loureiro et al,2010pvar effet sptial .pdf
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/14/2019 Loureiro et al,2010pvar effet sptial .pdf
1/41
THE DYNAMICS OF LAND-USE IN BRAZILIANAMAZON
Paulo R. A. LoureiroAdolfo Sachsida
Mrio Jorge Cardoso de Mendona
Universidade de Braslia
Departamento de Economia
Srie Textos para Discusso
Department of Economics Working Paper 342University of Brasilia, November 2010
Texto No 342Braslia, Novembro de 2010
-
8/14/2019 Loureiro et al,2010pvar effet sptial .pdf
2/41
T HE DYNAMICS OF L AND -USE IN BRAZILIAN AMAZON
Mrio Jorge [email protected]
IPEA - Instituto de Pesquisa Econmica Aplicada (Brazil)
Paulo R. A. Loureiro
University of Brasilia (UnB)
Adolfo Sachsida
IPEA - Instituto de Pesquisa Econmica Aplicada (Brazil)
Abstract : This paper studies the dynamics of land-use in the Brazilian Amazon using a
structural vector autoregressive (SVAR) model. The heterogeneity in the data is controlled
by mean of fixed effect panel specification. Meanwhile, spatial autocorrelation is also
diagnosed by a statistical methodology that allows to us to split the model in subsamples(clusters) of more homogenous municipalities in order to re-estimate the model on separate
clusters. The clustering analysis shows that there are three clusters whose land-use patterns
are strongly different in an economical point of view. The first cluster identifies the pioneer
fronts; dedicated to logging, natural resources exploitation and slash-and-burn cultures, the
second cluster have grown a more diversified agriculture while the third cluster presents
most developed, intensive agriculture oriented municipalities.
Another distinctive feature of this article pertains to the assessment of the
contemporaneous causal order that exists among distinct land-uses. This permits to evaluate
the succession dynamics that derive from unexpected innovations in the process of soil
occupation by means of impulse response functions (IRFs). The IRFs applied for cluster 1
lead to the following results: (1) the new demand for cropping requires to clear new areas
of forest. This extra cleared land will be transformed in pasture land or fallow in the long
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected] -
8/14/2019 Loureiro et al,2010pvar effet sptial .pdf
3/41
term. This process can be considered a necessary outcome of the slash-and-burn
agriculture, a common practice in the Amazon; (2) Contrary to other studies we do not find
evidence that cattle ranching is the primary driver of deforestation; (3) the impact of a
shock of pasture land on itself is virtually null at the beginning but it augments substantially
over time not requiring to clear extra areas of forest land but rather competing with crop
land, and (4) it seems that if not for all the Amazon Basin, at least in this cluster, cattle
ranching and cropping could be competitive activities.
Key words : Brazilian Amazon, Vector autoregressive, Panel data, Spatial autocorrelation,
Impulse response functions.
JEL : Q24; Q34; Q56; C33; C38.
1. INTRODUCTION
Over the past two decades the international community has become aware of the global
and regional environmental risks associated to possible massive forest losses in the
Brazilian Amazon. The impacts on global carbon cycle, regional climate and the loss of
biodiversity are among the main consequences of extensive land-use change processes in
this region. Therefore a good understanding of land-use dynamics in the Brazilian Amazon
is a fundamental step before action whether controlling the problem or even change its
course towards a more sustainable path.
Several studies have already contributed to a better understanding of the underlying
processes that drive land-use change in the Amazon. One of the main difficulties of land-
use studies lies in the fact that relevant economic and natural processes are fundamentally
defined (and face constraints) at a fine geographic scale. This calls for an effort to bridgemethodological gaps within a triangle of three approaches: classical economic approach
(e.g. Angelsen, A., 1996), agent-based models (e.g. Soares-Filho & alli, 2006) and
econometric modelling [(Reis and Blanco, 1997); (Pfaff, 1999), (Reis and Guzmn, 1994),
inter allia]. Each of these approaches has advantages and drawbacks relative to their
respective research objectives. Here, we focus on the econometric approach. This
-
8/14/2019 Loureiro et al,2010pvar effet sptial .pdf
4/41
methodology, applied to land-use, has been criticized for its lack of economic consistency
(in comparison for example to sectoral or general equilibrium models), but it has
definitively the advantage to unveil the most out of existing data when the primary research
issue is to describe land-use dynamics in the whole Amazonian perimeter, including non-
optimal succession of uses from a strict economic standpoint.
Econometric and statistical methods have been used for example with the objective to
determine the main dynamical features between succeeding anthropogenic land-use
sequence, like, e.g., cropland, pastures, and regeneration, which constitute a typical pattern
of successive land-uses following land clearing. Indeed, in order to seek for deforestation
drivers, it is important to know up to what extent, in past deforestation trends, cropland or
pastures uses are more or less keen to immediately follow deforestation. Such trends mayalso differ in different frontier patterns, for example the eastern versus southwestern
frontiers of the Amazonian Basin.
In one of the first attempts to determine a succession profile for the whole Amazon,
Andersen et al. (2002, 1997) estimated a reduced form vector autoregressive (VAR) model
involving the municipalities of Brazilian Amazon over the period 1970 through 1985.
Concerning the use of this model to formulate environmental policies some remarks need
be stated. A first difficulty lies in the fact that spatial heterogeneity among cross-section
units (municipalities) has to be taken into account in order to contemplate the geographic,
environmental and economic diversity among those different units and the effect of their
mutual interactions. A second difficulty is related to the fact that land-use census data in the
Brazilian Amazon are only available in a few 5-years time steps.
The environment in the Amazon is subject to very strong dynamic forces that are
capable to change the patterns of land-use even in a moderately short period of five years,
that is, the period in which the data are collected. Combined with the fact the Andersen et
al. model is a reduced form VAR and not a structural model, it implies that the
contemporaneous (i.e. at each studied time step) relationships among distinct land-uses
occuring during a given period are not clearly treated. In this case, the model fails to
-
8/14/2019 Loureiro et al,2010pvar effet sptial .pdf
5/41
adequately estimate the succession dynamics that derives from contemporaneous causal
orders of land-use change. In other words, such an approach is not adequate to uncover
stylized facts on the short-run impacts of the identified exogenous sources in the land-use
process. For instance, an exogenous demand shock on agricultural product or meat prices
generates both a current and subsequent effect on soil occupation. In the same way a
technological shock or demographic shock can induce a new unexpected evolution of land-
use. However, the proper understanding of this kind of diffusion processes in Amazonian
land-occupation can be improved by using a model that captures the structural relations
among different land-uses .
In this paper we adopt the structural VAR (SVAR) model with panel data to assess
impacts of the identified exogenous sources. We expand and refine previous works totackle these metodological issues. First, we take into account the heterogeneity among land
units using the panel data 1 model [(Hsiao, 1995), (Baltagi, 1995), (Arellano, 2003), etc.],
mixing information concerning variation among individual units with variations taking
place over time. Second, in the structural VAR literature, the contemporaneous relationship
is identified on the basis of prior information supported by a-theoretical considerations.
Notwithstanding, another distinctive feature of this article is the employment of Directed
Acyclic Graphs (DAGs) to assess the contemporaneous causal order of the SVAR. Using
the selected orderings to identify the SVAR models we obtained their impulse response
functions (IRFs). The IR functions allow to model the dynamics of distinct land-uses
derived from an unexpected shock on the occupation of the Amazon Basin. Finally,
because the object of this study is clearly the spatial process that results from the complex
interplay of many phenomena occurring in a much extended spatial domain, it is obviously
a spatial phenomenon and we may expect spatial autocorrelation to be present in the data.
