The role of land use conversion in shaping the land cover of the Central American Dry Corridor

Land Use Policy xxx (xxxx) xxxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Land Use Policy journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/landusepol

The role of land use conversion in shaping the land cover of the Central American Dry Corridor Yosef Gotlieba,b,*, Jorge Daniel García Girónb a b

David Yellin College of Education, Jerusalem, Israel Center for Geophysical Research, University of Costa Rica, San Pedro, Montes de Oca. San José, Costa Rica

ARTICLE INFO

ABSTRACT

Keywords: Central American Dry Corridor Deforestation Land cover-land use Sustainable development Extreme events Spatial autocorrelation Land use conversion Climate change

The Central American Dry Corridor (CADC) is a trans-border region characterized by climatic and ecological continuities. It is expected to experience rising aridity and severe hydro-climatic events due to climate change. Subsistence agriculture and other rural livelihoods to which land cover is central are widely practiced in this impoverished territory of approximately eleven million people. The CADC’s land cover was profiled to determine: a) how it differs from Non-CADC areas, and b) the role of land use in shaping these differences. Spatial autocorrelation analysis using satellite data showed that forest cover is a third less prevalent in the CADC than in the Non-CADC while the share of mosaic vegetation and mosaic cropland is nearly double. A naturally prevalent cover type in the CADC, tropical dry forest (TDF), has been largely eliminated. The significantly lesser proportion of forest and greater percentage of coverage consistent with agriculture and ranching implicate land use conversion, specifically deforestation for agricultural expansion and cattle ranching, in shaping CADC land coverage. The process began in the mid-1800s when small-scale agriculturalists migrated to the region followed by large-scale export crop and beef production, primarily for international markets. Deforestation peaked after WWII, concluding by the 1990s with the conversion of most woodlands. Similar patterns now threaten forests along the Caribbean coast. Traditional land use practices cannot sustain local communities or preserve the resource base, thereby contributing to rural outmigration. Adopting sustainable practices and promoting livelihoods strategies leading to forest regeneration will be fundamental for CC adaptation in the CADC.

1. Introduction Previous studies of Latin America have classified land cover at the continental scale (Latifovic et al., 2004; Blanco et al., 2013). This paper is focused on a considerably smaller region, the Central American Dry Corridor (CADC, or Dry Corridor). We discuss how land cover patterns of the CADC and Non-CADC regions of the isthmus differ and explore the factors giving rise to these differences. Differences in environmental conditions such as precipitation, temperature and elevation would naturally produce different endowments of flora and fauna in these regions. However, evidence suggests that land use, specifically land conversion through deforestation to clear tracts for agriculture and ranching, was the primary driver of the distinct land cover patterns discerned in these regions today. The process started in the mid-nineteenth century and accelerated in the postWWII period through the 1980s. It has fundamentally altered land

⁎

cover patterns to the point of largely eliminating a naturally prevalent cover type, the tropical dry forest (TDF). A historical review of regional land settlement supports our research that both proximate causes (agricultural expansion) and underlying economic, social and institutional factors were the main determinants of land cover changes in the CADC (Geist and Lambin, 2001). The commercial production of cash crops (principally coffee) and cattle raising to meet foreign demand for beef catalyzed this process in the post-WWII period. Land tenancy practices, social norms, urbanization and, more recently, extractive industry and tourism-related development, served as contributing factors. To a large extent, deforestation in the CADC was nearly complete by the 1990s, but there are indications of a limited increase in secondary growth in some areas due to land abandonment and agricultural decline as a result of migration (López-Carr and Burgdorfer, 2013; Redo et al. (2012). Nonetheless, in Central America as a whole deforestation

Corresponding author at: David Yellin College of Education, Jerusalem, Israel. E-mail address: [email protected] (Y. Gotlieb).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.104351 Received 22 November 2018; Received in revised form 1 November 2019; Accepted 5 November 2019 0264-8377/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article as: Yosef Gotlieb and Jorge Daniel García Girón, Land Use Policy, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.104351

Land Use Policy xxx (xxxx) xxxx

Y. Gotlieb and J.D. García Girón

continues with evidence suggesting that rural-rural migration is replicating deleterious land use practice formerly characteristic of the CADC in the humid forests along the Caribbean coast. Characterizing the CADC’s land cover is especially relevant given the centrality of natural resource-dependent livelihoods — agriculture, ranching, forestry, fishing and tourism — to the regional economy (Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO, 2015b). Of these branches, subsistence-based agriculture sustains some one million families throughout the region (Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO, 2016). This system, based on traditional methods of cultivation and resource use can no longer sustain local communities, given current levels of environmental degradation and the stresses that are foreseen as a result of climate change (CC). The study applied spatial autocorrelation techniques to European Space Agency’s GlobCover satellite data for three regions of analysis: (1) the Central American isthmus (CA region), (2) the Central American Dry Corridor (CADC region), and (3) those areas of Central America that are outside the CADC (Non-CADC region). Profiles of the land cover patterns for these three regions were then compared and the differences identified. The historical processes of deforestation associated with land colonization and agricultural expansion were then reviewed and shown to support the thesis that land use conversion, rather than natural factors alone, explains the differences in the regional land cover profiles. The research reported here is part of a series of studies undertaken to characterize the CADC and provide a knowledge base for projects aimed at advancing sustainability and CC resilience in the Dry Corridor.1

anomalies associated with the El Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO; FEWS NET, 2019). 2.1. Geography/Biogeography The Mesoamerican land bridge is positioned between the North and South American continents and two great bodies of water (the Caribbean Sea and the Pacific Ocean) and its climate is influenced by weather systems affecting both these areas. This convergence of hydroclimatic systems, along with the region’s varied terrain, has resulted in abundant biodiversity and relatively high species richness (Gillespie et al., 2000). Historically, the region was dominated by tropical dry forest that was once largely continuous from southern Mexico to South America (Willis et al., 2014) but which exists today only fragmentally (Janzen, 1988; Sabogal, 1992; Calvo-Alvarado et al., 2009). The CADC extends inland from the Pacific coast of the Central American (CA) isthmus, which varies between 100−400 km in width and is more than 1600 km in length. The region is tectonically and seismically active, leading to diverse landscapes (Marshall, 2007). Mountain ranges (cordilleras) running from the northwest to the southeast are characteristic of the region; elevations sharply decline toward sea level. Some 13.6 % of the land area of the CADC countries is situated in areas lying at elevations of five meters or lower (Center for International Earth Science Information Network-CIESIN-Columbia University, 2013). The land areas of each country in the CADC and the proportions of the region they encompass are described in Table 1. 2.2. Climate

2. Context and background

The wet season in Central America normally takes place from May to October. It is interrupted by the MSD during July or August, and then resumes. The dry season runs from December to April (Maldonado et al., 2016). The CADC has a drier climate than elsewhere on the isthmus and is prone to drought-like conditions (periods defined by anomalies in rainfall, delays in the onset of the rainy season, an extended MSD or a delay in the start of rainfall thereafter) that typically last between 12–36 months (van der Zee Arias et al., 2012, p. 8; Peralta Rodríguez et al., 2012, p. 8). These phenomena appear to be related to sea surface temperatures influenced by the ENSO (Imbach et al., 2017). These conditions produce hydrological and climatic uncertainty for local agricultural producers and ranchers and risks are expected to increase due to CC. Maurer et al. (2017) anticipate the lengthening of the MSD and significant drops in precipitation. Increased aridity and extreme hydro-climatic events (tropical storms, cold fronts, floods) have been projected by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Magrin et al., 2014, p. 1509). Such events have already exacted heavy losses in the agricultural sector (Calvo-Solano et al., 2018) and infrastructure (ECLAC, 2018, p. 51).

The CADC is situated in the Pacific watershed of Central America and extends eastward to include parts of Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and Panama. The CADC is marked by climatic and ecological parameters that differentiate it from other parts of the Mesoamerican isthmus (Van der Zee et al., 2012).2 Seasonal and inter-annual climate variability, manifested by drought cycles and dry spells, characterizes the region and is expected to become more pronounced due to climate change (Hidalgo et al., 2017). Extreme hydroclimatic events, including floods, rising aridity and cold waves, exacerbate the difficult social and economic conditions characteristic of the region (Pérez Briceño et al., 2016). More than eleven million people3 live in the CADC. Poverty rates are high (Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO, 2015b) and food insecurity and nutritional inadequacy are a fact of life for much of the regional population. This is all the more the case during cycles of drought and as a result of extreme events, such as the extended midsummer drought (MSD) that transpired during 2014–2015 (ECLAC et al., 2018, p. 42). At the time of writing (August 2019), a prolonged seasonal dry spell has left parts of the Dry Corridor environmentally stressed; these conditions may worsen as the result of precipitation

2.3. Climatic and environmental parameters Central America can, broadly, be divided into three ecological zones: 1) the humid tropics of the Caribbean lowlands, where rainfall levels are between 2000−6000 mm/year, 2) the central highlands, which are characterized by a cooler, temperate climate and lesser rainfall, and 3) the Pacific lowlands where rainfall is between 1000−1500 mm/year (Harvey et al., 2005). An oft-cited definition of the CADC defines the region in terms of drought risk (CIAT, World Bank and UNEP, 1999). According to this delimitation, the CADC experiences cycles of drought lasting four to six months. The drought risk is differentiated by three levels of severity (high, medium, low) that are defined by amount of rainfall, evapotranspiration rates and land cover (Van der Zee et al., 2012, p. 9; Peralta Rodríguez et al., 2012, p. 8). Central America is well-endowed with

1 Identifying knowledge-rich strategies for climate change-adaptive development in the CADC is the goal of the Integrated Program on the Central American Dry Corridor (IPCADC) a consortium of university-based professionals established in 2017 (Gotlieb et al., 2019). 2 Central America includes seven countries: Belize, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and Panama. Belize, which is on the Caribbean side of the isthmus, has no territory within the Dry Corridor. 3 Approximately 10.5 million people inhabited the contiguous CADC areas of El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Nicaragua (Van der Zee et al. (2012, p. 23). Considering natural growth along with the inhabitants of the Costa Rican Dry Corridor (the latter is estimated at approximately 110,000 people based on the July 2012 Household Survey (Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Censos, (INEC, Costa Rica) 2012), the approximate number of people living in the CADC is 11 million.

