ArticlePloS one2026
Incentives are effective but insufficient to halt smallholder deforestation in the Colombian Amazon.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this article, we assess the impact of two Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) initiatives aimed at deterring deforestation in the department of Guaviare, Colombia. The initiatives are the government-led Incentivo Forestal Amazónico (IFA), which is part of the country's REDD+ strategy, and the NGO-driven Caminemos-Territorios Sostenibles (CTS) project, which supported sustainable land-use activities over a four-year period. We find that, combined, these initiatives prevented approximately 1,400 hectares of forest loss, though they differed in their annualized impacts (2.9% versus 3.8%). We argue that this difference likely reflects variations in the type of incentives provided, their geographic focus, and their overarching goals. IFA focuses on larger, less threatened forest patches across a broader area, providing cash payments to landowners whilst laying the foundations for a long-term conservation and management approach. CTS, in contrast, targeted smaller patches at higher risk of deforestation along Guaviare's agricultural frontier, offering targeted technical assistance and payments for a series of conservation and restoration commitments at farm level, including the adoption of silvopastoral practices. Considering these findings, we argue that distinct PES designs can play a complementary role in halting deforestation in the Colombian Amazon, and potentially in similar regions across tropical America. We call for more sustained and scaled-up efforts in sustainable land use and forest conservation for smallholders, while recognizing that such initiatives will remain insufficient unless scaling is accompanied by substantially stronger territorial state presence and governance in areas contested by armed groups, as well as comprehensive land-use policy reform.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.