The methodology developed here aims to diagnose the extend of the problem so that in a
first step, the model may be re-estimated on subsamples of more homogenous groups of
municipalities. Moreover, this methodology allows us to propose a comprehensive
interpretation of the meaning of the clusters in an economic point of view.
1. Important sources of variation may be left out if the data is only pooled in a single (temporal or spatial)dimension, and more precise parameter estimates can be obtained in panel approaches that explore thevariability present in the data both across counties and within counties over time.
-
8/14/2019 Loureiro et al,2010pvar effet sptial .pdf
6/41
The article is organized as follows. The section 2 presents the methodology used to
analyse the dynamics of land-use introducing the distinct subjects involved in our analysis
such as structural and reduced form VAR, panel data method, spatial autocorrelation and
identification by DAGs. The database is described in section 3. The econometric results are
presented in sections 4 and 5. In section 4 we present many partial but important results
derived from estimation, spatial analysis and the identification procedure undertaken by
DAGs methodology. In section 5 we present the clustering and the IRFs analyses. Some
concluding remarks are stated in section 6.
2. M ETHODOLOGY
2.1. Overview
The need for a specific methodology allowing to deal with the contemporaneous
relationship existing among distinct land-uses was soon perceived by many authors.
Andersen et al. (1997, 2002) and Weinbold (1999) estimated a model of land-use using a
vector autoregressive (VAR) specification on the municipalities of Brazilian Amazon. This
model is given by the system of equations (1):
it it it it it it
it it it it it it
it it it it it it
fallow pasturecrop Dclear fallow
fallow pasturecrop Dclear pasture
fallow pasturecrop Dclear crop
31413121
21413121
11413121
(1) 2
The indexes i and t are associated, respectively, to each municipality and each time
period. Our point here is to reformulate this model in order to contemplate some interesting
issues about land-use in the Brazilian Amazon. The first issue is how to identify the
contemporaneous causal order underlying the land-use process. Any model that does not
2 Here it it it it fallow pasturecropclear and 1 it it it clear clear Dclear .
-
8/14/2019 Loureiro et al,2010pvar effet sptial .pdf
7/41
take this point into account is inappropriate in a policy perspective concerning land-use in
the Amazon. The second issue is that equation system (1) does not deal explicitly with the
heterogeneity in climate, soil quality, etc among the municipalities of the Brazilian
Amazon. As a third issue, we question the possibility to analyze adequately deforestation in
this dynamic framework. Finally, considering that the land-use change is a spatial
phenomenon the treatment of spatial autocorrelation in the data is an open issue.
In this paper, these questions are tackled in the following way. The two first problems
are treated simultaneously using an econometric model that contemplates spatial
heterogeneity among counties and contemporaneous causal order in the same framework.
This is performed in a structural vector autoregressive (SVAR) with panel data
specification. In order to model deforestation we include to system (1) an extra endogenousvariable associated explicitly to deforestation and hereafter designated by forest 3. Finally,
considering the difficulty to incorporate directly spatial autocorrelation in a SVAR model
with a panel structure, we chose a more progressive route where in a first step we carefully
study the spatial correlation in the residuals after a first estimation step. Indeed, the
literature either implements SVAR panel models (Favero, 2002) or spatial SVAR models
(Di Giacinto, 2003). The direct estimation of the model with a spatial component would
require further theoretical developments. Thus we rely on spatial autocorrelation diagnosis
tests and propose to split the sample into homogeneous sub-samples for re-estimation with
the idea to lower spatial autocorrelation.
2.2. VAR analysis: Reduced x Structural form and Identification
Considering that natural forest can be seen as another category of land-use, the
endogenous variables of our model can be represented by the following vector
),,,(),,,( 4321 it it it it it it it it forest fallow pasturecrop y y y y . Under this notation we propose to
use the following model to formalize the dynamics of land-use in Brazilian Amazon:
3 This variable is associated to natural land and considers both natural forest and natural pasture. More comments about the
variables used in this research appear in Section 4.
-
8/14/2019 Loureiro et al,2010pvar effet sptial .pdf
8/41
-
8/14/2019 Loureiro et al,2010pvar effet sptial .pdf
9/41
with ),0(~ N u where u is the reduced form of disturbance covariance matrix and it
is also assumed that ),0(~ , with a diagonal matrix. The relationship between
structural form and reduced form is based on the following identities, providing 0 A is
invertible, c Ab 10 , 11
01 A A B , t
10t Au and:
'', )())(( 101
01
0t t 1
0 A A A E A
(5).
Note that this representation does not allow to identify the effects of exogenous
independent shocks onto the variables, since reduced form residuals are contemporaneously
correlated (the matrix is not diagonal) 6. That is, the reduced form residuals t u can be
interpreted as the result of linear combinations of exogenous shocks that are notcontemporaneously (in the same instant of time) correlated. In evaluations of the model
(and economic policies) it only makes sense to measure exogenous independent shocks.
Therefore, it is necessary to present the model in another form where the residuals are not
contemporaneously correlated.
Thus, without additional restrictions on 0 A we cannot recover the structural form from
the reduced form because does not have enough estimated coefficients to identify an
unrestricted 0 A matrix. Therefore, we need to set up restrictions in order to identify and
estimate 0 A7. This procedure is named identification. It is possible to estimate the reduced
form parameters b , 1 B and consistently, but except for forecasting t Y given 1t Y , these
matrices are not the parameters of interest.
6 These shocks are primitive and exogenous forces, with no common causes, that affect the variables of the model.
7 The matrix 0 A cannot have, together, a number of free parameters bigger than the number of free parameters in the symmetricmatrix . If n is the number of endogenous variables of the model then, to satisfy the order condition for identification of 0 A ,it is necessary that the number of free parameters to be estimated in 0 A be no bigger than n(n-1)/2. When n is smaller thann(n-1)/2 the model is over-identified. There exists no simple general condition for local identification of the parameters of A.However, as has been shown by Rothenberg (1971), a necessary and sufficient condition for local identification of any regular
point in R n is that the determinant of the information matrix be different from zero. In practice, evaluations of the determinantof the information matrix at some points, randomly chosen in the parameter space, is enough to establish the identification of amodel.
-
8/14/2019 Loureiro et al,2010pvar effet sptial .pdf
10/41
Spirtes, Glymour, and Scheines (1993, 2000) [hereafter SGS] and Pearl and Verma
(1991) claimed that it is possible to make causal inferences based on associations observed
in non-experimental data without previous knowledge. These restrictions follow from
directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) estimated by the TETRAD software developed by SGS
using as input the covariance matrix of the reduced form disturbances. Moreover, if the
causal relations can be represented by DAGs, SGS have shown that under some weak
conditions the Markov Condition and distribution of random variables faithful to the
causal graph there exist methods for identification of causal relations that are
asymptotically (in sample size) correct 8 . The results of SGS are discussed in several
articles 9 In other words, this methodology enables us to read from the data the
contemporaneous relationships existing among distinct land-uses in the Amazon.
