Deforestation, as a specific subject of study, is particularly salient to sociological research, given that the felling of trees largely results from human activities. Despite its importance, most empirical studies to date (principally by geographers, demographers, and economists) have been essentially theoretical. The lack of theoretical grounding retards the accumulation of knowledge by reducing the generalize-ability and explanatory power of research findings. Nevertheless, selected theories of social change have been suggested. Environmental degradation and deforestation in particular have been hypothesized to result primarily from three sources of change: population growth, modernization, and dependent development. Although all three have been hypothesized to increase deforestation, this article uncovers hidden complexities in their relationships that yield unanticipated outcomes. As a measure of modernization, for example, urbanization is shown to have a curvilinear effect on the rate of deforestation, resulting in lower rates of deforestation at the highest levels of urbanization. Two previously unexplored measures, inequality and change in tertiary education, are also shown to reduce the rate of deforestation. (Ehrhardt-Martinez 568)
Nowhere in the world has so much forest disappeared so rapidly as in the Brazilian Amazon. According to statistics, Brazil deforested annually 25,540 km2 between 1990 and 1995, the bulk of which occurred in the Amazon. This national figure is between double and triple the amount of forest lost by any other single country (Indonesia is second on the list, with 10,840 km2). In spite of this large absolute loss, estimations indicate that the Brazilian deforestation rate is a modest 0.5% per year. The sheer size of the forest means that accumulated deforestation over the last forty years of aggressive development policies has thus far affected less than 15% of the Amazon forest. Much of the Amazon thus remains a relatively undisturbed environment, and the land-use decisions made by many local actors often reflect this perception of drawing on a seemingly endless pool of forest resources. (Andersen et al. 5)
In the late 1990s, it appeared that overturning orthodox explanations of environmental change was popular and necessary. Ever since the political...
(Batterbury, Forsyth, and Thomson) in addition, there is a need for newer research that is more thorough and conclusive.
Batterbury, Forsyth, and Thomson, gave insight into a research method that is effective when considering deforestation. The research method is called Hybrid research, this method may consider knowledge claims from varied sources, but also acknowledge that its subject (environmental degradation) is variously constructed from physical and social viewpoints. Its aim is to identify information about externally real biophysical processes, yet also democratize the identification of environmental problems. Hybrid research on landscape change, therefore, does not only record physical aspects of change as conducted in, but also seeks to define how far physical change such as deforestation may form a problem for local communities. As discussed above, orthodox approaches to deforestation have suggested local farmers cause forest loss and that deforestation increases soil erosion.
Works Cited
Andersen, Lykke E., et al. The Dynamics of Deforestation and Economic Growth in the Brazilian Amazon. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 2002.
Batterbury, Simon, Timothy Forsyth, and Koy Thomson. "Environmental Transformations in Developing Countries: Hybrid Research and Democratic Policy." The Geographical Journal 163.2 (1997): 126+.
Ehrhardt-Martinez, Karen. "Social Determinants of Deforestation in Developing Countries: a Cross-National Study." Social Forces 77.2 (1998): 567-586.
Hibbard, Michael. "Deforestation, Environment, and Sustainable Development: A Comparative Analysis." Journal of the Community Development Society 34.2 (2004): 122
Wunder, Sven. The Economics of…
