Skip to Main Navigation

Options for Conserving Stable Forests (English)

The belief that stable forests need to be conserved reflects their extensive contributions to carbon sequestration, hydrology, biodiversity, climate, culture, and society. Stable forests are mostly excluded from policy and financial valuations that could incentivize maintenance and ongoing protection, such as REDD+. Stable forests lack the historical emissions that could provide the kind of reference against which protection and results-based payments are currently estimated. As a result, large areas of stable forest that hold vast carbon stocks are not valued or protected. Over time, they riskbecoming fragmented, degraded, converted to at-risk forest, and ultimately deforested. Meanwhile, efforts to conserve global forests tend to focus exclusively on areas under imminent threat of deforestation. This approach is akin to spending money only on firefighters while ignoring more cost-effective methods to reduce fire risks. The failure to assign value to stable forests is a classic example of the free rider problem, whereby free goods or services are overexploited and fail over time.




Official version of document (may contain signatures, etc)

  • Official PDF
  • TXT*
  • Total Downloads** :
  • Download Stats
  • *The text version is uncorrected OCR text and is included solely to benefit users with slow connectivity.


Simon,Sophia Bhanti,Meyru O'Sullivan,Robert M.H. Sohngen,Brent Dyck,Melania Pearson,Timothy R.H.

Options for Conserving Stable Forests (English). Washington, D.C. : World Bank Group.