2.3. Spatial Autocorrelation
In order to assess spatial autocorrelation directly in system (3) some new elements
must be introduced in our analysis. A standard choice is to include in the mean process a
spatial autoregressive component that takes the spatial locations into account. This can be
done by the use of a contiguity or neighborhood matrix )( ijwW with ijw representing the
neighborhood between the sites i and j, such that 0ijw if the sites i and j are neighbors,
and 0ijw otherwise. This spatial weight matrix is a square matrix representing the spatial
context. It encodes the neighborhood relationship among the spatial units. The literature on
this subject is vast, we shall only retain here that the neighborhood relationships chosen by
the analyst may change the results 10. In this sense equation (3) may be rewritten in the
following way:
t t t t Y AY W cY A
1110 (6)
t t t W 2
8 Demiralp and Hoover (2003) evaluate the PC algorithm employed by TETRAD in a Monte Carlo study and conclude that it isan effective tool for the selection the contemporaneous causal order of SVARs.
9 Swanson and Granger (1997) were the first to apply graphical models to identify contemporaneous causal order of a SVAR,although they restrict the admissible structures to causal chains. Bessler and Lee (2002) use error correction and DAGs tostudy both lagged and contemporaneous relations in late 19 th and early 20 th century U.S. data.
10 See Anselin at al. (1988) for a detailed discussion.
-
8/14/2019 Loureiro et al,2010pvar effet sptial .pdf
11/41
where )( ij and )( ij are matrices and ),0(~ I t .
In this study we assume that0
which means that we focus our attention in random
spatial effect or spatial correlation in errors. The development of a spatial SVAR panel data
model in (6) is left for further research. We implement here the spatial analysis as a non
stationarity and we propose to split the sample to estimate separate models. In doing so we
expect to capture the land-use dynamics in homogeneous areas. The spatial autocorrelation
analysis is conducted on the mean residuals of the model, that is, the arithmetic mean of the
reduced form VAR model residuals 11 , because we are mainly interested in the splitting of
the sample over the whole period.
The methodology is implemented in four steps. First, spatial autocorrelation in the
mean residuals of the model is tested by the Moran scatterplot (Anselin, 1995). We check
two distinct contiguity structures (see below) to assess the stability of the results. That is, if
the results are coherent for those different neighborhood structures we assume enough
confidence to proceed. Second, the residuals are spatially smoothed meaning that current
values are replaced by the average of the neighbors conditional on the neighborhood
structure. Third, a principal component analysis (PCA) on the smoothed residuals is
conducted. This method is motivated in Benali and Escoffier (1990) who name it Local
Principal Component Analysis as a way to extract the systematic spatial features present in
the data by local smoothing and dimension reduction 12 . As a byproduct, this tends to
produce spatially connected clusters which is a desirable property of clusters for spatial
data. Fourth, from the LPCA results we compute by clustering homogenous areas to split
the model for re-estimation.
Because one may have some difficulty to grasp all the different steps of the analysis we
present a summary of the methodology we used in this paper. It can be described in the
following way
11 Formal tests on the whole residuals are left to posterior work.
12 Note that in their original paper, these authors develop the dual of this analysis which consists in substracting from the originaldata the average of the neighbors. This method is not discussed here.
-
8/14/2019 Loureiro et al,2010pvar effet sptial .pdf
12/41
a) In the first step we estimate the reduced form VAR for unrestricted sample;
b) With the residuals of VAR we analyse spatial autocorrelation throughout the
method described in section 2.3. Based on this analysis the sub-samples of
homogeneous areas (clusters) are selected;
c) Next we re-estimate the VAR on selected sub-samples. In this step the structural
VAR is recovered using the DAGs method to identify the contemporaneous causal
orders; and
d) Finally, the impulse response functions are computed.
3. Database
The main original source of the data available for this study comes from Brazilian National Agriculture Census elaborated by the Brazilian Institute for Geography and
Statistics (IBGE) which is usually conducted every five years. Others original data sources
used are the Industrial and Commercial Census that were also elaborated by the IBGE for
the same periods. The data were collected for the following for years 1970, 1975, 1980,
1985 and 1995 at the municipality level. The data were cleaned, harmonized and merged
with data of other sources by the Institute for Applied Economic Research (IPEA) managed
by the team of IPEADATA 13 . The original database includes data on economic,
demographic, ecological and agriculture variables.
In the Brazilian Amazon Basin a county can be subjected to ongoing change in its size
mainly during the expansion of the agricultural frontier in Amazon. This fact obstructs the
comparison between periods at county level. That is why the concept of Minimum
Comparable Area (MCA) 14 was introduced, which is the smallest stable spatial unity
during these five censuses that accommodates the changing county boundaries over the
panel. The aggregation of counties in the later census years, in order to match the county
area in 1970, is greatest in the more recently populated and sub-divided regions found in
the legal Amazon.
13 http://www.ipeadata.gov.br
14 For further details about the concept of MCA see Reis at al. (2007)
-
8/14/2019 Loureiro et al,2010pvar effet sptial .pdf
13/41
The agricultural censuses group all land into private land and public land. Private land
is stratified into eight categories according to agricultural use. These are (i) annual crops,
(ii) perennial crops, (iii) planted forest, (iv) planted pasture, (v) short fallow and (vi) long
fallow are classified in cleared land, while (vii) natural forest and natural pasture are
considered non-cleared land. A small category of private non-usable land (rivers,
mountains, etc.) is also considered non-cleared land. Finally, all land that is not claimed by
anyone is considered public land and by definition non-cleared.
Based on these definitions the dependent variables used in our land-use model fall into
one of the following four categories: cropland ( crop ), pasture ( pasture ), fallow ( fallow ) and
natural land ( forest ). Cropland covers annual crops, perennial crops and planted forest.Pasture is planted pasture only. Fallow land includes short fallow, long fallow and non-
usable land like roads, dams, etc. Natural land considers natural forest and natural pasture.
4. Econometric Results
4. 1. Regression Analysis
We propose in this section a consistent method to estimate the reduced form VAR
with panel data (4). Before derivation of the estimator, we must introduce notations to
accommodate the data sample. The observations related to each equation j can be
represented in the following way. For J j ,...,1 , '1111 ),...,,...,,...,( jNT jN T j j j y y y y y where
j y is a 1 NT vector of dependent variables associated to equation j . Let
'1 ),...,( jN j j the 1 N vector of individual effects and 1 NT the vector of noise
given by '1111 ),...,,...,,...,( jNT jN T j j j . We assume that individual effects are fixed. In
this sense the individual effect can be included into the set of parameters. Thus the error
covariance matrix is defined so that NT j jj j j I E 2' )( .
-
8/14/2019 Loureiro et al,2010pvar effet sptial .pdf
14/41
-
8/14/2019 Loureiro et al,2010pvar effet sptial .pdf
15/41
The residuals of the model estimated in the preceding section are analyzed as follows.
First, the mean residuals over the all periods are computed. Second, these mean residuals
are further centered and standardized. In short, the residuals are transformed into:
ie
ii s
i
eee
(8)
with s standing for standardized. This transformation is performed on each of the four
equations of the SVAR, that is residuals of the crop , pasture , fallow and forest equations, in
that order. In other words, the present analysis do not use the NJ-K observations of the
estimated model but the mean of the residual vector on the N spatial units: the 257 AMCs
of the Amazon Basin.
4.2.2 Spatial weights
The spatial weight matrix is the square N by N matrix representing the spatial context.
In this context we intend to test several neighborhood schemes to check the stability of our
computations. Note that in the literature it is generally admitted that the analyst may test
several neighborhood matrices and retain the most stable or meaningful results. This is why
we use two common neighborhood structures to compute our tests.
