Sebastian Bustos

Alarming rates of forest loss in the Colombian Amazon have created a perceived trade-off that the only means of achieving economic prosperity is by sacrificing the forest. This study finds little evidence of this trade-off; rather, we find that economic development and forest protection are not an either-or choice. Forest clearing is driven by extensive cattle-ranching as a means to secure land titles. In essence, the loss of some of the world’s richest biodiversity is the result of some of the least economically complex activities that fail to achieve economic prosperity in the region. If anything, the acceleration in deforestation has accompanied a period of economic stagnation.

The existing economic model in the Amazon – centered on agrarian colonization and mineral extraction – has not generated prosperity for the people, all while failing the forest. The exceptional diversity of the Amazon’s biome is not reflected in the region’s economy. The Amazonian economy is best characterized by its low diversity and low complexity. A significant proportion of employment is linked to public administration – more than in other departments of the country. Very little of the production in the departments is destined to be consumed outside the departments ("exported").

This study seeks to define an alternative economic model for the Colombian Amazon from the perspective of economic complexity with environmental sustainability. Economic complexity research finds that the productive potential of places depends not only on the soil or natural resources, but on the productive capabilities—or knowhow—held by its people. This research finds that the Colombian Amazon will not become rich by adding value to its raw materials or by specializing in one economic activity. Rather, economic development is best described as a process of expanding the set of capabilities present to be able to produce a more diverse set of goods, of increasingly greater complexity. This model starts from the base of understanding the existing productive capabilities in Caquetá, Guaviare, and Putumayo, to identify high-potential economic sectors that build off those capabilities to achieve new, sustainable pathways to shared prosperity.

Achieving shared prosperity in the Amazon depends on the connectivity and opportunity in its urban areas. The primary drivers of greater economic complexity – and prosperity – are the cities in the Amazon. Even in the remote areas of the Amazon, the majority of people in Caquetá, Guaviare, and Putumayo live in urban areas. The low prosperity in the Colombian Amazon is driven by the lack of prosperous cities. The report finds that Amazonian cities are affected by the lack of connectivity to major Colombian cities that limit their ability to ‘export’ things outside the department to then expand the capacity to ‘import’ the things that are not produced locally as a means to improve well-being.

The Colombian Amazon faces the dual challenge of low economic growth and high deforestation. High rates of deforestation in Colombia have led to a perceived trade-off between economic development and protecting the forest. However, we find little evidence of this trade-off: rising deforestation is not associated with higher economic growth. In fact, the forces of deforestation of some of the world’s most complex biodiversity are driven by some of the least complex economic activities, like cattle-ranching, whose subsistence-level incomes are unable to meet the economic ambitions for the region. All the while, the majority of the Amazonian departments’ population works in non-forested cities and towns, at a distance from the agriculture frontier that forms the “arc of deforestation.” The relative urbanization of the Amazonian departments, despite the vast land mass available, recognizes that prosperity is achieved through close social-economic interactions to expand the knowledge set available to be able to produce more, and more complex activities. Achieving economic goals therefore relies on creating new productive opportunities in non-forested, urban areas.

The risk of deforestation reduces incentives to improve the connectivity of Amazonian departments with major cities and export markets. The remoteness of these departments increases the cost of ‘exporting’ goods to markets outside the departments. Poor connectivity contributes to the low economic complexity of the departments. In turn, the low complexity reduces incentives to coordinate new investments that would generate returns to greater connectivity. Coordination failures, which occur when a group of economic actors (e.g., firms, workers) could achieve a better outcome but fail to do so because they do not coordinate their actions, are widespread in all three of the Amazonian departments studied. This limits the creation of new capabilities and productive diversification to generate new jobs and higher incomes.

