Livelihood Capitals and Opportunity Cost for Grazing Areas’ Restoration: A Sustainable Intensification Strategy in the Ecuadorian Amazon

SIMPLE SUMMARY: Land sparing and land sharing should be considered complementary strategies to favor pasture areas’ restoration in the Ecuadorian Amazon Region (EAR). Their implementation will depend on factors such as the livelihoods, natural resources’ valuation and income from livestock activity (dual-purpose cattle farms). A sample of 167 farms of the EAR distributed in the three altitudinal gradients (high, medium, and low) was used. The different livelihood capitals and the opportunity cost of the grazing area was calculated. Therefore, to promote pasture restoration areas, policy strategy should aim to maximize net benefits by unit area (ha). Starting from the results obtained, different strategies of restoration are proposed by altitudinal gradient and productive specialization: (a) Land-sparing restoration actions; in middle hill and low zones, land could be destined to produce ecosystem services, i.e., a strategy that promotes ecosystem restoration through environmental payments and considers at least the opportunity and transaction costs. (b) Land-sharing pasture restoration, which would focus on high mountain farms with a strategy of sustainable intensification and food security. ABSTRACT: Land use change in pastures is considered one of the leading drivers of tropical deforestation in the Ecuadorian Amazon Region (EAR). To halt and reverse this process, it is necessary to understand, among other factors, the local livelihoods, income from grazing area and the appropriate options to foster sustainable production, incorporating the land-sparing and land-sharing approach. This work was conducted using 167 household surveys along an altitudinal gradient within the buffer and transition zone of the Sumaco Biosphere Reserve (SBR) in the EAR. The results of a comparative analysis of the main capital variables (human, social, natural, financial, and physical), and the opportunity cost of grazing area assessment provides the following key findings: (a) the concepts of land sparing and land sharing should be considered as complementary local strategies, including household livelihoods and the opportunity cost of the grazing area; (b) we should encourage markets with differentiated restoration rights, based on households engaged in low grazing areas’ opportunity costs, and making less impact on capitals’ livelihood a key element of economic and conservation initiatives; and (c) sectoral policy implications, including moderate intensification and technological improvements to strengthen the pastureland-sparing and -sharing approach, are discussed.