The most common way to introduce spatial weights is the contiguity matrix, which is
defined by the presence of a common frontier between two spatial units. We have then w ij =
1 if i and j share a common border, zero if not. The second form of neighborhood retained
here is the k-nearest neighbors matrix, (with k = 4 and k = 8). One easily sees that
contiguity is a symmetric relation, but not nearest neighbors. Consequently, the contiguity
matrix is symmetric but not the k-nearest neighbors matrix. The row sums are the degrees
of the incidence matrix of the graph associated to the neighborhood relation; in the
contiguity case, the degree is variable but in the k-nearest neighbors case it is constant and
equal to k. Symmetry is a desirable property in spatial analysis but generally it is lost via
normalization. Effectively, it is often more practical to standardize the neighborhood
matrices, and this is done by dividing each row by the degree, that is, the number of
neighbors.
-
8/14/2019 Loureiro et al,2010pvar effet sptial .pdf
16/41
4.2.3. Moran test
The Moran spatial autocorrelation coefficient is defined as the ratio of the local
autocovariances to the total variance of the series:
2 x x
x x x xw
S n
I i
jiij (9)
In other words it is the ratio of the covariance between neighbors to the variance of the
whole series (complete graph): it is the fraction of total variance accounted by spatial
neighborhood relationship. For the neighbors the normalization constant is S = ijw i,j, i. e.,
the total number of links in the neighborhood matrix. The computation and visualization of
the statistic can be greatly enhanced by the Moran scatterplot where the Moran I statistic is
computed on the standardized residuals. From equation (8), let us call S ii e z ; given a row
standardized neighborhood matrix W, then each row sums to one, and as there are exactly
N rows, S=n, thus the first term of equation (8) is equal to one, to give in matrix form:
zz
zWz I t
t
(10)
Then Moran I statistic can be easily expressed as a regression coefficient, as one can
verify that if we pose: Wz y , and noting that the denominator of (10) may be written as
1 zz t , we obtain:
zy zz I t t 1 (11)
This offers an easy way to compute Moran I, which is simply the slope coefficient of
the regression equation (11) on the variable Wz, that is, one simply regresses y=Wz on z
without a constant. The dependent is the spatially smoothed variable Wz and the
-
8/14/2019 Loureiro et al,2010pvar effet sptial .pdf
17/41
independent is the original (standardized) variable. The standardization allows a clear
interpretation of the regression graphs (see below). This phenomenon is easily understood
in this context as Anselin (2003) puts it: he quotes deforestation studies as an exemplary
case for spatial autocorrelation left in the residuals of an econometric model because of non
observed variables.
4.2.4. Spatial autocorrelation analysis
The spatial correlation coefficients are summed up in Table 1 by contiguity structure.
The computations were performed as explained in section 2.5, equation 3 and 4. Thus,
neighborhood matrices are row standardized so that direct estimation by regression is
possible. Computations where performed in GEODA (Anselin & al, 2005) and GRETL for
comparison purposes and also because of a minor technical problem 17.
Table 1: Moran coefficients by contiguity structure
Neighborhood
matrixVariable
GRETL GEODA
Moran
I
Bootstrap p-value
for t
Moran
I
Bootstrap p-value
for t
First order
CROP 0.066 0.023** 0.066 0.007***
PASTURE 0.303 0.000*** 0.303 0.002***
FALLOW 0.306 0.000*** 0.307 0.001***
FOREST 0.266 0.000*** 0.266 0.003***
4NN
CROP 0.035 0.153 0.035 0.020**
PASTURE 0.124 0.000*** 0.124 0.004***
FALLOW 0.239 0.000*** 0.239 0.001***
FOREST 0.123 0.000*** 0.123 0.006***
8NN
CROP 0.026 0.113 0.026 0.030**
PASTURE 0.102 0.000*** 0.102 0.001***
FALLOW 0.239 0.000*** 0.239 0.001***
17 In the first version of this paper we could not use GEODA to compute the Moran Is for the contiguity matrix becauseGEODA could not built properly the matrix because of defects in the shapefile of the Amazon Basin. These has now beencorrected and the full results presented here.
-
8/14/2019 Loureiro et al,2010pvar effet sptial .pdf
18/41
FOREST 0.063 0.003*** 0.063 0.014**
** significant at 5 % ; *** significant at 1 % or less. All tests
performed with 999 permutations.
Spatial autocorrelation is present and significant for most variables. For example,considering the contiguity neighborhood, it is lower for the crop equation (~ 0.07); but
quite higher for the three other variables: forest (~ 0.27), pasture (~ 0.30) and fallow (~
0.31) which is the highest of all four spatial autocorrelation coefficients computed for both
software application and neighborhood structure. The magnitudes of these autocorrelation
coefficients may seem modest, but because they relate to residuals estimates, they are in
fact rather high. We can expect these to decrease for both neighborhood structures (higher
order of contiguity and number of near neighbors).
There are slight differences between neighborhood structures, but the conclusions are
convergent between the two software implementations except for the crop residuals which
are not significant under the 4 and 8 nearest neighbors in GRETL. These differences are
due to the different implementations of the permutation tests between the softwares.
According to GEODA, all neighborhood structures show significant spatial autocorrelation
of the mean residuals for all equations but not in the case of GRETL. However, the orders
of magnitude of the computed coefficients are identical between software implementationsat least up to the second decimal place and often to higher places.
There is thus a relatively good stability of the estimates among neighborhood structures
and softwares, because the magnitude of the computed coefficients leads to a similar
ordering of spatial autocorrelation present in the residuals. Both for contiguity, and nearest
neighbors, the crop is the lowest followed by forest , then pasture and fallow which is
always highest.
The magnitude of the autocorrelation coefficients for the nearest neighbors matrices
decreases slowly for all variables except for fallow . This may be explained by the
increasing smoothing effect induced by the growing number of neighbors which lower the
difference to the average at each location and thus the Moran I. However, this effect does
not seem to affect the fallow equation mean residuals. For this variable, it appears that
-
8/14/2019 Loureiro et al,2010pvar effet sptial .pdf
19/41
spatial autocorrelation may be both stronger than for the other variables (at a given distance
or contiguity order) but also that it may be felt up farther away 18.
To sum up, there is significant autocorrelation for all residuals, with fairly robust
conclusions. The fallow equation residuals show the highest and strongest spatial
autocorrelation among the four series, this may indicate that the SVAR specification may
lack explanatory power for this variable, but seem better for the others variables.
4.2.5. Clustering Analysis
This step allows splitting the panel of MCAs in the Amazon Basin as a way to reduce
spatial autocorrelation that may be present in the residuals. The same spatially smoothed
data are used to perform the PCA on the 4 vectors of spatially smoothed residuals. The
smoothed mean residuals are defined by:
si
jii
si eW k
e ~
* 1 (11)
which is technically the same as variable y=Wz above. That is, the stared (spatially
smoothed) residuals are the average of the neighboring residuals. The computations are
done on the non symmetric k-nearest neighbors, with k=4,8 and for the order one contiguity
matrix. The results for k=8 do not differ from those relative to k=4, so they are not
presented here at this stage. The reader shall note that the splitted samples are exactly the
same for both these orders of neighborhood.
From the 4 vectors, the first two principal components explain 85 % of the variability in
the data. Now on we apply the k-means algorithm on the two first principal components.
Three clusters are found to be optimal. The clusters are depicted on map 1 below. Table 3
in Appendix 3 gives the bootstrapped Moran I computations for cluster I and II of this map.
Here cluster I is composed of 156 municipalities and cluster II 75 municipalities. The 26
18 We note this fact for further investigation.
-
8/14/2019 Loureiro et al,2010pvar effet sptial .pdf
20/41
-
8/14/2019 Loureiro et al,2010pvar effet sptial .pdf
21/41
-
8/14/2019 Loureiro et al,2010pvar effet sptial .pdf
22/41
use in Brazilian Amazon. This why we restrict the use of prior theoretical restrictions in
order to identify the matrix of contemporaneous relationship 0 A .