2

Land Use Policy xxx (xxxx) xxxx

Y. Gotlieb and J.D. García Girón

Among CA’s biomes, the tropical dry forests are estimated to have originally constituted 49 % of the region’s vegetation coverage (Griscom and Ashton, 2010), although this coverage label (TDF) is applied variably by practitioners of different disciplines (PortilloQuintero and Sánchez-Azofeifa, 2010; Murphy and Lugo, 1986). Willis et al. (2014) define TDF as being limited to areas where precipitation does not exceed 1800 mm/year and that are characterized by diverse vegetation that display marked seasonality. This includes a variety of sub-categories ranging from grasslands to tall forests conforming to both tropical and sub-tropical Holdridge life zones. The category would also include deciduous, semi-deciduous and semi-evergreen species as well as savannah and thorny woodlands systems thought to have once been TDFs (Griscom and Ashton, 2011). TDFs are characterized by more endemic species than humid forests. They are also endowed with high-quality timber and perform important functions in watershed maintenance (Tucker et al., 2005).

Table 1 Countries of the CA Dry Corridor. Country

Total area (Km2)

Country area within the CADC (Km2)

Percentage of CADC area, per country

Percentage of country area within CADC

Costa Rica El Salvador Guatemala Honduras Nicaragua Panama Total

51,177 20423 109153 112290 128220 75,104 496366

9713 17206 31038 54005 26392 3404 141757

7 12 22 38 19 2 100

19 84 28 48 21 5 –

water resources, yet the Pacific watershed, which includes the Dry Corridor, the region’s largest cities and 70 % of the region’s population, has access to only 30% of regional water resources (Global Water Partnership, 2016). The CIAT, World Bank and UNEP (1999) definition of the CADC is based on drought risk and includes areas in Panama hundreds of kilometers from the contiguous Dry Corridor. The description provided by Van der Zee et al. (2012) is more specific as it uses both drought risk and ecological criteria (particularly with respect to TDF), but does not encompass the Panamanian sections. The two definitions are compatible and the areas they include are displayed in Fig. 1. The CADC stretches inland from the Pacific littoral to the central premontane areas of Guatemala, Honduras (where it also extends over the central part of the country toward the Caribbean coast), Nicaragua and northwestern Costa Rica in areas associated with the tropical dry forest (TDF) ecosystem. Also included are the Arch of Panama (Darien Region) and other parts of that country, the Central Valley of Costa Rica and islets in northern Guatemala. Taken as a whole, the CADC constitutes a third of the land area of the countries of which it is a part.

2.5. Impacts of land conversion Land use conversion, by which one cover type is entirely replaced by another to accommodate changes in land use (Geist and Lambin, 2001) has environmental and socioeconomic impacts. Conversion affects climate (modifying surface-atmosphere exchanges), reduces biotic resources, alters local water cycles, and degrades soil (Lambin et al., 2003); Anderson et al., 2008). A study of Southeast Asia demonstrates that deforestation for agricultural expansion has amplified ENSO-related extremes of precipitation and temperature (Tölle et al., 2017). Australia, a dry region with many endemic species, has also lost a large proportion of forest cover due to land settlement. This has resulted in changing climate conditions, deteriorating land resources and imperiled ecosystems (Bradshaw, 2012). Throughout Latin America, land conversion for the purposes of spontaneous settlement, extensive agriculture, ranching and logging has had multiple impacts (Lambin et al., 2001). Further, it is a continuing process that produces new forest frontiers, each exploited in turn, as in the case of the Brazilian Amazon (Schielein and Börner, 2018). Whereas the initial settlers of the CADC were farming families working small plots, production gradually become dominated by landowners with large holdings, disadvantaging smallholders and leading to increasing poverty (Myers and Tucker, 1987; Chomitz et al., 2007). On the environmental front, cattle grazing, which has become a dominant landscape feature in the CADC, largely takes place on lands ill-suited to it (Farrow and Winograd, 2001) and depletes increasingly scarce water resources. These land use patterns and the environmental deterioration deriving from them are among the factors spurring rural outmigration in the region (World Food Programme et al., 2017).

2.4. Biodiversity, forests and vegetation Central America is highly diverse ecologically and encompasses a variety of forest biomes. Among these are the tropical rain and other broadleaved forests found along the Caribbean coasts of Belize, Honduras and the autonomous regions of Nicaragua,4 as well as parts of Costa Rica and Panama (Merrill, 1994, p. 59). Rainfall in these areas is typically between 2000−4000 mm/year (Foundation for the Autonomy and Development of the Atlantic Coast of Nicaragua (FADCANIC, 2019). In Guatemala’s largest department, Petén, 90 % of the land area is covered by humid and very humid tropical and sub-tropical forests (Irungaray et al., 2016, p. 60). Small areas of lowland pine savannah, wetlands and mangroves are also found in the region. In Guatemala’s highlands and along the mountain ranges of the Honduran and Costa Rican interior upland pine, oak and broad-leaved forests are present (Harvey et al., 2005). Cloud forests, which are found along upper montane slopes in the northern and southern mountain ranges of Honduras, the Guatemalan Highlands, Costa Rica’s Cordillera Central and mountainous areas of Panama, exhibit high levels of biological richness and endemism due to their isolation. These systems draw water directly from clouds (Nair et al., 2008) and they provide important environmental services, including serving as a source of downstream water (Imbach et al., 2017). Cloud forests, however, are particularly susceptible to rising surface temperature. An estimated 50 % reduction in the extent of this coverage over pre-colonial averages has been reported in Mexico and the Guatemalan highlands; these forests occupy just 1 % of CA area today (Ornelas et al., 2013).

2.6. Traditional systems of production – a chain of vulnerability Of the 57 Holdridge life zones found in Central America, 47 are characteristic of the CADC (Van der Zee et al., 2012). Peralta et al. (2012) has combined these 47 zones into 14 dominant groups where equivalent conditions prevail. These groups are made up of a few locally dominant livelihood sectors including subsistence agriculture, fishing, aquaculture, tourism, day labor, cattle raising, basic grain cultivation, intensive agriculture, and logging. A prevalent system of production in the CADC is the family farm (1−3 ha) engaged in the production of basic grains (maize, rice, beans). Smallholders, who represent approximately 60 % of agricultural producers in Central America, own just 6.5 % of the region’s growing surface (ECLAC et al., 2018, p. 70). These farmers work rainfed, lowyielding plots using traditional technologies characteristic of the maizebean (Mesoamerican) farming system (Dixon et al., 2001). Accordingly, there is little surplus available for markets, diets are limited, and nutritional levels are constrained (Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO, 2015b). Regional production does not suffice for domestic

4 North Atlantic Autonomous Region (RAAN) and the South Atlantic Autonomous Region (RAAS)

3

Land Use Policy xxx (xxxx) xxxx

Y. Gotlieb and J.D. García Girón

Fig. 1. The Central American Dry Corridor (integrating the delimitations of CIAT-World Bank and UNEP, 1999 and Van der Zee et al. (2012)).

consumption (ECLAC et al., 2018, p. 91). Therefore, these areas cannot be considered food self-sufficient. The average monthly income of these households from both farming and other sources is estimated to be approximately US$177 (Peralta et al., 2012, pp. 11–12), which provides little or no margin to cover contingencies such as droughts, plant diseases or extreme climatic events. Such events are particularly damaging to subsistence crops (Imbach et al., 2017). Rivera et al. (2015) describes the subsistence farming system common among CADC producers as resulting in a chain of vulnerability, one that is unsustainable given the larger physical, economic and institutional context: The intensive cultivation of small family plots for basic grain production depletes soils, is water-inefficient and leads to overall environmental degradation. Agricultural abandonment and migration frequently result from such conditions. Associated practices, such as the indiscriminate application of chemical fertilizers and pesticides,5 squatting and illegal land use, burning to clear fields and dispose of garbage, hunting, inefficient systems of production, along with forest clearing, threaten the region’s biodiversity (Dinerstein et al., 1991, p. 94) and result in multiple environmental impacts (Harvey et al., 2005, pp. 18–19). Among the latter are soil erosion, decreased fertility, waterlogging, river desiccation, soil encrustation, land destabilization (landslides and mudslides) and the breakdown of physical infrastructure such as roads and bridges (Van der Zee et al., 2012, p. 11; Rivera et al., 2015). The damage incurred to

the local communities, their natural resource base and the national economies is considerable. The unregulated expansion of agricultural and cattle production to marginal areas (rocky lands, slopes) after local resources have been exhausted is common, as are conflicts over land ownership and tenancy arrangements. These factors, combined with market vagaries, are part of a cycle that keeps these people in a state of poverty, food insecurity, ill-health and seasonal under-employment (Rivera et al., 2015) and contributes to migration (WFP Español, 2017). Inder (2015, 2016) intricately describes the environmental, economic, social and institutional factors that comprise this chain of vulnerability for communities in the Costa Rican Dry Corridor. Their situation is typical of other areas of the CADC. The impacts of extreme hydro-climatic events (drought, floods, and cold fronts) are acutely felt in the CADC due to the social vulnerability of its communities (Pérez Briceño et al., 2016). The resulting losses in food stocks, farm animals and to the primary sector overall has taken a mounting toll over the past several decades (Calvo-Solano et al., 2018). The 2014–2015 drought, for example, brought sharp declines in the harvest of staples, which underscored the fragile circumstances of these agrarian communities. El Salvador and Honduras suffered an estimated 60 % reduction in maize and Guatemala lost 80 % of its basic crops, including 55,000 metric tons of maize and 11,500 metric tons of beans (Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO, 2015a). More than half a million families, approximately two million people, suffered from food insecurity (Flores, 2014). This vulnerability will be heightened given the expected impact of CC in the region.

