Measurement

There are different methods for measuring land use change, in which various software such as ArcGis, QGis, Idrisi, Python, among others, are used; for the processing of maps obtained from geographic information sources. Although each of the software is used in a different way, the purpose of each one is the same: to generate a matrix that shows the change in land use in a given sector. Below, a method will be presented taking as reference a measurement carried out with the ArcGis and Idrisi software and general steps that are important to take into account in land use change measurements will be highlighted.

The measurement of land use change over recent years is carried out mostly with remote sensing systems as a source of geographic information. As an example, an important project in this field is the Landsat satellites that have played an important role in collecting images of the Earth's surface and have been operating since 1972.

Remote sensing allows monitoring the Earth's surface through sensors that are installed on balloons, satellites, helicopters, drones, airplanes, among others. These sensors capture energy in the form of electromagnetic radiation that can be emitted or reflected by the Earth's surface depending on whether the energy source is passive or active respectively. In the first case, electromagnetic radiation is emitted in the form of sunlight and in the second, the sensor is the emitter of the radiation and it is reflected by the Earth's surface and then captured by the system. In both scenarios, the sensor will receive radiation according to the different physical characteristics and energy reflection capacity of the different structures of the land cover. After capturing the information, it is stored or sent to a reception system where it will be ready to be interpreted by experts[15]​ through competent software such as, for example, ArcGis, which among its functions allows delimiting different land use areas. After this stage, the process of creating digital maps ready to be used to solve problems in the scientific community will be completed.

Before starting the measurement, it is important to verify that all the cartographies of the dates studied meet certain criteria, such as: having the same classification system, being on the same scale and that the images have coherence in relation to the area covered, station and sensor.[15]​.

Once the previous criteria have been verified, the process begins with the help of ArcGis software. The first step to carry out is that both cartographies must be converted to raster format with the intention of generating a new column in the attribute table previously generated by ArcGis, to assign a value to the polygons that contain the different land use codes and that are present in this table, it is vitally important that the values ​​of each land use are the same for both cartographic layers. Then, the information layers converted into raster must be generated, paying special attention to the Pixel size that will be configured for the studied layers and that will be represented in square meters. Next, the procedure will be saved as an image, taking care that both raster maps are composed of the same number of columns and the same number of rows.

The next step is to export the previously saved maps to the Idrisi software and perform a cross-tabulation. The number of pixels in each category of land use change will be visible in the tabulated table.

Without taking into account the zero or total columns and rows, the results of the cross-tabulation are copied and pasted and the values ​​that had been assigned in the attribute table are replaced by the respective land use. The “X” axis is labeled as the cartographic layer of the old year and the “Y” axis as the cartographic layer of the most current year.

Causes

The development, expansion and maintenance of forestry and agricultural activities along with the construction and expansion of urban and/or industrial infrastructure are commonly mentioned as the main causes of land use change. It is evident that those actions generate an immediate change—that is, without intermediate procedures—in the soil, which is why they have been classified as direct causes.

Agricultural activity has used more than a third of the planet's land surface,[3]​ which translates into around 5,000 mega hectares.[16]​ Of the land dedicated to agriculture, approximately one third is used for the production of crops for food purposes and the remaining two-thirds are used for the maintenance of meadows and pastures required for grazing.[16]​ However, mentioning agriculture and livestock as the main direct causes of the Land use change implies encompassing an area that incorporates diverse cultures, companies of all sizes and different methodologies. Therefore, in order not to reflect on the generality, the forms of impact presented by agriculture and livestock activities are described below:

Livestock farming, in the first instance, requires the preparation of the land to operate it as grazing areas and growing forage for livestock. On many occasions, this implies the need to deforest forests or even modify agricultural crops used for the food industry. Its way of manifesting a change in land use includes processes of defoliation, trampling of the land and the return of nutrients through livestock feces and urine.[17]​.

