforestation in the Bolivian
Amazon. Environ Conserv 28:127–134
Stevens K, Campbell L, Urquhart G, Kramer D, Qi J (2011)
Examining complexities of forest cover change during armed
conflict on Nicaragua’s Atlantic Coast. Biodivers Conserv
20:2597–2613
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime—UNODC (2009)
Colombia: Monitoreo de Cultivos de Coca 2009. UNODC,
Bogotá
Urioste A (2010) Deforestación en Bolivia. Una amenaza mayor al
cambio climático. Fundación Friedrich Ebert. Working paper.
http://library.fes.de/pdf-files/bueros/bolivien/07570.pdf
Viloria de la Hoz J (2003) La ganaderı́a bovina en las Llanuras del
Caribe colombiano. Documentos de trabajo sobre economı́a
regional. Banco de la República, No. 40, Cartagena de Indias,
Colombia
Wassenaar T, Gerber P, Verburg PH, Rosales M, Ibrahim M,
Steinfeld H (2007) Projecting land use changes in the neotropics:
the geography of pasture expansion into forest. Global Environ
Chang 17:86–104
Wright S, Samaniego M (2008) Historical, demographic, and
economic correlates of land-use change in the Republic of
Panama. Ecol Soc 13(2):17
Zeledon EB, Kelly NM (2009) Understanding large-scale deforesta-
tion in southern Jinotega, Nicaragua from 1978 to 1999 through
the examination of changes in land use and land cover. J Environ
Manag 90:2866–2872
123