5 One CADC country, Costa Rica, has the highest rate of chemical pesticide use in the world (Araya, 2015).

4

Land Use Policy xxx (xxxx) xxxx

Y. Gotlieb and J.D. García Girón

3. Methods

(positive values) or dispersion (negative values) by identifying groups of neighboring domains based on similar values. Geary’s C uses the squared differences of a feature associated with a location and expresses the dissimilarity (Anselin, 2017). Nonetheless, Geary’s C is a test of spatial autocorrelation consistent with Moran’s I given that both statistics “capture the same aspects of spatial autocorrelation” (Sawada, 2001).

The research strategy employed in this study first aimed at characterizing the land cover profile of the CADC. We distinguish it from a) the CA region, which consists of the land area of the entire isthmus, and b) the Non-CADC region, which comprises those areas of CA that are not in the CADC. Land cover data were processed and analyzed for the CA, CADC, and Non-CADC regions separately and the results were then compared using statistical methods and GIS imaging (ArcMap 10.5 and GeoDa 1.12.1.16).

4. Results The proportions of land cover by category for the three regions are summarized in Table 2. Table 3 displays the results of the measures of statistical significance for the three most extensive land cover types found in CA. These results confirm the statistical significance of the regional differences in land cover for the three dominant types in Central America. The patterns characterizing the Dry Corridor and the NonCADC areas relating to forest cover and areas of mixed vegetation and mixed cropland are significantly different and the results are robust in this regard.

3.1. Data and spatial units The data used for this study were taken from the European Space Agency’s (ESA) GlobCover 2009 Project (V. 2) (ESA and UCLouvain, 2010; Bontemps et al. (2011)), which offers the most detailed and recent collection of land coverage maps available (Hengl, 2017). Other data sources were considered, but GlobCover proved superior in terms of resolution (300 m per pixel at full resolution) and the large number of land cover types (22) it detects (Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO, 2018).6 GlobCover data are also consistent with the FAO’s Land Cover Classification System (LCCS; Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO, 2018) and are validated at the pixel level against the values derived from the Committee on Earth Observation Satellites’ LANDNET (European Space Agency (ESA, 2014). Additionally, GlobCover downloads in GeoTIFF, a user-friendly format widely used in GIS systems, and utilizes a standard reference grid, the World Geodetic System 1984 (WGS 84). The data employed in the present study correspond to local-level administrative divisions, known in Spanish as municipios,7 that are spatially defined in the database of Global Administrative Areas (Center for Spatial Sciences, 2018). The CA countries have a total of 1203 municipios (also referred to below as domains) and of these 515 are wholly in the CADC and another 453 are partially within that region. The values extracted from the GlobCover 2009 dataset represent the percentage of area in the municipio corresponding to the different coverage types.

4.1. Spatial autocorrelation The first test of spatial autocorrelation, Moran’s I, produces results between -1 and 1. A value of 0 would indicate that differences observed are random. As the I statistic approaches -1, a dispersed pattern is suggested and as it approaches 1 a clustered pattern is indicated. The results for the Moran’s I analysis (Table 4) show that with respect to every form of land cover found in Central America in amounts of at least 1 % of the surface area, the probability that these patterns observed are due to random effects approaches zero (p = 0). The results for the Geary’s C statistic reinforce those obtained by Moran’s I and confirm that the land cover profiles of the CADC and NonCADC regions display different patterns.9 Due to the large number of observations compared (13 cover types multiplied by 1203 municipalities), the results of Geary’s C test are presented as maps in an associated article (Gotlieb and García Girón, 2019). The respective land cover profiles of the CADC and Non-CADC regions are displayed in Fig. 2.

3.2. Procedure

4.2. Data analysis

The percentages of each land cover type for the three analytic regions were calculated for the thirteen land cover types found in Central America. We subsequently calculated the proportions of these coverages for the three regions. We then tested whether the differences observed were statistically significant. The null hypothesis, that no differences exist between the regions with respect to land cover, was tested for the three most prevalent cover types8 using the Moran's I statistic, which determines whether the distribution of an attribute associated with a specific set of locations is characterized by a clustered, dispersed or random pattern. After generating the Moran’s I statistic, we employed a second measure of spatial autocorrelation, Geary’s C, to further corroborate our findings. The results obtained for the Geary’s C were then compared to those of Moran’s I. Moran’s index determines whether values tend toward aggregation

The null hypothesis that there are no differences in land cover patterns between the regions has been rejected, based on: a) the findings that the differences between the regional profiles are statistically significant (p < .001), b) the results of the Moran’s I test, (> 0) for every land cover category, which indicate contrasting aggregation patterns in each case, and c) corroboration of the Moran’s I results by a second test of spatial autocorrelation, Geary’s C. The results demonstrate that three land cover types (broadleaved evergreen or semi-deciduous forest, mosaic vegetation, mosaic cropland) together account for 87.1 % of the CA, 89 % of the CADC, and 86.4 % of the Non-CADC regions, albeit in different combinations. These cover types, along with three other classes found in much smaller quantities (each less than 4 % in all regions) including herbaceous vegetation, rainfed crops or water bodies, account for 98.2 %. 99 % and 98 % of the CA, CADC and Non-CADC regions, respectively. Analysis shows that broadleaved forest is the most prevalent in all regions, but proportions vary. This coverage extends over 52.4 % in the CA region to 59 % in the Non-CADC, yet comprises just 35.1 % of the CADC. In other words, there is 40 % less broad-leaved forest in the Dry Corridor than in Non-CADC areas.

6 Another study, undertaken by the Centro del Agua del Trópico Húmedo para América Latina y el Caribe (CATHALAC; Hernandez et al. (2011), analyzed CA land cover using satellite data from the NASA MODIS instrument, which provides 16 coverage classifications adapted for Central America from the Corine Land Cover Inventory (Copernicus Land Monitoring Service, n.d.). The data for this study could not be used in this study as it is not in the public domain. 7 In Costa Rica, the relevant unit is known as a cantón (pl. cantones). 8 These cover types together represent more than 80% of the coverage in each of the regions.

9 The clustering results produced by Moran’s I and Geary’s C can differ, as they do in this study, given the different measures they employ.

5

Land Use Policy xxx (xxxx) xxxx

Y. Gotlieb and J.D. García Girón

Table 2 Land Cover Profiles of the Regions. GlobCover Classification Number and Cover Type

Percent of total area

a

Cat. 40 Broadleaved evergreen or semi-deciduous forest Cat. 30 Mosaic vegetationb Cat. 20 Mosaic croplandc Cat. 140 Herbaceous vegetation (grassland, savannah or lichens/mosses) Cat. 14 Rainfed croplands Cat. 210 Water bodies Cat. 110 Mosaic forest or shrubland mixed with grasslandd Cat. 120 Mosaic grassland mixed with forest or shrub lande Cat. 170 Permanently flooded closed broadleaved forest or shrublandf Cat. 50 Broadleaved deciduous forest (> 5 m)g Cat. 130 Shrublandh Cat. 190 Artificial surfaces and associated areas (Urban areas > 50% Cat. 200 Bare areas Total Area a b c d e f g h

CA Region

CADC Region

Non-CADC Region

52.4 18.3 9.8 6.6 3.3 2.8 2.7 2.3 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.1 100

35.1 27.1 15.3 11.8 1.9 0.4 3.8 3.6 0.2 0.6 0.1 0.3 0.0 100

59 15 7.7 4.7 3.8 3.7 2.3 1.8 0.8 0.5 0.4 0.0 0.1 100

Stands > 5 m in height. Consisting of grassland/shrub land/forest mixed cropland in proportions of 50–70 % and 20–50 %, respectively. Consisting of crops mixed with vegetation (grasslands/thickets/forests) in proportions of 50–70 % and 20–50 %, respectively. Consisting of mosaic forest or shrubland mixed with grassland in proportions of 50–70 % and grassland 20–50 %, respectively. Consisting of mosaic grassland mixed with forest or shrubland in proportions of 50–70 % and 20–50 %, respectively. Consisting of broadleaved forest closed in amounts greater than 40 % of area or shrubland that are permanently flooded with either saline or brackish water. Consisting of broadleaved deciduous forest with stands > 5m in height and closed in at least 40 % of their area. Consisting of shrubland with broadleaved or needleleaved, evergreen or deciduous species that are closed to open in more than 15 % of its area.