Agriculture, understood as the “set of techniques and knowledge related to the cultivation or tillage of the land[18]​”, has generated changes in land use from the need to increase production. This entails using methods to improve production yield, increase crop intensity (i.e., harvest frequency) and expand the tillage area.[19]​ Practices that are not sustainable, such as monocultures, imply land degradation, salinization and reduction of agricultural genetic diversity.[20]​ On the other hand, good agricultural techniques allow for the enhancement of ecosystem benefits such as carbon storage and the conservation of rural landscapes and their biodiversity.

Forest development is understood as the certainty of conservation and use of the diversity of natural resources that it can give us. Forest management produces different impacts, depending on the interest of a given forest area; either the preservation of species within the area or the planting of species that will be exploited to obtain natural resources (such as wood, resin, among other natural products). Due to the different impacts obtained by forest management, during the years 2001 to 2015 it could be said that 3.5 to 6.5 million hectares per year were lost worldwide, which has generated a great loss of ecosystem services such as carbon sequestration.[7]​.

Given the high productivity rate, that is, due to the harvesting or felling of forest trees, a change in land use can be generated since the trees have the action of protecting the soil from erosion as well as from dehydration. Therefore, when they are cut down, the soil is exposed with a high probability of being eroded.[21]​.

For its part, the occupation of land use in infrastructure, whether due to urbanization or the installation of industries, has been growing since, first of all in terms of urbanization, the increase in urban areas that has doubled since the 1990s does not project to end. According to the UN, today about 55% of the population lives in urban areas and it is estimated that by the year 2050 this population will increase by 13%.[22]​ This Added to the population growth that implies greater demand for products, they generate this type of change in land use, which it is worth highlighting mainly affects the surface of forests, wetlands and grasslands.}.

However, in addition to the direct causes described, factors are also considered that, despite not directly changing land use, do influence the management of the negative consequences and the direct causes mentioned; These factors are classified as indirect causes.

According to the IPBES report[3]​ (2019), the direct drivers that impact terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems—among them, Land Use Change—are associated with other indirect drivers. These, therefore, can be understood as indirect causes of land use change that, although they do not generate an immediate impact, do influence the way in which agricultural activities and the development of infrastructure are carried out. These are incorporated into headings: 1) Demographic and sociocultural, 2) Technological and economic, 3) Institutions and governance and 4) Conflicts and epidemics. Likewise, conceptual ambiguity can play a relevant role when managing measures seeking to reduce the consequences of land use change.

Policies that promote activities related to direct causes without sustainable management influence changes in land use (1). In such a way that legislation and economic incentives can facilitate those activities. As happened in Chile, with Decree Law 701, which encouraged the forestry area through bonuses and tax benefits; However, this process was based on the introduction of exotic species (or introduced species), and in the long term it was one of the main causes of landscape change and the loss of the native forest.[5]​ Or, the decrease of tropical forest, humid and subhumid forest of the Amazon territory present in Mexico, for use in cattle farming; procedure financed by international organizations[23]​ (including the World Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank).

It is worth mentioning that, despite not being mentioned within the indirect drivers of IPBES, conceptual ambiguity, that is, confusion or misuse of concepts, can cause serious problems or misinterpretations that lead to uncertainty about the information to be applied, which will be used to solve a problem.

Great importance should be given to this issue of conceptual ambiguity because it has already happened in research, for example in an FAO report that was developed in 2015, in which there was uncertainty about the data that was provided. By not differentiating between the concepts of natural forests and their difference with forest plantations, the estimates that had to be made in relation to the dynamics of their loss were affected and, consequently, the data were not close to reality.[7]​.

Consequences

The change in land use has consequences within the ecosystem, whether at a global or local level. However, it is worth mentioning that this is presented as a multidimensional problem, which implies consequences in both environmental and social and economic aspects. When carried out for agricultural, livestock or industrial purposes, it can have different consequences. Both positive and negative are distinguished.