We posit that economic growth in the Colombian Amazonian is limited by a “connectivity trap” whereby the lack of external market connectivity restricts economic complexity, and, in turn, the low complexity fosters the coordination failures that limit returns to new diversification. Ultimately, low returns to diversification further reduce incentives to improve connectivity. Underpinning the connectivity trap is the belief that limiting the connectivity of Amazonian departments with large Colombian cities and the broader global economy will limit incentives for deforestation. Yet, deforestation has accelerated in recent years, despite the continued poor connectivity. We argue that Colombia must create a new national law to curb deforestation by eliminating the financial incentives for land speculation. Reclassifying forested lands under the control of national protection systems with severe restrictions on economic activities and strengthened enforcement, as detailed in an accompanying report, provides the needed legal clarity regarding land formalization. Within the law to eliminate incentives for deforestation, the national government should create a new development approach for the Colombian Amazon. This approach must move beyond a natural resource-based approach to the region, to center on the productive potential of its urban areas, and the carbon markets and tourism potential of its forested areas. One pillar of this approach is to build new public sector capabilities to coordinate investments into new, targeted productive sectors to create new national-local mechanisms of investment promotion. A second pillar is to improve connectivity to external markets through road and air investments between Caquetá, Guaviare, and Putumayo and major cities and ports.

Las alarmantes tasas de pérdida de bosques en la Amazonia colombiana han creado la percepción de que el único medio para lograr la prosperidad económica es sacrificar el bosque. Este estudio encuentra poca evidencia de esta percepción; más bien, encontramos que el desarrollo económico y la protección de los bosques no son una opción entre uno u otro. La tala de bosques está impulsada por la ganadería extensiva como medio para asegurar títulos de propiedad de la tierra. En esencia, la pérdida de una de las biodiversidades más ricas del mundo es el resultado de algunas de las actividades económicamente menos complejas que no permiten lograr la prosperidad económica en la región. En todo caso, la aceleración de la deforestación ha ido acompañada de un período de estancamiento económico.

El modelo económico existente en la Amazonía—centrado en la colonización agraria y la extracción de minerales—no ha generado prosperidad para la gente y le ha fallado al bosque. La excepcional diversidad del bioma amazónico no se refleja en la economía de la región. La economía amazónica se caracteriza mejor por su baja diversidad y complejidad. Una proporción significativa del empleo está vinculada a la administración pública, más que en otros departamentos del país. Muy poca de la producción de los departamentos se destina a ser consumida fuera de los departamentos ("exportada").

Este estudio busca definir un modelo económico alternativo para la Amazonía colombiana desde la perspectiva de la complejidad económica con la sostenibilidad ambiental. La investigación sobre la complejidad económica encuentra que el potencial productivo de los lugares depende no sólo del suelo o los recursos naturales, sino también de las capacidades productivas (o conocimientos técnicos) de su gente. Esta investigación encuentra que la Amazonía colombiana no se enriquecerá agregando valor a sus materias primas o especializándose en una sola actividad económica. Más bien, el desarrollo económico se describe mejor como un proceso de expansión del conjunto de capacidades presentes para poder producir un conjunto cada vez más diverso y complejo. Este modelo parte de la base de comprender las capacidades productivas existentes en Caquetá, Guaviare y Putumayo, para identificar sectores económicos de alto potencial que aprovechen esas capacidades para lograr caminos nuevos y sostenibles hacia la prosperidad compartida.

Lograr una prosperidad compartida en la Amazonía depende de la conectividad y las oportunidades en sus áreas urbanas. Los principales impulsores de una mayor complejidad económica—y prosperidad— son las ciudades de la Amazonía. Incluso en las zonas remotas de la Amazonía, la mayoría de la población de Caquetá, Guaviare y Putumayo vive en zonas urbanas. La baja prosperidad en la Amazonía colombiana se debe a la falta de ciudades prósperas. El informe encuentra que las ciudades amazónicas se ven afectadas por la falta de conectividad con las principales ciudades colombianas que limitan su capacidad de 'exportar' cosas fuera del departamento para luego ampliar la capacidad de 'importar' las cosas que no se producen localmente como medio para mejorar el bienestar. 

