Search

This paper assesses the effects of public policies on the occurrence of natural disasters related to extreme rainfall. By using a unique and geolocated database on natural disasters in the state of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, I test whether variables related to public policies - e.g. forest cover and urban infrastructure - affect the occurrence of natural disasters, conditional on the existence of extreme rainfall. Results point to a significant role for public policies in order to mitigate effects of extreme weather events. More specifically, results point to an important role for urban infrastructure, as proper sewage and waste collection, and forest cover in reducing the impacts of extreme rainfall. Moreover, I discuss how these heterogeneous effects have distributional consequences and can be linked to the Environmental Justice literature. Finally, this paper reinforces the idea that adaptation policies to disasters are essential in reducing local vulnerabilities and can yield distributional and fiscal benefits. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Tropical forest conservation is considered a low-cost option for climate change mitigation. But mitigation cost assessments have featured opportunity costs, neglecting policy implementation costs. Here we use official data to identify the Brazilian federal government's operational and institutional budgets related to forest conservation policies implemented from 2000 to 2014. We distinguish the allocated and executed budgets of these policies, and provide scenario-based estimates of their cost-effectiveness. On average, Brazil spent US$ 1 billion/year on forest conservation policies at the federal level. Brazil's substantial reduction in annual forest loss after 2004 was accompanied by a higher operational budget execution of disincentive-based policy instruments, and an absolute increase in both allocated and executed institutional budgets. The post-2004 successful mitigation effort represented additional implementation costs to the Brazilian federal government of US$ 308–923/ha of avoided deforestation, or US$ 0.87–2.60/tCO 2 of avoided emissions. Factoring in also approximate municipal and state expenditures, these costs increase to US$ 385–1153/ha or US$ 1.09–3.25/tCO 2 . We conclude that implementations costs are non-trivial in size, including compared to estimates of land users' opportunity costs. This has important implications for REDD + policy design, in the sense that implementation costs need to be adequately considered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]