Table 3 Tests of Statistical Significance of Differences in Land Cover Patterns. GlobCover Category

Region

Broadleaved evergreen or semi-deciduous forest (Cat. 40) Mosaic vegetation (grassland / shrubland/forest) / cropland (Cat. 30) Mosaic cropland / vegetation (grassland / shrubland/forest) (20-50%) (Cat. 20)

t-Test

CADC Non-CADC Non-CADC CADC CADC Non-CADC

Mann Whitney U test

M

SD

df

t

p

Mdn

U

p

33.02 49.77 31.26 19.80 15.67 10.45

27.62 29.56 24.37 16.06 13.5 10.84

803

−9.47

< .001

105930

1104

9.5

< .001

981

7.13

< .001

24.71 51.35 29.89 16.53 12.96 66.73

.001

182890

.001

174780

.001

Table 4 Moran's I Statistic for all CA Covers over One Percent in Area. GlobCover Category Number 40 30 20 140 14 110 120

Cover Broadleaved evergreen or semi-deciduous forest Mosaic vegetation Mosaic cropland Herbaceous vegetation Rainfed croplands Mosaic forest or shrubland mixed with grassland Mosaic grassland mixed with forest or shrubland

CA Region* 0.43 0.97 0.6 0.45 0.16 0.55 0.33

Moran’s I CADC Region* 0.43 0.97 0.6 0.39 0.23 0.69 0.39

Non-CADC Region* 0.55 0.85 0.66 0.53 0.21 0.49 0.6

* p-value=0 for all cover types.

These asymmetric patterns continue regarding the other extensive land cover types as well. The next significant coverage in all three regions, mosaic vegetation, is nearly a third more prevalent in the CADC (27.1 %) than in the CA (18.3 %) and is nearly twice as extensive in the former than in the Non-CADC region (15 %). Similarly, with respect to the third most prevalent coverage in all three regions, mosaic cropland, this extends over 9.8 % of area in the CA region, 7.7 % in the Non-CADC region, yet 15.3 % in the CADC. With a value of 11.8 % for grassland, savannah or lichens/mosses (herbaceous vegetation), the CADC has nearly double the percentage of this coverage than does the CA region (6.6 %) and nearly 2.5 times more than in the Non-CADC region (4.7 %). It is important to emphasize that mosaic vegetation, mosaic cropland and savannah, which are considerably more abundant in the CADC

than in the Non-CADC areas, are consistent with agricultural and ranching activities. This is also the case concerning mosaic forest or shrubland, which is present in 3.8 % of the CADC, yet represents only 2.7 % in CA and 2.3 % in the Non-CADC. Similarly, mosaic grassland (50–70%) / forest or shrubland (20–50%) is represented twice as much (3.6 %) in the CADC relative to the Non-CADC region (1.8 %). These patterns for all land cover types found in appreciable amounts in the CA are consistent with changes associated with land use, specifically land conversion by deforestation to accommodate agricultural and ranching activities (Lambin et al., 2001). 4.3. Geospatial patterns The regions’ land coverage displays distinct geospatial patterns. 6

Land Use Policy xxx (xxxx) xxxx

Y. Gotlieb and J.D. García Girón

Fig. 2. Land Cover Profile of CADC and Non-CADC Regions, % area by cover type.

Mosaic vegetation mixed with crops are is typical of cultivation in drier areas found adjacent to the Pacific coast, from the Guanacaste Province of Costa Rica through Nicaragua and into El Salvador, as well as inland in those countries and Honduras. Interestingly, there is little presence of this type in the Guatemala Dry Corridor where herbaceous crops such as sugarcane are cultivated; it is the second-most lucrative cash crop for the country after coffee (Melgar et al., 2012). Land with mosaic coverage of crops and vegetation accounts for 10 % of total coverage in Central America, and is spatially dominant in the CADC in two areas: 1) around the Gulf of Fonseca at the borderlands of Nicaragua, Honduras and El Salvador (and inland in the latter), and 2) along the Pacific coast of Nicaragua and further south in the Guanacaste province of Costa Rica. Where it is found in Guatemala, along the southern coast, it does not exceed 15 % of the total area in the domains where it is located. Grassland and savannah constitute only 6 % of total CA coverage. This is mainly pasturage associated with livestock production and sugarcane cultivation. Analysis of this coverage type indicates focal rather than extensive distribution. Four of the six areas where this coverage is found are within the contiguous Dry Corridor, a fifth is in the Central Valley of Costa Rica and the sixth is located in the Arch of Panama, a dry zone. Pasturage exists in amounts greater than 20 % in the central and northern sector of the Guanacaste Province in Costa Rica. Another concentration is in the area of the Matagalpa Department, Nicaragua,

where it is found in amounts greater than 40 % of the area. An additional focal area is the northwest of El Salvador where coverage also exceeds 40 %. The northernmost area of the CADC where this coverage is prevalent is the central and western Guatemala where pasture and related coverage are found in amounts greater than 55 %. Notably, with the exception of Costa Rica’s Central Valley, extensive pasturage is nearly absent in CA outside of the CADC. This coverage exists in Central America almost exclusively in the Dry Corridor, albeit in focal areas. Mosaic coverage of shrubland and grassland constitutes just 3 % of the total area of Central America. It is highly focalized in the CADC, specifically in the central zones of Honduras and Guatemala, although its proportion varies widely from 10 to 70% of the total area in the domains where it is found. The municipalities of Managua, Granada and Masaya in Nicaragua have shrub cover greater than 5 %, constituting another focal area within the CADC. The spatial distribution of domains with high proportions of grassland (50–70%), and smaller amounts of forest or shrubland, comprises a small proportion (2.2 %) of the area of CA and is found in two focal areas of the region. The first is within the CADC and is located in an area of sugarcane production in Guatemala. Lesser amounts are found in areas surrounding large urban settlements in Nicaragua, Honduras and El Salvador. Rainfed crops, among them grains, legumes and fruit trees, comprise only 3.3 % of the land area in Central America but are nonetheless 7

Land Use Policy xxx (xxxx) xxxx

Y. Gotlieb and J.D. García Girón

Fig. 3. Urban regions of CADC countries (data source: Wang et al., 2017).

Extensive land clearing is implicated in these patterns. Uniform data on changes in Central American forest cover for the pre-1990 period is scant (Bray, 2010). However, Kaimowitz (1996) assembled statistics for 1950–1990 from diverse sources (Fig. 4). El Salvador is not included in this comparison as by the early 1950s it had very little land left under forest cover (Kaimowitz, 1996; Bray, 2010). Of the four countries depicted, Honduras showed the greatest losses in tree cover in absolute numbers (16.6 million ha) and Costa Rica the least (5.7 million ha) between 1950–1990. Most of the forested lands were transformed directly into pasturage, which likely also incorporated tracts initially used for crop cultivation by small producers (Kaimowitz, 1996). More reliable data exists concerning forest loss for the period from 1990 onward (Fig. 5). The rate of loss of forest cover as a percentage of total land area has declined since 1990, although tree-cover loss has continued in all countries with the exception of Costa Rica (Fig. 6), which has reversed deforestation (World Bank, 2016). The spatial distribution of forest loss for the CADC and the NonCADC has been calculated for the period from 2001 to 2016 (Table 5) and the geospatial trend is clear: Greater losses took place outside of the CADC than within it during that period. From the above we see that for the period 2000–2016, 84 % of the deforestation in CA occurred outside the Dry Corridor region – largely because in the latter most forest cover had already been lost. This asymmetry has significant implications, as discussed below.

vital to the diet of the regional population. This form of cultivation, which is practiced on only 1.9 % of the CADC’s surface area, does not occur in the CADC in large aggregations. This to be expected, given the lesser amount of rainfall in the Dry Corridor relative to areas outside of it. CADC domains with approximately 30 % of this kind of coverage can be found only in the Copán Department of Honduras, which is mostly, but not entirely, in the CADC. In summary, the geospatial analysis demonstrates that, other than rainfed crops, all forms of coverage associated with small-scale agriculture and animal husbandry, are more dominant in the Dry Corridor than in other areas of Central America. 4.4. Built-up areas Built-up areas associated with urbanization and roadways constitute less than 1 % of CA land area, yet they represent an important difference in the land cover between the CADC and Non-CADC regions. As Fig. 3 shows, with the exception of Panama City, all of the major cities of CA are at least partially within the CADC. Aside from urban areas, roadways and other infrastructure associated with export-oriented activities and domestic markets also impact on land cover and contribute to deforestation (Tucker et al., 2005). 4.5. Deforestation Key differences in the coverage profiles of the CADC and Non-CADC regions are defined by two trends that mirror one another in the Dry Corridor: a) significantly lesser proportions of forest cover, and b) greater percentages of coverage associated with farming and grazing.

5. Discussion Forests today comprise a significantly smaller proportion of the land 8

Land Use Policy xxx (xxxx) xxxx

Y. Gotlieb and J.D. García Girón

Fig. 4. Decline of Forest Cover 1950–1990, after Kaimowitz, 1996, p. 6.

Fig. 5. Data Source: World Development Indicators.