4. 3. Identification
4.3.1. The Identification Problem
Structural inference and policy analysis employing VAR model require
differentiating between correlation and causation, an issue known as the ide ntification
problem. The practice in the literature has been the use of identifying assumptions based
on economic theory or institutional knowledge to sort out the contemporaneous links
among the variables in order to allow correlations to be interpreted causally. Given an
exogenous impact on a certain category of land, it dictates the subsequent constraints by
which the mechanism of land-use takes place during the period of five years after this
exogenous shock. In short, it detects how the other categories of land-use react given a
primary impulse on a certain type of land-use. In this paper it can be associated to the
drivers or prime forcers of the soil occupation in this region.
For example, credit and fiscal subsidies to the agriculture jointly with the expansion
of the road network pushed the agricultural frontier in the northwestern part of the Amazon
Basin while the colonization programs aided to fix people in the interior. Strong incentives
were created to clear land for pasture. In fact, the growth of cattle herds has consistently
been cited as one of the primary factors behind the land clearing in Amazon. Regarding the
problem of the identification this analysis implies that the subsequent effect of an
enlargement of the area of pasture has a contemporaneous effect on the other land-uses,
most likely on forest land where new areas are required to be opened. Notwithstanding we
need to check if it really happen.
4.3.2. The Identification using DAGs
-
8/14/2019 Loureiro et al,2010pvar effet sptial .pdf
23/41
Based on the results of the spatial autocorrelation analysis we re-estimate the reduced
form VAR using the data related only for the biggest cluster (156 MCAs) because we doubt
that the other clusters have enough information to warrant the computations of the results.
Applying TETRAD at the 0.5% significance level 19 on the estimated disturbance
covariance matrix
and assuming that the variables selected for the model are causally
sufficient 20 , we obtain what is known as a pattern 21 . The pattern is a graphical
representation of the set of observationally equivalent DAGs containing the
contemporaneous causal ordering of the variables.
The DGAs detected four valid representations of the contemporaneous causal ordering.
In accordance with this pattern three of the contemporaneous causal ordering display
causality in one direction while one indicates causal ordering exists but it does not allow to
know which one is the true 22. In this case we produced the IRFs of both identifications
separately. Fortunately we did not note any relevant difference between them 23 . The
relations derived from DGAs enter in matrix 0 A as restrictions that will help to identify the
contemporaneous relationships 24 . The figure 1 shows the matrix 0 A identified using the
causal ordering obtained from DGAs 25 . In this matrix one observes seven identified
conditions represented by zeros. Because more the VAR has four variables the matrix 0 A
requires six conditions for identification. Hence this matrix is over-identified 26.
19 The significance level cannot be interpreted as the probability of type I error for the pattern output, but merely as a parameterof the search. Based on simulation tests with random DAGs, SGS suggests setting the significance level at 20% for samplesize smaller than 100; at 10% for sample size between 100 and 300; and at 0.5% (or smaller) for larger samples. Here wefollowed their suggestion. However, slight changes in the significance level can produce large variations in TETRADs output.
20 A set of variables V is said to be causally sufficient if every common cause of any two or more variables in V is in V .TETRAD has a bias towards excluding causal relations present in the data, to overcome this problem it is suggested that a20% significance level be used.
21 A pattern is a partially oriented DAG, where the directed edges represent arrows that are common to every member in theclass, while the undirected edges are directed one way in some DAGs and another way in others. Undirected edges ( ) meanthat there is causality in one of the two directions but not on both, while double oriented edges ( ) mean causality on bothdirections.
22 The DAGs display the following pattern : pastures crops, fallow crops, forest crops and pasture forest .23
The results can be obtained under request.
24 In appendix 1 we show how to apply the causal ordering obtained by DGAs to identify matrix 0 A .
25 We assume that pasture affects forest contemporaneous but the reverse is not true.
26 See footnote 9.
-
8/14/2019 Loureiro et al,2010pvar effet sptial .pdf
24/41
FIGURE 1
10001000010
1
42
141312
0
A forest fallow past
A A Acrops
forest fallow past crops
A
5. Analysis of Empirical Results
5.2. An economic interpretation of the partition in two clusters
Given a partition built by a clustering on the mean residuals of the unrestricted
VAR model, i.e. the estimates on the whole sample of 257 Amazon municipalities 27 we
would like to know the most salient features of the partitions. In this aim, we use the notion
of valeurs -test proposed in the French school of Exploratory Data Analysis. A valeur -
test is the e quivalent of a t-stat computed on the means of the clusters, provided the that
these variables are external to the computations (Lebart & al., 1995). It is then a test of
significance of the difference of means in the clusters to the mean on the whole sample; the
test is done in the context of sampling without replacement. In this work we consider avariable mean in a cluster to significantly differ from the population mean if the valeur-test
is greater than 2.0 in absolute value. This means that a variable for which a test -score is
greater than 2.0 conveys significant information on the feature pertaining to the given
variable in the cluster. The usual and natural interpretation of these statistics carries over: a
negative score indicates a significantly inferior mean in the cluster and conversely for a
positive value.
We computed different statistics for each separate year of census and also from all
the years. This gives an interesting perspective about the evolution of the clusters
27 The data form a panel consisting in the 257 municipalities of Legal Amazon for the space domain and 5 dates in the timedomain. The dates are separated by about five years which where years of censuses. Let us stress that the partitions where builtfrom the mean residuals of the SVAR model estimated on all the panel, thus the partitions are generated on 257 meanresiduals.
-
8/14/2019 Loureiro et al,2010pvar effet sptial .pdf
25/41
characteristics through time: the partitions are fixed (fixed zoning) but test-scores may vary
at different dates. This would allow to sort out effects that may be present in the long run
(30 years) from effects that are felt differently in time or more from more recent times.
The t-scores on the illustrative attributes are used to describe the most interesting
features of the clusters in each of the two partitions. To ease the exposition, the different
attributes have been regrouped under the different topics: Demography, Agricultural
Economy, General Economy, Education, Infrastructure, Natural Environment and Land-
Use. The complete table is reported in Appendix 3. The reader is warned that not all
variables may be present for all the years, we report and comment statistics for separate
years on the available variables; note that some attributes are present on all years. For each
partition a t-score was computed on all the attributes and every cluster in the partition. Thenumber of municipalities of each cluster is indicated as a number in parentheses under the
cluster number. The t-scores have been computed on a set of 39 variables in the panel
database, on all the years. In those computations, means and standard errors were computed
using total population as a weighting variable 28.
It is interesting to present a brief description of the clusters by topic and then compare
the two partitions and comment those results. In accordance with the table of t-scores in
Appendix 3 the demographic topic t-scores show that population and consequently
dwellings are significantly higher than the average in group 1, lower and group 2, and not
significantly different from the average in group 3. Thus, the biggest cluster of 156
municipalities has a higher population, while the second is significantly less populated. We
shall see below that this is also true for the size of municipalities. For this we would have to
compute t-scores for the shares of dwellings with sanitation and electric lighting per group.