La Amazonía colombiana enfrenta un desafío doble: bajo crecimiento económico y alta deforestación. Las altas tasas de deforestación en Colombia han llevado a que se crea que el desarrollo económico no puede tener lugar si se protege la selva. Nosotros no encontramos evidencia que sustente esa dicotomía: el aumento de la deforestación no está asociado a un mayor crecimiento económico. Las fuerzas detrás de la deforestación de una de las áreas con mayor biodiversidad en el planeta se sustentan en algunas de las actividades económicas menos complejas, como la ganadería extensiva, cuyos ingresos son incapaces de cumplir con las ambiciones económicas de la región. Al mismo tiempo, la mayoría de la población de los departamentos amazónicos trabaja en ciudades y pueblos desprovistos de selva, lejos de la frontera agropecuaria que forma el “arco de deforestación”. La relativa urbanización de los departamentos amazónicos, pese a la gran masa de tierra disponible, constituye un reconocimiento de que la prosperidad solo se logra mediante interacciones socioeconómicas que expanden el conjunto de conocimientos disponible para que se pueda producir más, y mediante actividades más complejas. Por lo tanto, para alcanzar las metas económicas hay que crear nuevas oportunidades productivas en las áreas urbanas sin selva.

El riesgo de deforestación reduce los incentivos para mejorar la conectividad de los departamentos amazónicos con las grandes ciudades y los mercados de exportación. El carácter remoto de estos departamentos aumenta el costo de “exportar” bienes a mercados que están fuera de estos departamentos. La conectividad precaria de la región contribuye a su baja complejidad económica, que a su vez reduce los incentivos para coordinar nuevas inversiones que podrían generar retornos a partir de una mayor conectividad. Las fallas de coordinación - que ocurren cuando un grupo de actores económicos (como empresas y trabajadores) podrían lograr un mejor resultado, pero no logran hacerlo pues no coordinan sus acciones respectivas - son extendidas en los tres departamentos amazónicos bajo estudio. Esto limita la creación de nuevas capacidades y la diversificación productiva que podrían generar nuevos empleos y mayores ingresos.

Planteamos que el crecimiento económico en la Amazonía colombiana está siendo limitado por una “trampa de conectividad” donde la falta de conectividad con los mercados externos restringe la complejidad económica, y a su vez la baja complejidad alienta las fallas de coordinación que limitan los retornos de una nueva diversificación. A fin de cuentas, los bajos retornos de la diversificación reducen aún más los incentivos para mejorar la conectividad. Como trasfondo de la trampa de conectividad está la creencia de que limitar la conectividad de los departamentos amazónicos con las grandes ciudades colombianas y el resto de la economía global limitará también los incentivos para la deforestación. Pero la deforestación se ha acelerado en los últimos años, mientras que la conectividad sigue siendo muy mala. Nosotros argumentamos que Colombia debe crear una nueva ley nacional para frenar la deforestación que elimine los incentivos financieros de la especulación con tierras, al reclasificar las áreas selváticas bajo control de los sistemas nacionales de protección para que tengan severas restricciones sobre las actividades que se puedan emprender en ellas, y se refuercen las labores de cumplimiento de la ley, como se comenta en detalle en el reporte siguiente. Con una ley que elimine los incentivos para la deforestación, el gobierno nacional debe crear un nuevo enfoque del desarrollo para la Amazonía colombiana. Este enfoque debe trascender el basado en los recursos naturales y centrarse en el potencial productivo de las áreas urbanas, así como en los mercados de carbono y el potencial turístico de las áreas selváticas. Un pilar de este enfoque es la construcción de nuevas capacidades en el sector público, que le permitan coordinar inversiones en nuevos sectores productivos específicos, para crear nuevos mecanismos locales y nacionales de promoción de inversiones. Un segundo pilar es la mejora de la conectividad con los mercados externos, mediante inversiones en carreteras y transporte aéreo entre Caquetá, Guaviare y Putumayo, y las grandes ciudades y los puertos.