9

Land Use Policy xxx (xxxx) xxxx

Y. Gotlieb and J.D. García Girón

Fig. 6. Data source: World Bank (2018).

regions of Central America, beginning in the mid-1800s, took place there for several reasons. Drier areas produce abundant biomass during rainy months while offering relief in the dry season from the onerous precipitation that negatively affects both agriculturalists and their animals in wetter areas (Slater Museum of Natural History, University of Puget Sound, n.d.). Diseases were less common than in humid areas, the soils were rich and timber was of higher quality and was more easily cleared (Myers and Tucker, 1987; Harvey et al., 2005; Bray, 2010; Griscom and Ashton, 2011). Frontier migrants who engaged in subsistence agriculture comprised the original drivers of deforestation (Bray, 2010; López-Carr and Burgdorfer, 2013). The historical trend entailed the expansion of agricultural lands rather than agricultural intensification (Harvey et al., 2005, p. 25; López-Carr and Burgdorfer, 2013). Jones (1990) characterizes the settlement process as resulting mainly from spontaneous colonization by families seeking to migrate from the coffee and dairy production centers in the Central Valley of Costa Rica, the Pacific coastal plain in Nicaragua and Honduras, and the latter’s highland regions. This cohered with a cultural ethos of expanding the national space by conquering frontier woodlands and was often supported by the central governments. Social prestige associated with the ownership of land and cattle also contributed to this process (Jones, 1990). A discussion of land tenancy and the political economy underlying these processes is beyond the scope of this paper. However, the relationship between land ownership and the expansion of ranching and extensive agriculture in the region is an important link in the process as land clearing was used by both migrants and absentee owners to establish property rights (Jones, 1990; López-Carr and Burgdorfer, 2013). Kaimowitz (1996) relates that small-scale producers cleared land in exchange for tenancy rights accorded by mostly absentee claimants who sought to consolidate and expand their holdings. Myers and Tucker (1987) document how this resulted in large concentrations of cleared land held by wealthy owners.

Table 5 Regional Distribution of Forest Loss, 2001–2016. Year

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total

Reduction in Forest Area, Km2 Total CA

CADC Region

1954 1952 2152 1422 2846 1900 3090 2525 2993 3650 2022 1957 1921 2540 1784 5949 40657

602 308 343 286 340 346 383 366 352 335 323 318 242 287 262 1212 6305

CADC Forest Loss as % of Total

31 16 16 20 12 18 12 14 12 9 16 16 13 11 15 20 16

Data: Hansen et al., 2013.

in the CADC than in Non-CADC areas and this is mirrored by the opposite trend: With the exception of rainfed crops, land use associated with agricultural activity and cattle raising is more predominant in the CADC than in the Non-CADC areas. These spatial features are consistent with the historical record of colonization in the post-Columbus period10 which favored temperate areas over tropical ones (Jones, 1990). Human settlement along the Pacific coast and central highland 10 Myers and Tucker (1987) and Bray (2010) describe earlier cycles of deforestation by the Mayans and later by the Spaniards.

10

Land Use Policy xxx (xxxx) xxxx

Y. Gotlieb and J.D. García Girón

and mid-sized (≥ 2.5 km2 ≤ 10 km2) blocks. Smaller concentrations have greater vulnerability to human disturbance (Portillo-Quintero and Sánchez-Azofeifa, 2010). Deforestation continues throughout Central America (Fig. 7), though the spatial patterns have changed significantly and have given way to a complicated array of deforestation, limited forest recovery and protection (Bray, 2010). Redo et al. (2012) characterize the loss of tree cover as being asynchronic by biome (humid versus temperate). Deforestation was focused during the period 2000–2010 in the humid Caribbean areas of the region given that “dry forests of the highlands and the Pacific coast have a much longer colonization history…and as a result very little remaining land to deforest.” The remaining forest cover in Central America mostly comprises broadleaved forests on the Caribbean side of the isthmus (Harvey et al., 2005; Bray, 2010). Accordingly, land use conversion for agriculture and related activities continues in Central America, albeit with a shift of spatial patterns. While Redo et al. (2012) report that there was a net gain of 4730 km2 in regional coniferous forests and 2054 km2 in dry forests from 2001 to 2010, this still left a deficit in forest cover given the net losses in moist forests, particularly along the Caribbean coasts of Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and Costa Rica (Bray, 2010). Significantly, the modest regrowth in the dry forests appears to be due to agricultural abandonment and emigration and parallels the opposite trend in tropical areas where deforestation of humid forests by small-scale producers is increasing (López-Carr and Burgdorfer, 2013).

5.1. Market catalysts Export-oriented crops, at first including cotton but later principally coffee, were increasingly cultivated in the CADC during the first decades of the 1900s followed by expanding beef production in the postWorld War II period (Imbach et al., 2017; Myers and Tucker, 1987). Commercial ranching peaked in the 1970s and then declined in the 1980s and 1990s, due largely to international market forces, but not before it had resulted in the extensive deforestation of the region (Kaimowitz, 1996). In the case of the Costa Rican Dry Corridor, the beef industry was the “single most influential driver of deforestation” (Calvo-Alvarado et al., 2009). Significantly, only 15–20% of land devoted to livestock in the region was suitable for grazing, resulting in the increasing use of marginal lands, land degradation, the depletion of water stocks and the straining of environmental services generally (Farrow and Winograd, 2001). Other economic activities including cement production, energy production, hydrocarbon and mineral extraction are increasingly significant contributors to deforestation in the region, particularly in the Guatemalan, Honduran and Panamanian sectors of the Dry Corridor where mining concessions have been granted (Bebbington et al., 2018). Nonetheless, land clearing for agricultural and ranching purposes has been the historically dominant causes of forest loss in the CADC. 5.2. Deforestation and forest recovery: asynchronic trends by biome Deforestation in CA was particularly devastating to the TDFs of the CADC. Areas with TDF coverage today are the remnants of a vast stretch of land that extended from Mexico to South America, an estimated 550,000 km2 at the time of the Spanish conquest (Janzen, 1988). Today, TDFs are one of the most vulnerable ecosystems in the world (Janzen, 1988; Portillo-Quintero and Sánchez-Azofeifa, 2010) and the remaining coverage of this forest type in Central America represents only 1.7 % of the estimated original extent, contrasting with the global retention rate of TDFs of nearly 35 % (Calvo-Alvarado et al., 2009). The fragments of TDF that do remain are relatively large (≥10 km2) in El Salvador and Honduras, whereas Costa Rica, Guatemala and Nicaragua have a high proportion of critical-sized (small (≤2.5 km2)

5.3. Limited recovery The main focus of reforestation in the CADC has been in the Guanacaste Province of Costa Rica (Calvo-Alvarado et al., 2009) with forest cover now found in 48 % of the province (Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganadería, 2016). The country’s successes in reforestation were achieved through a combination of conservation policies (such as the establishment of protected areas and restrictions on timber extraction), as well as such policies such as payment for environmental services (Buckingham and Hanson, 2015). It should be noted that El Salvador has also seen some regeneration of forests (Calvo-Alvarado

Fig. 7. Data set description: Hansen et al., 2013. 11

Land Use Policy xxx (xxxx) xxxx

Y. Gotlieb and J.D. García Girón

Fig. 8. Greenhouse gas emissions due to land conversion. Source: Global Forest Watch, 2019b.

the CADC has 2.5 times more of this type of cover than the Non-CADC region (4.7 %). While climate, along with topography, soil and other physical factors determine land cover, these natural factors do not suffice to explain the differences between the CADC and Non-CADC profiles. Tropical dry forests were the dominant land cover along the Pacific coast and in the central highlands of the isthmus until the onset of intensive colonization some two centuries ago. We conclude that land clearing for the purposes of expanding agricultural production and ranching was the primary driver of land cover change in the region. These changes were not simply subtle modifications in land cover that retained the preexisting coverage, but complete conversion (Lambin et al., 2003). This process began gradually with migrant farm families clearing land for settlement purposes. This trend gained momentum during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries and spread throughout the region. It then accelerated during the second part of the twentieth century with the expansion of the large-scale cultivation of cash crops (principally coffee) and beef production. These commodities were produced to meet foreign market demand and, to a lesser extent, rising consumption in the CADC countries. Underlying factors, such as cultural influences (e.g. social prestige associated with cattle ranching) and land tenancy practices, played an indirect or supporting role in this process. There is a distinct spatial trend to deforestation in Central America with the longest temporal trajectory beginning in the Pacific west, then moving to the central highlands and only afterwards to the Caribbean side of the isthmus; in other words, from lands associated with the CADC and only later to Non-CADC areas (Harvey et al., 2005). Moreover, while there appears to be some stabilization of temperate forests in the CADC (Bray, 2010), rural-rural migration of small-scale producers is a source of deforestation in the new agricultural frontiers of the humid eastern seaboard (López-Carr and Burgdorfer, 2013). Given that these frontiers are situated in indigenous, protected or ecologically fragile areas, these lands are especially at risk due to the same activities that led to deforestation of the CADC forests. This dynamic has already resulted in conflict as in the case of rural-rural migrants who have settled in the Miskitu areas of Nicaragua (Robles, 2016). Settlers from the Dry Corridor have been identified among the new migrants along the Caribbean Coast (Silva, 2017). Given projected climate change impacts, small-scale, subsistencebased farming using traditional methods cannot provide a basis for sustainable development in this region. Severe climate events have already affected the primary sector, incurring losses in basic grains, other crops and livestock (Calvo-Solano et al., 2018), with particularly

et al., 2009), having gained 8600 ha of forest during the period from 2001 to 2012, yet losses of tree cover left it with a negative balance through 2017 (Global Forest Watch, 2019a). 5.4. Ecological and environmental aspects Central America’s rich biodiversity and ecosystems are imperiled by land cover change, particularly by deforestation and unplanned development (Gillespie et al., 2000). Among the region’s ecosystems, broadleaved forests will have a “significantly high percentage” of the serious impact that is expected from changes in the climate, though this will vary with altitude (higher elevations being more resilient) and with the severity of the climate change (Anderson et al., 2008). Extreme hydro-climatic events (droughts, floods) have already had an impact on the region (Calvo-Solano et al., 2018; Pérez Briceño et al., 2016) and the IPCC describes the region as being particularly vulnerable to heightened evapotranspiration, decreased precipitation, overall warming and extreme heat events (Magrin et al., 2014, p. 1509). Experts maintain that the tropical dry forests’ ecosystems should be considered “severely threatened” (Gillespie et al., 2000; Magrın et al., 2007, p. 584; Blackie et al., 2014). Although Central America is responsible for only 0.8 % of net total global greenhouse gases (GHGs) emissions (ECLAC et al., 2018; p. 16), the contribution of land use conversion associated with farming and ranching as a share of total GHG emissions is significant (Fig. 8); it accounts for over two-thirds of these discharges in Honduras and Nicaragua and over 40 % in Guatemala. There is virtually no land available to convert for these uses in El Salvador while in Costa Rica emissions due to this cause have been reversed due to reforestation efforts. In addition to GHG emissions, other environmentally damaging effects of prevailing agricultural and cattle-raising practices include soil compaction and field clearing by burning, the latter being common in the region (Gillespie et al., 2000; Hernandez et al., 2011). 6. Conclusion This study demonstrates that the CADC and Non-CADC regions differ significantly with respect to land cover. Their respective cover profiles reveal that broadleaved and semi-deciduous forest cover is a third less prevalent in the CADC than in the Non-CADC, while nearly twice as much mosaic vegetation is found in the CADC (27.1 %) than in the Non-CADC region (15 %). Similarly, with respect to mosaic cropland, with 15.3 % of its land area displaying this cover, the CADC has nearly double that of the Non-CADC (7.7 %). As for herbaceous vegetation (grassland, savannah or lichens/mosses), with a value of 11.8 % 12