The agricultural economy profile of t-scores shows that, in cluster one, even as we haveseen average population is higher than cluster two, agricultural investment is the lowest,
while it is still lower than the average in cluster two and far higher in cluster three. The
same is true for bovine livestock, total irrigated land area and number of tractors. On the
28 More detailed results by year are available from the authors.
-
8/14/2019 Loureiro et al,2010pvar effet sptial .pdf
26/41
contrary, labor force in the agricultural sector is higher than the average in cluster three,
lower in cluster two and insignificant in cluster three. The value of wood production differs
only in cluster two, and the average rental value of land is higher in the municipalities of
cluster one, lower in those of cluster two, and not different from the average in cluster
three. However, the volume of commercialized wood is the most significantly different
from the average in cluster one, with a t-score of +27.31, lowest in cluster two (-8.75), and
significantly under the average in cluster 3. However, the average wood production
potential (cubic meters per hectare) is essentially the same in clusters one and two and it is
far above the average. Thus, it is quite clear that municipalities of cluster one are largely
devoted to logging production, having a higher population and total employment in the
agricultural sector, while those of cluster two have a more diversified agriculture that is less
reliant on logging: these have even a larger than average surface of irrigated land while being less populated on the average but still retaining a similar logging potential. Finally,
the average purchase price of live beef is significantly higher than average in cluster one,
and lower in cluster two.
The general economy profile of the clusters shows significant differences: higher share
of wages in group one, lower in group 2; significantly lower average wages in group one,
average in group three and far higher in group 3; lower industrial wages in group two but
not significantly different from the Amazon mean in groups 1 and 3; Interestingly, a very
significantly lower share of government/Banco do Brasil financing in cluster 1 but both
higher in clusters 2 and 3 and the lowest SUDAM financing for cluster one, lower than
average in group 2 and of course, significantly higher in group 3. These differences in
economic profile illustrate differences of economic structures.
Consider now the education and infrastructure profiles. Surprisingly, the share of
persons with five years of schooling is far above the Amazon average in group 1, and
significantly lower in group 2; the same is observed with the average number of years of
education in the population. On the paved roads length, cluster one shows no difference to
the average, but significantly less unpaved roads, and both lower for cluster two. There are
slight differences in infrastructure between clusters one and two, and cluster three has
significantly higher level of infrastructure. The contrast is the greatest between cluster one
-
8/14/2019 Loureiro et al,2010pvar effet sptial .pdf
27/41
-
8/14/2019 Loureiro et al,2010pvar effet sptial .pdf
28/41
Group 2: the margins; older pioneer fronts that have grown a more diversified
agriculture;
Group 3: the oldest, most developed, intensive agriculture oriented municipalities.
5.2. Analysis of IRFs for the biggest cluster (156 MCAs)
In this section we use the selected causal ordering obtained by DAGs to identify the
structural model on the biggest cluster of 156 MCA in order to build up the impulse
response functions. This procedure allows assessing the dynamic effect on different types
of land-use that derived from an unexpected innovation in a specific land-use. It can be
used to evaluate the impacts on areas of pasture, fallow and forest due to an unexpected
event on crop land. The dynamic effect includes not only the future impacts but also the
contemporaneous responses.
An important point refers to the fact that economic analysis can be indirectly performed
by means of the proper interpretation of the innovation. For instance, an unexpected
expansion of credit and subsidies implemented by a government policy aimed at promoting
agricultural activities can be seen as an innovation on the variable crop. Unexpected
movements of price can be also incorporated in this analysis like, for example, a rise in the
price of t imber may cause a growth of deforestation. In the same sense, an elevation of the
price of meat derived from a demand shock can be linked in the current context like a shock
on pasture land.
The IRFs are showed in figure 2. This figure must be viewed like a matrix in which
each graph represents the effect of a shock of the land-use of column j on the land-use ofrow i. We start the analysis of IR functions checking the consequences of a shock on crops.
In this case there exists an immediate effect on forest land. One can still see that there is lag
effect on fallow and pasture about six periods after. The new demand for cropping requires
to open new areas of forest and due to the poor quality of Amazons soil, crop land will be
transformed in the future in pasture land or left as fallow. This process is in accordance to
-
8/14/2019 Loureiro et al,2010pvar effet sptial .pdf
29/41
Smith and alli (1997) and can be considered a necessary outcome for the slash-and-burn
agriculture, a common practice in the Amazon 30
Figure 2
Impulse Response Functions
C r o p s
P a s t
P o u s
i o
F o r e s t
2 4 6 8 10 12
-2
-1
0
1
x 104Crops
2 4 6 8 10 12
-2
-1
0
1
x 104Past
2 4 6 8 10 12
-2
-1
0
1
x 104Pousio
2 4 6 8 10 12
-2
-1
0
1
x 104Forest
2 4 6 8 10 12
0
1
2
3
4
x 106
2 4 6 8 10 12
0
1
2
3
4
x 106
2 4 6 8 10 12
0
1
2
3
4
x 106
2 4 6 8 10 12
0
1
2
3
4
x 106
2 4 6 8 10 12
0
2
4
6x 10
4
2 4 6 8 10 12
0
2
4
6x 10
4
2 4 6 8 10 12
0
2
4
6x 10
4
2 4 6 8 10 12
0
2
4
6x 10
4
2 4 6 8 10 12
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
x 105
2 4 6 8 10 12
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
x 105
2 4 6 8 10 12
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
x 105
2 4 6 8 10 12
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
x 105
Contrary from the other studies, we do not find evidence that cattle ranching is the
primary driver of deforestation. The contemporaneous response of the variable forest to animpulse on pasture land is in fact positive but small compared to the response of this same
variable to a shock on crops land. As a matter of fact, it can be seen that the area of forest
30 The cycle of slash-and burn agriculture can be briefly described in the following way. In the first place, it begins withdeforestation targeting the implementation of agricultural activities involving many perennials crops. In the following stage,when the soil fertility declines, the site is used as pasture land. The cycle finishes when the soil is entirely exhausted and
pasture area is converted into fallow land.
-
8/14/2019 Loureiro et al,2010pvar effet sptial .pdf
30/41
grows in the future (figure 2, graph at row 4, column 2). As we expected the effect on the
area of fallow in response to the impulse on pasture land occurs fundamentally many
periods after the shock (graph at row 3, column 2). The figure also shows that the impact of
a shock on pasture land on itself is almost null initially but augments substantially over
time (graph at row 2, column 2) ; it do not require extra areas of forest land to clear but
rather competes with crop land (compare, graphs at row 1 and 2, column 2). In this sense
pasture affects crops not only in the current period but also in the longer term while this
long run impact appears considerably stronger than its contemporaneous counterpart. Our
results suggest evidence that, at least in this cluster, if not for all the Amazon Basin, that
cattle ranching and cropping could be competitive activities.
6. Concluding Remarks.
This paper studies the dynamics of land-use in the Brazilian Amazon using a
structural vector autoregressive (SVAR) model. The heterogeneity in the data is controlled
by the mean of fixed effect panel data. This method allows taking into account the specific
features like geographic, environmental, economic diversity present among the different
sites. Considering that the land-use is also determined by the interaction of the counties
among themselves, possible spatial autocorrelation in the data must be taken into account.
In this case spatial autocorrelation is diagnosed by a statistical methodology that allows to
us to split the model in sub-samples of more homogenous municipalities so as to re-
estimate the model on these. In doing so, cluster analysis shows that there are three clusters
whose land-use patterns are strongly different.
Furthermore, the illustrative attributes are used to describe the most interesting
features in each of the three clusters. To ease the exposition, the attributes have been
regrouped under the distinct topics such like demography, agriculture, education,
infrastructure, environment, etc. In this way it can be said that the cluster 1 identifies the
pioneer fronts; dedicated to logging, natural resources exploitation and slash-and-burn
-
8/14/2019 Loureiro et al,2010pvar effet sptial .pdf
31/41
-
8/14/2019 Loureiro et al,2010pvar effet sptial .pdf
32/41
Arellano, M. (2003) . Panel Data Econometrics. Oxford University Press.
