£2 a Day Basic Income Helps Amazon Communities Protect Rainforest, Study Finds
Theo The Guardian
A two-year pilot in Peru's Asháninka region gave 211 Indigenous people about £2 a day in unconditional cash. Researchers found nearly 90% adopted environmentally beneficial measures such as reforestation and water source restoration, while food insecurity and work-driven migration fell sharply. Other academics caution that cash transfers elsewhere have sometimes increased deforestation, and the authors say larger studies are needed.
A pioneering project providing unconditional basic income to Indigenous people in the Peruvian Amazon has helped protect the rainforest, according to published research.
The analysis from the University of Bath is expected to feed into a growing debate over the role of direct payments to communities that steward globally important ecosystems.
The two-year pilot, run by the UK-based charity Cool Earth, gave 211 people across three communities in Peru's Asháninka region six cash transfers of 1,032 Peruvian soles each – roughly £2 a day – to spend as they wished.
Over the course of the trial, researchers found that close to 90% of participants adopted environmentally beneficial measures, such as collective reforestation, restoring vital water sources and reducing forest burning.
They also recorded a fall in food insecurity, which can sometimes push forest communities into logging or environmental crime. The share of households unable to afford nutritious food dropped from 73% to 26%.
Another reported benefit was reduced migration, with the proportion of participants forced to leave their homes in search of work falling from 43% to 18%. Researchers said this allowed more people to stay and protect the forest.
Dr Nick Langridge, a co-author of the report, said: "The findings suggest that when communities have greater security and autonomy, they are better able to protect the ecosystems they depend on."
There is growing recognition of the importance of Indigenous stewardship of the Amazon and other biomes, which absorb carbon, shelter biodiversity and provide essential ecological services for the planet. Yet that role is increasingly difficult as Indigenous lands come under threat from miners, loggers, farmers and land-grabbers, and as many young people in these often economically poor communities gain access to the internet or are drawn to wealthier cities.
How to sustain, encourage and reward Indigenous stewardship is a lively debate within the international aid and environmental community. Many previous payment schemes came with attached conditions, such as Brazil's government bolsa família programme, which carried requirements on children's education, or bolsa verde, which required conservation activities.
The authors of the new study said the project – drafted with local women's groups – was the first to provide unconditional basic income to an Indigenous community in the Amazon.
The lead author, Dr Neil Howard, said: "All of this helps make conservation ethical. The incentive to exploit or abandon land is reduced, and people are put first with respect and dignity, which is a complete contrast to the colonial history of conservation policy and Indigenous peoples."
To strengthen the impact, the project ran an optional add-on "cash plus" programme of community-led education on finance, conservation and climate change.
Other academics are more cautious about the environmental impact of cash transfers, pointing out that similar studies elsewhere have shown they can lead to increased deforestation when people use extra cash to expand farming.
In some parts of the Amazon, cash has been used to buy motorbikes and cars, raising demand for roads. There have also been reports of Indigenous communities becoming more exposed to drugs when they travel to cities to collect transfers.
The authors of the new report acknowledge that broader research is needed on the ecological impact of unconditional basic income. Their two-year study was small, covering just over 500 hectares (1,235 acres) of forest. They did not measure changes in vegetation or soil quality, nor did they account for the influence any separate projects may have had on community behaviour.
Despite these limitations, they said the initial results had encouraged a network of civil society organisations working on conservation through cash.
"Yes, this is a pilot and we may need a much bigger project," Howard said. "But this is a pioneering step. I hope the trade-off between scale and innovation tips in this direction."