Land Use Policy xxx (xxxx) xxxx

Y. Gotlieb and J.D. García Girón

deleterious effects on vulnerable communities (Pérez Briceño et al., 2016). Policies aimed at building resilience in the region should promote livelihoods which: 1) provide food security by incorporating crop varieties that tolerate rising heat and changing precipitation patterns, 2) transition away from export-oriented monoculture that is vulnerable to climate impacts and market volatility 3) encourage economic activities leading to forest recovery, and 4) employ agro-ecological systems that conserve and enrich soils and reduce water waste. Capacity-building, expanding social services and continuing land reform are necessary to support these activities.

2019. Center for Spatial Sciences, University of California, Davis, 2018. Data, World Data, GADM Version 3.6. Last accessed March 8, 2019. https://spatial.ucdavis.edu/data/. Chomitz, K.M., Buys, P., De Luca, G., Thomas, T.S., Wertz-Kanounnikoff, S.W., 2007. At Loggerheads? Agricultural Expansion, Poverty Reduction, and Environment in the Tropical Forests. World Bank Publicationshttps://doi.org/10.1596/978-0-82136735-3. Last accessed March 7, 2019. CIAT, World Bank, UNEP, 1999. Climate Risk Index. Last accessed March 8, 2019. http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTEEI/811099-1115809852605/20486433/ ClimateRiskIndex.pdf. Copernicus Land Monitoring Service, 2019. CORINE Land Cover (n.d.). Last accessed March 8, 2019. https://land.copernicus.eu/pan-european/corine-land-cover. Dinerstein, E., Olson, D., Graham, D.J., Webster, A.L., Primm, S.A., Bookbinder, M.P., Ledec, G., 1991. A Conservation Assessment of the Terrestrial Ecoregions of Latin America and the Caribbean (English). World Bank, Washington DC Last accessed August 28, 2019. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/ 957541468270313045/A-conservation-assessment-of-the-terrestrial-ecoregions-ofLatin-America-and-the-Caribbean. Dixon, J., Gibbon, D., Gulliver, A., 2001. Chapter Seven. Latin America and Caribbean, in Farming Systems and Poverty: Improving Farmers’ Livelihoods in a Changing World (English). World Bank, Washington, DC http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/ en/126251468331211716/Farming-systems-and-poverty-improving-farmers-livelihoods-in-a-changing-world. Last accessed March 8, 2018. ECLAC (Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean), CAC (Central American Agricultural Council), COMISCA (Council of Ministers of Health of Central America), CCAD (Central American Commission for Environment and Development), COSEFIN (Council of Ministers of Finance/Treasury of Central America and Dominic Republic), SIECA (Secretariat of Central American Economic Integration), SICA (Central American Integration System), UKAID (United Kingdom Department of International Development), DANIDA (Danish International Development Agency), 2018. Climate Change in Central America: Potential Impacts and Public Policy Options. LC/MEX/L.1196, Mexico City, Mexico. Last accessed March 7, 2019. https://repositorio.cepal.org/bitstream/handle/11362/39150/S1800827_en.pdf? sequence=7&isAllowed=y. European Space Agency (ESA), 2014. MERIS Surface Reflectance Time Series. Last accessed March 8, 2019. https://www.esa-landcover-cci.org/?q=node/160. European Space Agency (ESA), Université Catholique de Louvain (UCLouvain), 2010. GlobCover 2009 (Global Land Cover Map, V. 2). Last accessed March 8, 2019. http://due.esrin.esa.int/page_globcover.php. Famine Early Warning System Network (FEWS NET), 2019. Irregular Rainfall Affects the Poorest Households in Central America and Haiti. June 2019. Last accessed on June 25, 2019. http://fews.net/central-america-and-caribbean. Farrow, A., Winograd, M., 2001. Land use modelling at the regional scale: an input to rural sustainability indicators for Central America. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 85 (1-3), 249–268. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8809(01)00192-X. Last accessed March 9, 2019. Flores, C., 2014. Record Drought in Central America: Four Countries, 40 Days without Rain, Two Million Facing Hunger. World Bank, Washington. Sept. 10, 2014. http:// www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2014/09/10/sequias-centroamerica. Last accessed March 11, 2019. Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO), 2015a. Major Crop Losses in Central America Due to El Niño. Last accessed March 8, 2019. http://www.fao.org/news/story/en/ item/328614/icode/. Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO), 2015b. Disaster Risk Programme to Strengthen Resilience in the Dry Corridor in Central America. Last accessed March 7, 2019. http://www.fao.org/emergencies/resources/documents/resources-detail/en/ c/330164/. Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO), 2016. Dry Corridor: FAO in Emergencies. Drought Emergency in the Dry Corridor in Central America. Last accessed March 7, 2019. http://www.fao.org/emergencies/crisis/dry-corridor/en/. Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO), 2018. GlobCover land cover maps (GlobCover). Land Water Last accessed March 8, 2019. http://www.fao.org/landwater/land/land-governance/land-resources-planning-toolbox/category/details/en/ c/1036356/. Foundation for the Autonomy and Development of the Atlantic Coast of Nicaragua (FADCANIC), 2019. Agroforestry and Sustainable Development. Last accessed March 8, 2019. http://www.fadcanic.org.ni/?q=node/104. Geist, H., Lambin, E., 2001. What Drives Tropical Deforestation? A Meta-analysis of Proximate and Underlying Causes of Deforestation Based on Subnational Case Study Evidence. Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium: Land-use and Land-cover Change (LUCC). Project IV. International Human Dimensions Programme on Global Environmental Change (IHDP) V. International Geosphere-biosphere Programme (IGBP) VI. Title VII. Collection: LUCC Report Series; 4. Gillespie, T.W., Grijalva, A., Farris, C.N., 2000. Diversity, composition, and structure of tropical dry forests in Central America. Plant Ecol. 147 (1), 37–47. https://doi.org/ 10.1023/A:1009848525399. Last accessed March 7, 2019. Global Forest Watch, 2019a. “El Salvador” (n.d.a). Last accessed March 8, 2019. https:// www.globalforestwatch.org/dashboards/country/SLV?category=forest-change. Global Forest Watch, 2019b. “Historical Emissions in Costa rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua” (n.d.b.). Last accessed March 9, 2019. https://www. globalforestwatch.org/dashboards/global. Global Water Partnership, 2016. Integrated Water Resources Management in Central America: the Over-riding Challenge of Managing Transboundary Waters. Technical Focus Paper. Stockholm: Global Water Partnership Secretariat. Last accessed March 8, 2019. https://www.gwp.org/globalassets/global/toolbox/publications/technicalfocus-papers/tfp_central_america.pdf.

