Table 10

Relative Importance of Alternative Drivers of Land Use Changes. 1988-2005

ScenarioFarmForestGrassWaterUrbanUnused
Scenario(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)(9)(10)(11)(12)
Baseline2.00%-4.80%-11.10%0.40%3.60%10.00%
No change in urban land value3.681%-5.0-2%-9.911%0.874%3.2−11%7.3-27%
No change in agricultural land value2.12%-5.0-3%-11.9-7%0.4-3%4.217%10.22%
No change in urban income0.9-54%-4.410%−14.9-34%-0.2−142%3.0−17%15.657%
No change in rural income3.887%-5.3−10%−13.1−18%0.877%4.114%9.9−1%
No change in road density1.3-34%-4.018%−12.0-8%0.59%3.5-3%10.88%
No public agricultural investment1.8-11%-4.57%−10.010%0.4−17%3.4-4%9.0-10%
  • Note: The odd columns report the simulated land use changes (million hectares); the even columns report the difference between counterfactual and baseline acreage change, divided by the absolute value of baseline acreage change. A positive percentage change indicates that the increase is larger or the decrease is smaller compared to the baseline. A negative percentage change indicates the opposite.