Tropical forests support immense biodiversity and provide essential ecosystem services for billions of people. Despite this value, tropical deforestation continues at a high rate. Emerging evidence... Show moreTropical forests support immense biodiversity and provide essential ecosystem services for billions of people. Despite this value, tropical deforestation continues at a high rate. Emerging evidence suggests that elections can play an important role in shaping deforestation, for instance by incentivising politicians to allow increased utilisation of forests in return for political support. Nevertheless, the role of elections as driver of deforestation has not yet been comprehensively tested at broad geographic scales. Here, we created an annual database from 2001 to 2018 on political elections and forest loss for 55 tropical nations and modelled the effect of elections on deforestation. In total, 1.5 million km2 of forest was lost during this time period, especially in the Amazon, the Congo Basin and in Southeast Asia. The annual rate of deforestation increased in 37 (67 %) of the analysed countries. Deforestation was significantly lower in years with uncompetitive lower chamber elections compared to competitive election years (i.e. when the opposition can participate in elections and has a legitimate chance to gain governmental power). Our results show a pervasive loss of tropical forests and suggest that competitive elections can be potential drivers of deforestation. Future analyses at higher resolution (intra-annual deforestation and sub-national governance) and simultaneous collection of data on additional mechanisms (legislative changes, financial investments, and binding term limits) will likely provide additional insights into the impacts of elections. We therefore recommend that organisations monitoring election transparency and fairness should also monitor environmental impacts such as forest loss, habitat destruction and resource exploitation. Show less