Arellano, M. And Bond, S. (1991) . Some Tests of Specification for Panel Data: Monte
Carlo Evidence and Application to Employment and Equations. Review of Economic
Studies, 58: 277-297.
Angelsen, A. (1996). Deforestation: Population or Market Driven? Different
approaches in modelling agricultural expansion . CMI Working Papers 1996:9, Michelsen
Institute, Bergen, Norway.
Awokuse, T. and Bessler, D. (2003). Vector Autoregressions, Policy Analysis, and
Directed Acyclic Graphs: an Application to the U.S. Economy . Journal of Applied
Economics VI(1): 1-24.
Baltagi, B. H. (1995). Econometric Analysis of Panel Data. John Wiley and Sons.
Bessler, D. and Lee, S. (2002). Money and Prices: U.S. Data 1869-1914 (A Study with Directed Graphs) . Empirical Economics 27: 427-446.
Binswanger, H.P. (1991). Brazilian Policies that Encourage Deforestation in the
Amazon. World Development, 19(7): 821-829.
Browder, J. O. (1988). The Social Cost of Rainforest Destruction: a critique of the
hamburger debate . Intercience, 13: 115-120.
Case, A. C. (1991). Spatial Patterns in Household Demand . Econometrica, 59 (4): 953-
965.
Demiralp, S. and Hoover, K. (2003). Searching for the Causal Structure of a Vector
Autoregression. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics 65 (Supplement): 745-767.
Enders, W. (1995). Applied Econometric Time Series, John Wiley and Sons.
Faminow, M. D. (1998). Cattle, Deflorestation and Development in Latin American.
CAB International.
Fearnside, P. M. (2006). Desmatamento na Amaznia: dinmica, impactos e controle .
Acta Amaznica, 36(3): 395-400.
Hamilton, J. (1993). Time Series Analysis. Princeton University Press.
Hsiao, C. 1995. Analysis of Panel Data . Cambridge University Press.
Jacobs, R. Leamer, E. E. and Ward, M. P. (1979). Difficulties with Testing for
Causation. Economic Inquiry, 17: 401-413.
-
8/14/2019 Loureiro et al,2010pvar effet sptial .pdf
33/41
Lebart, L., Morineau, A., Tabart, N. (1995). Statistique Exploratoire
Multidimensionnelle . Dunod, Paris.
Mahar, D. (1989). Government Policies and Deforestation in Brazil's Amazon Region .
Washington, DC: World Bank
Myers, N. (1994). Tropical Deforestation Rates and Patterns . In: Brown, K and Pearce,
D. (eds.) The causes of tropical deforestation, the economic and statistical analysis of
factors giving rise to the loss of tropical forests, 172-91. University College London Press.
Nepstad, D. C., Moreira, A. G. e Alencar, A. A. 1999 A Floresta em Chamas: Origens,
Impactos e Preveno de Fogo na Amaznia. Braslia: Programa Piloto para a Proteo
das Florestas Tropicais do Brasil .
Pearl, J. (2000). Causality: Models, Reasoning, and Inference. Cambridge University
Press.Pearl, J. and Verma, T. (1991). A Theory of Inferred Causation. In J. Allen, Fikes, R.
and
Pfaff, A.S. 1999. What drives deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon? Evidence from
Satellite and Socioeconomic Data. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,
37(1): 26-43.
Reis, E. J. and Blanco, F. A. (1997). The Causes of Brazilian Amazon Deforestation .
Working Paper, IPEA.
Reis, E and Guzmn, R. 1994. An Econometric Model of Amazon Deforestation . In:
Brown,K and Pearce, D. (eds.) The causes of tropical deforestation, the economic and
statistical analysis of factors giving rise to the loss of tropical forests, 172-91. University
College London Press, London.
Reis, E. J., Pimentel and Alvarenga, A. I. (2007). Areas Minimas Comparaveis entre os
Anos de 1920 a 2000. WP NEMESIS.
Robins, J., Sheines, R., Spirtes, P. and Wasserman, L. (2003). Uniform Consitency in
Causal Inference . Biometrika 90(3): 491-515.
Rothenberg, T.J. (1971) Identification in Parametric Models. Econometrica, VOL. 39,
NO. 3-May, 1971. pp. 577-592.
-
8/14/2019 Loureiro et al,2010pvar effet sptial .pdf
34/41
Smith, J., Winograd, M., Gallopin, G. and Pachico, D. (1998). Dynamics of the
Agricutural Frontier in the Amazon: analysing the impact of policy and tecnology.
Environmental Modelling and Assessment, 3:31-46.
Spirtes, P., Glymour, C. and Scheines, R. (1993). Causation, Prediction, and Search .
Lecture Notes in Statistics 81. Springer-Verlag.
48(4): 555-568. 2000). Causation, Prediction, and Search. MIT Press.
Soares-Filho, B. S.; Nepstad, D.; Curran, L.; Voll, E.; Cerqueira, G.; Garcia, R. A.;
Ramos, C.; McDonald, A.; Lefebvre, P.; Schilesinger, P. Modeling Conservation in the
Amazon Basin . Nature, 440: 520-523, 2006.
Scheneider, R. R. (1992). An Economic Analysis of the Environmental Problem in the
Amazon . Draft, World Bank.
Swanson, N. and Granger, C. (1997). Impulse Response Functions Based on a Causal Approach to Residual Orthogonalization in Vector Autoregressions . Journal of the
American Statistical Association 92(437): 357-367.
Toiolo, A. and Uhl, C. (1995). Economic and Ecological Perspectives on Agriculture in
Eastern Amazon . World Development, 23: 959-973.
Walker, R. and Homma, A. K. O. (1996). Land-use and land Cover Dynamics in
Brazilian Amazon: an overview. Ecological Economics, 18: 67-80.
Wassenaar, T., Gerber, P. Verburg, P.H., Rosales, M., Ibrahim M. and Steinfeld, H.
(2007). Projecting land-use changes in the Neotropics: The geography of pasture
expansion into forest., Global Environmental Change, 17(1): 86-104.
Weinhold, D. (1999). Estimating the Loss of Agricultural Productivity in the Amazon.
Ecological Economics, 31: 63-76.
Appendix 1. DAGS and the Identification of Structural Form VAR
The SGS procedures allow us to establish the conditional independence relations that
are equivalent to determining whose coefficients of matrix A 0 are equal to zero. The
framework developed by SGS does not rule out the possibility of finding alternative
sets of conditional independence relations for a given data set. In this case we arrive at a
-
8/14/2019 Loureiro et al,2010pvar effet sptial .pdf
35/41
set of matrices A 0 that are observationally equivalent. It may be the case that the found
conditional independence relations are not enough to allow for the identification of the
matrices. In this case, additional restrictions are needed in order to identify the model.
Next we show how DAGs can be used to impose restrictions that allows identification
of Structural VARS (SVARs). In the example below we assume that the VAR has 4
endogenous variables.
The relationship between reduced form and structural form residuals is given by the
following equation:
t = [I -A 0 ] t + t
where: t column vector, with dimension 4x1, with reduced form VAR residuals at
period t;
t column vector, with dimension 4x1, with structural form VAR residual at period t;
A0 full rank matrix with the relationship between the two types of residuals.