¿Hay que sacrificar la selva para traer prosperidad económica a la Amazonía colombiana? Según este compendio de investigación compuesto por una serie de estudios sobre esa región, la respuesta es “no”: la percepción que hay un dilema entre crecimiento económico y protección de la selva es una falsa dicotomía. Los factores que impulsan la deforestación y la prosperidad son distinguibles entre sí, y tienen lugar en sitios diferentes. La deforestación ocurre en la frontera agropecuaria, donde uno de los entornos con mayor complejidad biológica del mundo está siendo destruido por algunas de las actividades económicas menos complejas, en particular la ganadería extensiva. En cambio, los motores económicos de la Amazonía son sus áreas urbanas, que en su mayoría están ubicadas lejos del borde de la selva, como es el caso de las áreas localizadas en el piedemonte y que no cuentan con un bosque denso. Estas ciudades ofrecen mayor complejidad económica con su acceso a un rango más amplio de capacidades productivas en actividades de mayores ingresos, con poca presencia de las actividades que favorecen la deforestación. Tal vez la cara menos notoria de la vida en cada una de las tres regiones amazónicas estudiadas, Caquetá, Guaviare y Putumayo, es que la mayoría de la gente vive en áreas urbanas. Este hecho dice mucho sobre la geografía económica de esos lugares: incluso en las partes más remotas de la Amazonía, la gente quiere vivir cerca de los demás, en áreas densamente pobladas. Esto además corrobora los hallazgos de nuestra investigación global en las últimas dos décadas: para traer prosperidad hay que expandir las capacidades productivas disponibles a nivel local y así diversificar la producción de ese lugar hacia más actividades y que posean mayor complejidad.  

Does economic prosperity in the Colombian Amazon require sacrificing the forest? This research compendium of a series of studies on the Colombian Amazon finds the answer to this question is no: the perceived trade-off between economic growth and forest protection is a false dichotomy. The drivers of deforestation and prosperity are distinct – as they happen in different places. Deforestation occurs at the agricultural frontier, in destroying some of the world’s most complex biodiversity by some of the least economically complex activities, particularly cattle-ranching. By contrast, the economic drivers in the Amazon are its urban areas often located far from the forest edge, including in non-forested piedmont regions. These cities offer greater economic complexity by accessing a wider range of productive capabilities in higher-income activities with little presence of those activities driving deforestation. Perhaps the most underappreciated facet of life in each of the three Amazonian regions studied, Caquetá, Guaviare, and Putumayo, is that the majority of people live in urban areas. This is a telling fact of economic geography: that even in the remote parts of the Amazon, people want to come together to live in densely populated areas. This corroborates the findings of our global research over the past two decades that prosperity results from expanding the productive capabilities available locally to diversify production to do more, and more complex, activities.

One of the consequences of COVID-19 is the recognition that many tasks can be done from home. But anything that can done remotely, can be done from abroad.

Given large salary differences between white collar workers across countries, it would make sense for value chains to try to exploit them. This opens an opportunity for Colombia to further promote its integration into the world global value chains and access new markets.

This paper explores the possibility of exporting teleworkable services from Colombia. The goal is to provide useful information to guide strategic interventions to speed-up the development of such service industries in Colombia.

We first introduce a definition of teleworkable jobs and describe its occupations and industries along different dimensions. We show that there are many teleworkable jobs in the US, representing a significant share of industry costs. Then, we show that many industries intensive in teleworkable jobs are currently traded across borders. To quantify Colombia’s advantage providing teleworkable services, we study the cost structure of industries and quantify the potential savings in overall costs if the tasks were performed by Colombians. Given Colombia’s current presence and the density around teleworkable industries we can calculate a proxy of the latent advantage in teleworkable services. We propose an index that summarize these dimensions and rank the potential gains from including telework from Colombia in an industry. We end with a set of policy recommendations to move this agenda forward.