Acknowledgements The authors wish to acknowledge the funding of this research through the following Vicerrectoría de Investigación, Universidad de Costa Rica. MICITT-CONICIT grants: V.I. 805-B7-286 (UCREA), B6-143 and B7-507 (CONICIT-MICITT), B0-810, A4-906 (PESCTMA) 805-B8-766 (Redes Temáticas) and B9-454 (Grupos). Additionally, the authors wish to acknowledge the European Space Agency and the ESA GlobCover 2009 Project for making available data essential to their research. References Anderson, E.R., Cherrington, E.A., Flores, A.I., Perez, J.B., Carrillo, R., Sempris, E., 2008. Potential Impacts of Climate Change on Biodiversity in Mexico, Central America and the Dominican Republic. CATHALAC (Centro del Agua del Trópico Húmedo para América Latina y el Caribe)/USAID (United States Agency for International Development), Panama City, Panama, pp. 105 pp.. Anselin, L., 2017. A Local Indicator of Multivariate Spatial Association: Extending Geary’s C (sic). Center for Spatial Data Science. University of Chicago Last accessed March 8, 2019. https://s3.amazonaws.com/geoda/docs/LA_multivariateGeary1.pdf. Araya, J., 2015. Costa Rica es el Consumidor Más Voraz de Plaguicidas en el Mundo. Seminario Universidad. Last accessed on May 27, 2019. https:// semanariouniversidad.com/pais/costa-rica-es-el-consumidor-mas-voraz-deplaguicidas-en-el-mundo/. Bebbington, A.J., Humphreys Bebbington, D., Sauls, L.A., Rogan, J., Agrawal, S., Gamboa, C., Imhof, A., Johnson, K., Rosa, H., Royo, A., Toumbourou, T., Verdum, R., 2018. Resource extraction and infrastructure threaten forest cover and community rights. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 115 (52), 13164–13173. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas. 1812505115. Last accessed March 8, 2019. Blackie, R., Baldauf, C., Gautier, D., Gumbo, D., Kassa, H., Parthasarathy, N., Paumgarten, F., Sola, P., Pulla, S., Waeber, P., Sunderland, T.C.H., 2014. Tropical Dry Forests: The State of Global Knowledge and Recommendations for Future Research Vol. 2 CIFORhttps://doi.org/10.17528/cifor/004408. Last accessed March 9, 2019. Blanco, P.D., Colditz, R.R., López Saldaña, G., Hardtke, L.A., Llamas, R.M., Mari, N.A., Fischer, A., Caride, C., Aceñolaza, P.G., del Valle, H.F., Lillo-Saavedra, M., Coronato, F., Opazo, S.A., Morelli, F., Anaya, J.A., Sione, W.F., Zamboni, P., Arroyo, V.B., 2013. A land cover map of Latin America and the Caribbean in the framework of the SERENA project. Remote Sens. Environ. 132, 13–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse. 2012.12.025. Last accessed March 7, 2019. Bontemps, S., Defourny, P., Bogaert, E.V., Arino, O., Kalogirou, V., Perez, J.R., 2011. GLOBCOVER 2009 Products Description and Validation Report. Technical report, Université catholique de Louvain (UCL) and European Space Agency (ESA) February 2011. Bradshaw, C.J., 2012. Little left to lose: deforestation and forest degradation in Australia since European colonization. J. Plant Ecol. 5 (1), 109–120. https://doi.org/10.1093/ jpe/rtr038. Last accessed March 7, 2019. Bray, D.B., 2010. Forest cover dynamics and Forest transitions in Mexico and Central America: towards a “Great restoration”? In: In: Nagendra, H., Southworth, J. (Eds.), Reforesting Landscapes. Landscape Series, vol 10 Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi. org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9656-3_5. Last accessed March 8, 2019. Buckingham, K., Hanson, C., 2015. The Restoration Diagnostic. Case Example: Costa Rica. World Resources Institute, Washington, DC Last accessed March 9, 2019. http:// wriorg.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/WRI_Restoration_Diagnostic_Case_Example_ Costa_Rica.pdf. 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. Manage. 258 (6), 931–940. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco. 2008.10.035. Last accessed March 7, 2019. Calvo-Solano, O., Quesada-Hernández, L., Hidalgo, H., Gotlieb, Y., 2018. Impacts of drought in the primary sector of the Central American Dry Corridor. Agron. Mesoam. 29 (3), 695–709. https://doi.org/10.15517/ma.v29i3.30828. Last accessed March 8, 2019. Center for International Earth Science Information Network-CIESIN-Columbia University, 2013. Low Elevation Coastal Zone (LECZ) Urban-Rural Population and Land Area Estimates, Version 2 [Data set]. NASA Socioeconomic Data and Applications Center (SEDAC), Palisades, NY. https://doi.org/10.7927/h4mw2f2j. Last accessed March 7,

13

Land Use Policy xxx (xxxx) xxxx

Y. Gotlieb and J.D. García Girón Gotlieb Y., García Girón J.D. Data Utilization in the Comparison of the Land Cover Characteristics of Central American Regions, under review. Gotlieb, Y., Pérez-Briceño, P.M., Hidalgo, H., Alfaro, E., 2019. The Central American Dry Corridor: a consensus statement and its background. Revista Mesoamericana de Biodiversidad y Cambio Climático 3 (5), 42–51. Griscom, H.P., Ashton, M.S., 2011. Restoration of dry tropical forests in Central America: a review of pattern and process. For. Ecol. Manage. 261 (10), 1564–1579. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.foreco.2010.08.027. Last accessed on March 8, 2019. Hansen, M.C., Potapov, P.V., Moore, R., Hancher, M., Turubanova, S.A., Tyukavina, A., Thau, D., Stehman, S.V., Goetz, S.J., Loveland, T.R., Kommareddy, A., Egorov, L., Chini, L., Justice, C.O., Townshend, J.R.G., 2013. High-resolution global maps of 21st-century forest cover change. Science 342 (6160), 850–853. Data available online from: http://earthenginepartners.appspot.com/science-2013-global-forest. Last accessed March 8, 2019. Harvey, C., Alpízar, F., Chacón, M., Madrigal, R., 2005. Assessing Linkages between Agriculture and Biodiversity in Central America: Historical Overview and Future Perspectives (No. 333.9509728 A846). The Nature Conservancy, San José (Costa Rica). Mesoamerican & Caribbean Region Conservation Science Program. Hengl, T. (Ed.), 2017. Current Global Land Cover Maps. WorldGrids. Global Soil Information Facilities (GSIF) Last accessed March 8. 2019. https://web.archive.org/ web/20170531214654/http://worldgrids.org/doku.php/wiki:land_cover_and_land_ use. Hernandez, B., Garcia, B., Garrish, V., Cherrington, E., Picado, F., Sempris, E., 2011. Mapa Centroamericano de cobertura y uso de la tierra, cambios de cobertura y uso de la tierra 1980-1990-2000-2010. CATHALAC / PREVDA. https://doi.org/10.13140/rg.2. 2.16349.82409. Last accessed March 7, 2019. Hidalgo, H.G., Alfaro, E.J., Quesada-Montano, B., 2017. Observed (1970–1999) climate variability in Central America using a high-resolution meteorological dataset with implication to climate change studies. Clim. Change 141 (1), 13–28. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s10584-016-1786-y. Last accessed March 7, 2019. Imbach, P., Beardsley, M., Bouroncle, C., Medellin, C., Läderach, P., Hidalgo, H., Alfaro, E., Van Etten, J., Allan, R., Hemming, D., Stone, R., Hannah, L., Donatti, C.I., 2017. Climate change, ecosystems and smallholder agriculture in Central America: an introduction to the special issue. Clim. Change 141 (1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10584-017-1920-5. Last accessed March 8, 2019. Instituto de Desarrollo Rural (Inder), Consejo Territorial de Desarrollo Rural, 2015. Plan de Desarrollo Rural Territorial Liberia-La Cruz 2015-2020. Last accessed on May 30, 2019. https://www.inder.go.cr/territorios_inder/region_chorotega/planes_ desarrollo/PTDR-Liberia-La-Cruz.pdf. Instituto de Desarrollo Rural (Inder), Consejo Territorial de Desarrollo Rural NandayureHojancha-Nicoya, 2016. Plan de Desarrollo Rural Territorial 2016-2021. Last accessed on May 30, 2019. https://www.inder.go.cr/territorios_inder/region_ chorotega/planes_desarrollo/PDRT-Nandayure-Hojancha-Nicoya.pdf. Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Censos (INEC, Costa Rica), 2012. Encuesta Nacional de Hogares Julio 2012: Resultados Generales. I San José, C.R. Vol. 1 Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Censos. Año 3 (2012). http://www.inec.go.cr/sites/default/files/ documentos/empleo/publicaciones/reenaho2012-01.pdf. Last accessed March 8, 2019. Irungaray, G.E.P., Gándara, G.A., Cabrera, J.C.R.M., Ibarra, R.E.M., Ruano, J.J.G., 2016. Ecosistemas de Guatemala, Una Aproximación Basada en el Sistema de Clasificación de Holdridge. Revista Eutopía 1 (1), 25–68. Janzen, D.H., 1988. Chapter, 14, Tropical Dry Forests: The Most Endangered Major Tropical Ecosystem. In Wilson EO, Peter FM, editors. Biodiversity. National Academies Press (US), Washington (DC) 1988. Jones, J.R., 1990. Colonization and Environment: Land Settlement Projects in Central America. United Nations University Press. Kaimowitz, D., 1996. Livestock and Deforestation in Central America in the 1980s and 1990s: A Policy Perspective. Center for International Forestry Research, Jakarta, Indonesia Last accessed March 8, 2019. http://www.cifor.org/publications/pdf_ files/SPubs/SP-LStock-n.pdf. Lambin, E.F., Turner, B.L., Geist, H.J., Agbola, S.B., Angelsen, A., Bruce, J.W., Coomes, O.T., R, Dirzo, Fischer, G., Folke, C., George, P.S., K, Homewood, J, Imbernon, Leemans, R., Li, X., Moran, E.F., Mortimore, M., Ramakrishnan, P.S., Richards, J.F., Skånes, H., Steffen, W., Stone, G.D., Svedin, U., Veldkamp, T.A., Vogel, C., 2001. The causes of land-use and land-cover change: moving beyond the myths. Global environmental change 11 (4), 261–269. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-3780(01) 00007-3. Last accessed March 7, 2019. Lambin, E.F., Geist, H.J., Lepers, E., 2003. Dynamics of land-use and land-cover change in tropical regions. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 28 (1), 205–241. https://doi.org/10. 1146/annurev.energy.28.050302.105459. Last accessed March 7, 2019. Latifovic, R., Zhu, Z.L., Cihlar, J., Giri, C., Olthof, I., 2004. Land cover mapping of North and Central America—global land cover 2000. Remote Sens. Environ. 89 (1), 116–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2003.11.002. Last accessed March 7, 2019. López-Carr, D., Burgdorfer, J., 2013. Deforestation drivers: population, migration, and tropical land use. Environ. Sci. Policy Sustain. Dev. 55 (1), 3–11. https://doi.org/10. 1080/00139157.2013.748385. Last accessed March 9, 2019. Magrin, G.O., Marengo, J.A., Boulanger, J.P., Buckeridge, M.S., Castellanos, E., Poveda, G., et al., 2014. Central and South America in climate change 2014: impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. In: Barros, V.R. (Ed.), Part B: Regional Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change, pp. 1499–1566. Magrın, G., Gay Garcıa, C., Cruz Choque, D., Giménez, J.C., Moreno, A.R., Nagy, G.J., Nobre, C., Villamizar, A., 2007. Latin America. Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Forth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 581–615.

