English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The effective prevention and control of forest disasters is important for forest resources and the well-being of those living in forested areas. This study evaluates the impact of a policy that employs a rural impoverished population as ecological forest rangers (EFRs) for the incidence of forest disasters. We estimate a generalized difference in differences (DID) model using nationwide provincial-level forest disaster data combined with regional data in all policy pilot areas. There are three primary findings. (1) The implementation of the EFR policy failed to effectively reduce the incidence of forest fires, forest pests, forest diseases, forest rodents and other forest disasters, which shows that the EFR policy has not achieved the goal of “forest protection”. (2) The effect of the EFR policy on forest disaster control is not significantly different among provinces with different forest resource endowments and different levels of social and economic development. This shows that there is no significant difference in the implementation of EFR policies between different forest resource endowments and different socioeconomic development areas. (3) The EFR policy failed to achieve the effective coordination of the dual goals of “poverty reduction” and “ecological protection”; this is the main reason for the failure to reduce the incidence of forest disasters while reducing poverty. The pressure of this policy neglected the “forest management and protection” function of the policy and the corresponding assessment requirements. At the same time, the central government also neglected the assessment of the prevention and control of “forest disasters” by local governments when implementing this policy. Ultimately, the opportunism of local governments and ecological rangers was strengthened. Therefore, the goals of environmental service payment items and the corresponding evaluation index settings need to be matched to truly achieve the established goals.

Does the Policy of Ecological Forest Rangers (EFRs) for the Impoverished Populations Reduce Forest Disasters?—Empirical Evidence from China