The above equations form a system of linear equations, where each variable (reduced
form residual) is a linear function of its direct causes and an error term (structuralresidual), with error terms independent of each other. If the graph G that represents the
model has no cycles (is a DAG) then the variables are generated by a Markovian model.
Therefore, the model satisfy the property that guarantees the compatibility between its
distribution function and graph G 31 . Because conditional independence implies zero
partial correlation, Proposition 2 translates into a graphical test for identifying the
partial correlations that must vanish in the model 32 . Therefore, equations (3) can be
structured according to a DAG G, and the partial correlation coefficient 3V.2V1V
vanishes whenever the vertices corresponding to the variables in V 3 d-separate vertex
V1 from vertex V 2 in G.
31 For a sketch of the proof see Pearl (2000).
32 The partial correlation coefficient of X and Y, controlling for Z is given
by 2/12/1. )1()1/()( YZ XZ YZ XZ XY Z XY .
-
8/14/2019 Loureiro et al,2010pvar effet sptial .pdf
36/41
-
8/14/2019 Loureiro et al,2010pvar effet sptial .pdf
37/41
Appendix 2. Clustering Analysis using Bootstrapped Moran I computations
The following table gives the bootstrapped Moran I computations for cluster 1 and 2of map 1. Here cluster 1 is composed of 156 municipalities and cluster 2 of 75
municipalities. The 26 municipalities cluster is not included as the model could not be
estimated because of insufficient degrees of freedom. All the computations were performed
in GRETL because GEODA is lacking functionalities to select subsamples and compute
associated stats.
Here we present for comparison both final results for the truncated matrices and the
correctly re-indexed matrix but only for the nearest neighbors structure. To be more
precise, it is not possible to re-index the contiguity because when a neighbor is in another
group, there are no new neighbor to replace it. This is why the border effect must be
stronger, and subsequently the bias for the contiguity neighborhood. Table 3 presents the
results for both computations of neighborhood, this allows to compare results and
interestingly provide a qualitative assessment of border effects biases.
Table 3: Moran test and bootstrap p-values for clusters I and II
-
8/14/2019 Loureiro et al,2010pvar effet sptial .pdf
38/41
*significant at 10%; ** significant at 5 % ; *** significant at 1 % ; All tests performedwith 999 permutations; NA: Not Applicable.
Zone 1: spatial autocorrelation is not significant for the 4NN, except for the fallow
residuals. We know from initial computations on the whole model that fallow residuals
display the strongest spatial autocorrelation, here it is significant at 5 % but largely
reduced. For the 8NN, spatial autocorrelation is significant for crop and pasture . Note that
it is negative for crop which is an interesting result meaning crop residuals values are
significantly dissimilar at farther distance. Note that it is the only variable for which we
find negative spatial autocorrelation. Then, both pasture and forest residuals do not display
any significant spatial autocorrelation in the residuals of zone 1.
Neighborhood
structureVariables
Moran I test sample
Trucated matrices Correct matrices
Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 1 Zone 2
MoranI
Bootstrap
pvalue
for t
MoranI
Bootstrap
pvalue
for t
MoranI
Bootstrap
pvalue
for t
MoranI
Bootstrap
pvalue
for t
First Order
Contiguity
CROP -0.091 0.072* 0.176 0.004***
NAPASTURE 0.256 0.003*** 0.638 0.000***
FALLOW -0.010 0.842 0.088 0.120
FOREST 0.062 0.219 0.252 0.001***
4NN
CROP -0.007 0.691 0.186 0.005*** -0.004 0.802 0.219 0.120
PASTURE 0.023 0.243 0.259 0.000*** 0.019 0.310 0.388 0.233
FALLOW 0.032 0.089* 0.058 0.203 0.064 0.041** 0.095 0.048**
FOREST 0.058 0.131 0.173 0.000*** 0.016 0.617 0.221 0.125
8NN
CROP -0.044 0.006*** 0.120 0.005*** -0.044 0.011** 0.004 0.004***
PASTURE 0.025 0.144 0.201 0.000*** 0.026 0.118 0.000 0.000***
FALLOW 0.020 0.221 0.067 0.055* 0.051 0.014** 0.049 0.243
FOREST 0.031 0.281 0.132 0.001 0.025 0.388 0.000 0.002***
-
8/14/2019 Loureiro et al,2010pvar effet sptial .pdf
39/41
Zone 2: At the 4NN we find the same results as for zone 1: significant spatial
autocorrelation for fallow residuals. At the 8NN the picture is quite different, as we see
significant autocorrelation for crop, pasture and forest residuals. The comparison of the
results for truncated and correct neighborhood matrices show differences in values that are
substantial for zone 2 (large differences) but smaller for zone 2. Also, the computed values
for zone 1 at 8NN are nearly the same but significance levels differ strongly. These
findings point to substantial biases due the boundary (border) effects and open interesting
further research on this subject.
Appendix 3.
Table 4: t-scores for selected variables for partitions in two clusters
whole panel, years 1970-1995
Topics
Variables Cluster
1
(156)
Cluster
2
(75)
Cluster
3
(26)
Demograp
hy
Total population 11.43 -11.54 -0.92
Urban population 10.79 -11.04 -0.81
Total dwellings 9.70 -11.07 -0.35
Dwellings with water 8.66 -10.13 -0.21
Dwellings with sanitation 6.59 -7.84 -0.10
Dwellings with electric lighting 9.54 -10.59 -0.46
Agricultur
al
Economy
Agricultural sector investments -9.13 -4.05 6.39
Total employement in agricultural
sector
4.46 -6.18 0.17
Bovine livestock -8.78 -3.47 5.97
Irrigated land area -7.96 2.15 3.28
-
8/14/2019 Loureiro et al,2010pvar effet sptial .pdf
40/41
Total number of tractors -11.31 -4.07 7.53
Value of wood production -0.19 -3.15 1.40
Average rental value of land (per
hectare)
4.10 -3.08 -1.04
Total volume of commercialized
wood
27.31 -8.75 -2.79
Average volume of wood in
munipicality
10.72 11.39 -7.15
Average purchase price of live beef 6.41 -3.75 -1.39
General
Economy
Share of wages in total expenses 4.09 -8.73 1.26
Average wage per employed -8.49 -0.91 4.78
Average wage in industry 1.97 -3.18 0.20
Share of direct government / Banco
do Brasil aids
-13.84 5.56 5.32
Surface of SUDAM financed projects -7.88 -5.67 5.94
Value of SUDAM financing -13.59 -3.35 7.78
Education
Share of population w. 5 yrs. or more
of education
10.51 -12.25 -1.41
Average number of years ofschooling
4.45 -9.40 1.57
Infrastruct
ure
Lenght of paved roads -0.08 -7.14 2.81
Lenght of unpaved roads -9.40 -6.80 7.07
Natural
Environment
Surface in 1997 2.94 -8.93 2.07
Land carbon content per hectare -4.39 -7.30 5.53
Share of water masses 11.25 -8.25 -2.87
Land nitrogen content per hectare -2.81 -7.98 4.95
Deforested area -8.50 -6.92 2.91
Land-use
Surface devoted to agriculture -10.28 -5.12 7.42
Artificial forest area -0.79 -4.25 2.12
Natural forests area -6.27 -6.75 5.99
-
8/14/2019 Loureiro et al,2010pvar effet sptial .pdf
41/41
Permanent plowing area 4.22 -5.67 0.09
Temporary plowing area -10.59 -4.39 7.28
Artificial pastures area -10.93 -3.07 6.93
Natural pastures area -13.77 -2.21 8.06
Resting land area -7.69 -2.46 5.00