Maldonado, T., Rutgersson, A., Alfaro, E., Amador, J., Claremar, B., 2016. Interannual variability of the midsummer drought in Central America and the connection with sea surface temperatures. Adv. Geosci. 42, 35–50. https://doi.org/10.5194/adgeo-42-352016. Last accessed March 8, 2019. Marshall, J.S., 2007. The geomorphology and physiographic provinces of Central America. Central Am. 1, 75–121 http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.465.505&rep=rep1&type=pdf. Last accessed March 7, 2019. Maurer, E.P., Roby, N., Stewart-Frey, I.T., Bacon, C.M., 2017. Projected twenty-firstcentury changes in the Central American mid-summer drought using statistically downscaled climate projections. Reg. Environ. Change 17 (8), 2421–2432. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s10113-017-1177-6. Last accessed March 7, 2019. Melgar, M., Meneses, A., Orozco, H., Pérez, O., Espinosa, R. (Eds.), 2012. El Cultivo de la Caña de Azúcar en Guatemala. CENGICAÑA (Centro Guatemalteco de Investigación y Capacitación de la Caña de Azúcar), pp. 512. Last accessed March 8, 2019. https:// cengicana.org/files/20170103101309141.pdf. Merrill, T., 1994. Nicaragua: a Country Study. Library of Congress, Federal Research Division. Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganadería (MAG), Dirección de Asuntos Internacionales (DAI), 2016. Caracterización de la Región Chorotega de Costa Rica: Efectos de la Sequía en la Región Chorotega. Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganadería (MAG), San José, Costa Rica. Murphy, P.G., Lugo, A.E., 1986. Ecology of tropical dry forest. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 17 (1), 67–88. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.es.17.110186.000435. Last accessed March 7, 2019. Myers, N., Tucker, R., 1987. Deforestation in Central America: spanish legacy and north american consumers. Environ. Rev. 11 (1), 55–71. https://doi.org/10.2307/ 3984219. Last accessed March 7, 2019. Nair, U.S., Asefi, S., Welch, R.M., Ray, D.K., Lawton, R.O., Manoharan, V.S., Mulligan, M., Sever, T.L., Irwin, D.I., Pounds, J.A., 2008. Biogeography of tropical montane cloud forests. Part II: mapping of orographic cloud immersion. J. Appl. Meteorol. Climatol. 47 (8), 2183–2197. https://doi.org/10.1175/2007JAMC1819.1. Last accessed March 8, 2019. Ornelas, J.F., Sosa, V., Soltis, D.E., Daza, J.M., González, C., Soltis, P.S., GutiérrezRodríguez, C., Espinosa de los Monteros, A., Castoe, T.A., Bell, C., Ruiz-Sanchez, E., 2013. Comparative phylogeographic analyses illustrate the complex evolutionary history of threatened cloud forests of Northern Mesoamerica. PLoS One 8 (2), e56283. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0056283https://doi.org/10.1371/ journal.pone.0056283. Last accessed March 8, 2019. Peralta, R.O., Carrazón Alocén, J., Zelaya Elvir, C.A., 2012. Buenas prácticas para la seguridad alimentaria y la gestión de riesgo. Publicado por: organización de las Naciones Unidas para la Alimentación y la Agricultura (FAO), pp. 53. Last accessed March 9, 2018. http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/user_upload/faoweb/honduras/ docs/buenas_practicas_para_la_SAN.pdf. Pérez Briceño, P.M., Alfaro Martínez, E.J., León, H., Hugo, G., Jiménez, F., 2016. Distribución espacial de impactos de eventos hidrometeorológicos en América Central. Revista de Climatología 16, 63–75. Last accessed March 7, 2019. http://hdl. handle.net/10669/74079. Portillo-Quintero, C.A., Sánchez-Azofeifa, G.A., 2010. Extent and conservation of tropical dry forests in the Americas. Biol. Conserv. 143 (1), 144–155. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.biocon.2009.09.020. Last accessed March 8, 2019. Redo, D.J., Grau, H.R., Aide, T.M., Clark, M.L., 2012. Asymmetric forest transition driven by the interaction of socioeconomic development and environmental heterogeneity in Central America. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 109 (23), 8839–8844. https://doi.org/10. 1073/pnas.1201664109. Last accessed March 8, 2019. Rivera, Canto, D.E., Cruz, N., Marín, R., Ramírez, V., 2015. Gestión del Riesgo en Agricultura de Subsistencia de Granos Básicos en Corredor Seco de Centroamérica. Taller, “Gestión del Riesgo asociado al Recurso Hídrico.” Global Water Partnership and UNISDR. Feb. 23-27, 2015. Tegucigalpa, Honduras. Last accessed May 30, 2019. https://www.slideshare.net/sjnavarro/anlisis-girh-y-gir-corredor-seco. Robles, F., 2016. Nicaragua Dispute Over Indigenous Land Erupts in Wave of Killings. The New York Times, NY. Oct. 16, 2016https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/17/world/ americas/nicaragua-dispute-over-indigenous-land-erupts-in-wave-of-killings. htmlLast accessed March 9, 2019. Sabogal, C., 1992. Regeneration of tropical dry forests in Central America, with examples from Nicaragua. J. Veg. Sci. 3 (3), 407–416. https://doi.org/10.2307/3235767. Last accessed March 7, 2019. Sawada, M., 2001. Global Spatial Autocorrelation Indices-moran’s I, Geary’s C and the General Cross-product Statistic. Laboratory of Paleoclimatology and Climatology, Dept. Geography, University of Ottawa, (Mimeo) Last accessed March 8, 2019. http://www.lpc.uottawa.ca/publications/moransi/moran.htm. Schielein, J., Börner, J., 2018. Recent transformations of land-use and land-cover dynamics across different deforestation frontiers in the Brazilian Amazon. Land Use Policy 76, 81–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.04.052. Last accessed March 7, 2019. Silva, J.A., 2017. Climate Change Brings Migration From the Dry Corridor to Nicaragua’s Caribbean Coast. Inter Press Service News Agency. Aug. 1, 2017. http://www. ipsnews.net/2017/08/climate-change-brings-migration-dry-corridor-nicaraguascaribbean-coast/. Last accessed March 9, 2019. Slater Museum of Natural History, University of Puget Sound, 2019. Tropical Dry Forest (n.d.). Last accessed March 11, 2019. https://www.pugetsound.edu/academics/ academic-resources/slater-museum/biodiversity-resources/world-biomes/ characteristics-of-bioclimatic/tropical-dry-forest/. Tölle, M.H., Engler, S., Panitz, H.J., 2017. Impact of abrupt land cover changes by tropical deforestation on Southeast Asian climate and agriculture. J. Clim. 30 (7), 2587–2600. https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0131.1. Last accessed March 7, 2019. Tucker, C.M., Munroe, D.K., Nagendra, H., Southworth, J., 2005. Comparative spatial

14

Land Use Policy xxx (xxxx) xxxx

Y. Gotlieb and J.D. García Girón analyses of forest conservation and change in Honduras and Guatemala. Conserv. Soc. 3 (1), 174–200. Van der Zee, A., van der Zee, J., Meyrat, A., Poveda, C., Picado, L., 2012. Estudio de la caracterización del Corredor Seco Centroamericano. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Rome, pp. 92 p.. Last accessed March 7, 2019. https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/tomo_i_corredor_ seco.pdf. Wang, P., Huang, C., Brown de Colstoun, E.C., Tilton, J.C., Tan, B., 2017. Global Human Built-up and Settlement Extent (Hbase) Dataset f. NASA Socioeconomic Data and Applications Center (SEDAC), Palisades, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.7927/ H4DN434S. Last accessed March 9, 2019. WFP Español, 2017. Unión Europea: Construyendo Resiliencia en el Corredor Seco Centroamericano. Historias del Programa Mundial de Alimentos. Programa Mundial de Alimentos de las Naciones Unidas (WFP). Last accessed on May 30, 2019. https:// historias.wfp.org/unión-europea-construyendo-resiliencia-en-el-corredor-secocentroamericano-4e3a1b57dac1.

Willis, C.G., Franzone, B.F., Xi, Z., Davis, C.C., 2014. The establishment of Central American migratory corridors and the biogeographic origins of seasonally dry tropical forests in Mexico. Front. Genet. 5, 433. https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2014. 00433. Last accessed March 7, 2019. World Bank, 2016. Accounting Reveals That Costa Rica’s Forest Wealth is Greater Than Expected. Feature Story. May 31, 2016. Last accessed March 8, 2019. http://www. worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2016/05/31/accounting-reveals-that-costa-ricasforest-wealth-is-greater-than-expected. World Bank, 2018. Forest Area (% of Land Area), World Development Indicators. Last accessed March 8, 2019. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/AG.LND.FRST.ZS. World Food Programme, the Inter-American Development Bank, the International Fund for Agricultural Development, 2017. Food Security and Emigration - Why People Flee and the Impact on Family Members Left Behind in El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras. Sept. 2017. Last accessed on March 11, 2019. https://docs.wfp.org/api/ documents/WFP-0000019629/download/.

15