What happened
A study led by the University of Bath examined a two-year cash-support pilot run by UK charity Cool Earth in three communities in Peru’s Asháninka region. The scheme gave 211 Indigenous participants unrestricted payments of 1,032 Peruvian soles each, equivalent to roughly £2 per day.
Researchers found that about 90% of those taking part adopted practices regarded as beneficial for the environment. These included collective tree planting, work to improve important water sources and reduced use of burning that can lead to forest fires.
The study also recorded a reduction in households struggling to obtain nutritious food, from 73% to 26%. The share of participants who left their communities to seek work fell from 43% to 18%.
The project included an optional additional programme, designed with community leadership, covering finance, conservation and climate-change education.
Why it matters
The findings add to debate among aid and environmental organisations over whether direct, unrestricted finance can help Indigenous communities remain on forest land and support conservation. The researchers link greater financial security with lower pressure to pursue activities that can damage forests.
For organisations considering nature and climate finance, the pilot suggests that local communities can be direct recipients of funding rather than solely programme beneficiaries. However, the evidence does not establish that cash transfers will have the same effect in every forest setting.
Background
Indigenous communities in the Amazon face pressure from mining, logging, farming and land appropriation, according to the report. The study’s authors say the initiative was the first to offer an unconditional basic income to an Indigenous community in the Amazon.
Other research has raised potential risks. Additional income may in some places be used to expand farming, potentially increasing forest loss. The article also notes reports that cash assistance in parts of the Amazon has been used to buy motor vehicles, increasing demand for roads, while journeys to collect payments may expose communities to other harms.
What's next
The authors say more extensive research is needed before drawing broader conclusions about environmental effects. This pilot was small, covered a forest area described as slightly more than 1,235 dönüm, and lasted two years. It did not measure changes in vegetation or soil condition, and did not account for the possible influence of other projects on community behaviour.