One of the positive consequences of the change in land use is that the irreversible loss of agricultural soils with the highest productive potential is avoided, since the installations of activities other than forestry and livestock are regulated because it is one of the sectors with the highest productivity, which is why the installation of non-agricultural activities on the soils of classes with lower production is favored.

Within agricultural activities, described in the Direct Causes item, good management of these is capable of keeping the ecosystem stable or favoring its functionality. Livestock farming, for example, allows the return of nutrients from livestock feces and urine.[24]​ On the part of agriculture, the maintenance of vegetation under good management contributes to the storage of carbon and the conservation of rural landscapes and their biodiversity.

Land use change is one of the direct drivers with the greatest impact worldwide in the face of global change in nature in the last 50 years, being the main driver that has triggered crises in terrestrial ecosystems.[3]​ These consequences can be described as: loss of biodiversity, soil degradation and carbon loss.

This is one of the most important consequences. This can generate the fragmentation of habitats and the extinction of species, be it flora or fauna of the area in which a change in land use is made, and environmental services, also without forgetting that it leaves ecosystems and people more vulnerable to any natural disaster (this could be cited with the source of the land in figures).

Land use change is one of the actions that could be said to have the greatest impact on soil degradation. It is an anthropic process that causes the loss of biodiversity, productivity and structure of forests, and that largely causes the emission of carbon dioxide into the environment, thus being direct consequences.

Another direct consequence that has not been mentioned and is of great importance is the loss of carbon which has been determined through research[6]​ which is a 53% to 58% loss that is produced by the change in land use which influences deforestation,[25]​ this is caused by the degradation of peatlands which store up to ⅓ of the carbon which is contained in the soil.

Just as there are direct consequences, “indirect consequences” are also highlighted. These are changes in soil properties that produce favorable conditions for the direct negative consequences described in the previous item and are related to the change in soil properties, whose impacts can transform both the surface layer of the earth and its other horizons;[26]​ depending on the magnitude of the cause (degradation, erosion, among others).

Organic soil, by losing the compounds that characterize it, also loses its characteristic structure. Furthermore, as a result of trampling by grazing animals or other causes that produce pressure on the land, soil compaction increases as well as its porosity decreases. Therefore, conditions are unfavorable for root development due to resistance to soil penetration and obstruction of water infiltration. All of the above implies a negative change in the production capacity of the land for future uses.

Causes and consequences in Chile

In Chile, the native forest has been modified by anthropogenic activities; according to official figures, it is believed that in the period from 1995 to 2016 alone, most of it has been replaced, by 47%, by grasslands and bushes or replaced, by 40%, by forest plantations, followed by approximately 6% by land for agricultural use.[7]​.

Among the main human-driven causes are real estate projects, the expansion of agricultural land, the extraction of minerals, the growth of the forestry industry and last but not least, are illegal logging, which results in both the degradation of native forests and the change to other land uses, such as bushland or agriculture.[7] All of these have resulted in the loss or reduction of forests in Chile, which in turn has harmed "services." ecosystems that they offer, which, in addition to generating damage at an ecological level, have caused a great negative impact at a sociocultural level in the country [7]​.”

Due, in large part, to the plantations of exotic species, urban expansion and expansion of the agricultural frontier, eleven ecosystems have been distinguished so far that are in the situation of "threat in the Mediterranean biome", specifically in the central zone of Chile.[7]​ This highlights the consequences that are being generated with events closely associated with the change in land use, which should not be taken lightly, since an "example of the final result of the threat process of an ecosystem is the collapse of the Aculeo lagoon, which generated the complete disappearance of the ecosystem due to the synergistic effects of climate change and poor territorial management[7].”