Cities and countries undergo constant structural transformation. Industries need many inputs, such as regulations, infrastructure or productive knowledge, which we call capabilities. And locations are successful in hosting industries insofar as the capabilities that they can provide. We propose a capabilities-based production model and an empirical strategy to measure the Sophistication of a product and the Production Ability of a location. We apply our framework to international trade data and employment data in the United States, recovering measures of Production Ability for countries and cities, and the Sophistication of products and industries. We show that both country- and city-level measures have a strong correlation with income and economic growth at different time horizons. Product Sophistication is positively correlated with indicators of human capital and wages. Our model-based estimations predict product appearances and disappearances through the extensive margin.

We study the effects of local tariff drops for Mexican exports to the US on the local electoral performance of Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO) in Mexico’s 2006 presidential election. In an effort to appeal to his rural base, AMLO proposed to unilaterally retain tariff exemptions on imported corn and beans, which were scheduled to drop under NAFTA by the end of 2008. This elevated protectionism in the public agenda during the campaign. We find that local economic gains due to export tariff drops under NAFTA between 1994 and 2001 led to a drop in AMLO’s local vote share gains in 2006. These effects are contingent to the 2006 election, as similar effects on local vote for the left are not found in previous or later elections. Results are robust to controls for local grain growing and Chinese competition. We predict that AMLO would have been elected in 2006 had protectionism not been a salient electoral issue. Our findings suggest export access gains due to globalization undermine local political preferences over national protectionist platforms.

Production is shaped by capability requirements of products and availability of these capabilities across locations. We propose a capabilities based production model and an empirical strategy to measure product sophistication and location’s production ability. We apply our framework to international trade data, and employment data in the US, recovering measures of production ability for countries and cities, and sophistication of products and industries. We show that both country and city level measures have a strong correlation with income, and economic growth at different time horizons. Product sophistication is positively correlated with measures like education and training needed in the industry. Our model-based estimations also predict the diversification patterns through the extensive margin.

Countries seldom grow rich by producing more of the same. Development implies changes in what countries produce. Structural transformation is the process by which countries move into new economic activities. In turn, new economic activities are the ones that are able to achieve higher levels of productivity, pay higher wages and increase the level of prosperity of a country’s population. Structural transformation is crucial for economic growth: countries that are able to upgrade their production and exports by moving into new and more complex economic activities tend to grow faster.

Decades of research in ecology have shown that nestedness is a ubiquitous characteristic of both, biological and economic ecosystems. The dynamics of nestedness, however, have rarely been observed. Here we show that the nestedness of both, the network connecting countries to the products that they export and the network connecting municipalities to the industries that are present in them, remains constant over time. Moreover, we find that the conservation of nestedness is sustained by both, a bias for industries that deviate from the networks' nestedness to disappear, and a bias for the industries that are missing according to nestedness to appear. This makes the appearance and disappearance of individual industries in each location predictable. The conservation of nestedness in industrial ecosystems, and the predictability implied by it, demonstrates the importance of industrial ecosystems in the long term survival of economic activities.

Over the past two centuries, mankind has accomplished what used to be unthinkable. When we look back at our long list of achievements, it is easy to focus on the most audacious of them, such as our conquest of the skies and the moon. Our lives, however, have been made easier and more prosperous by a large number of more modest, yet crucially important feats. Think of electric bulbs, telephones, cars, personal computers, antibiotics, TVs, refrigerators, watches and water heaters. Think of the many innovations that benefit us despite our minimal awareness of them, such as advances in port management, electric power distribution, agrochemicals and water purification. This progress was possible because we got smarter. During the past two centuries, the amount of productive knowledge we hold expanded dramatically. This was not, however, an individual phenomenon. It was a collective phenomenon. As individuals we are not much more capable than our ancestors, but as societies we have developed the ability to make all that we have mentioned – and much, much more.

For up-to-date datasets and new visualizations, visit atlas.cid.harvard.edu.