In the central-southern area of ​​the country alone, more than 130,000 hectares of native forest have been supplanted by forest plantations. In fact, it is believed that between 1974 and 1992 more than 200 hectares of the native forest of Chile were replaced. This is reflected in scientific evidence, since in the regions of Maule and Biobío, between 1978 and 1987, 48,000 hectares of this type of forest were replaced by plantations of radiata pine[5]​ (pinus insigne), a species of Californian origin (therefore, an exotic species in Chile), which due to its rapid growth is highly used for the use of its wood (FAO. “El pino de Monterrey as an exotic species.” Unasylva, vol. 14, no. 1, 1960, https://www.fao.org/3/x5394s/x5394s03.htm .). And, in subsequent years, in the period 1975-2000, it was reported that between the Maule and Cobquecura rivers, approximately 80 hectares of native forest had been lost, being replaced by forest plantations.[5]​.

As a result of the aforementioned, in south-central Chile “the remaining native forest areas are currently located in sectors with difficult access, steep slopes, altitudes above 800 meters, or inside protected wild areas[5].” Therefore, it can be seen that biodiversity has been affected and decreased, that is, biodiversity has been lost in Chilean territory, with this area of ​​Chile being known and considered by many “as one of the areas with the greatest biodiversity and endemism in the world[27]​”, with its habitat area reduced.

In the Los Lagos region, Osorno Province, during the years 1998 and 2006, slightly more than 4,415 hectares of native forest were replaced. Subsequently, between the years 2006-2013, approximately 1,100 hectares of forests were recorded that were used for plantations by large forestry companies.[27] Although in the period 2006-2013 a decrease in 1,754 ha replaced compared to the previous period, it is predicted that “interest in the production of plantations of exotic species will continue to increase, causing the decrease in the remaining native forest [27]​”.

"By 2019, it is estimated that the use of grasslands will give way to 9,529.7 hectares towards plantations. This can be explained by the growing economic interest in wood production. This is related to studies carried out in southern Chile where the change in land use was evaluated in 500,000 hectares; by 2020, an increase in forest fragmentation was recorded[27]​."

Measurement

There are different methods for measuring land use change, in which various software such as ArcGis, QGis, Idrisi, Python, among others, are used; for the processing of maps obtained from geographic information sources. Although each of the software is used in a different way, the purpose of each one is the same: to generate a matrix that shows the change in land use in a given sector. Below, a method will be presented taking as reference a measurement carried out with the ArcGis and Idrisi software and general steps that are important to take into account in land use change measurements will be highlighted.

The measurement of land use change over recent years is carried out mostly with remote sensing systems as a source of geographic information. As an example, an important project in this field is the Landsat satellites that have played an important role in collecting images of the Earth's surface and have been operating since 1972.

Remote sensing allows monitoring the Earth's surface through sensors that are installed on balloons, satellites, helicopters, drones, airplanes, among others. These sensors capture energy in the form of electromagnetic radiation that can be emitted or reflected by the Earth's surface depending on whether the energy source is passive or active respectively. In the first case, electromagnetic radiation is emitted in the form of sunlight and in the second, the sensor is the emitter of the radiation and it is reflected by the Earth's surface and then captured by the system. In both scenarios, the sensor will receive radiation according to the different physical characteristics and energy reflection capacity of the different structures of the land cover. After capturing the information, it is stored or sent to a reception system where it will be ready to be interpreted by experts[15]​ through competent software such as, for example, ArcGis, which among its functions allows delimiting different land use areas. After this stage, the process of creating digital maps ready to be used to solve problems in the scientific community will be completed.

Before starting the measurement, it is important to verify that all the cartographies of the dates studied meet certain criteria, such as: having the same classification system, being on the same scale and that the images have coherence in relation to the area covered, station and sensor.[15]​.

Once the previous criteria have been verified, the process begins with the help of ArcGis software. The first step to carry out is that both cartographies must be converted to raster format with the intention of generating a new column in the attribute table previously generated by ArcGis, to assign a value to the polygons that contain the different land use codes and that are present in this table, it is vitally important that the values ​​of each land use are the same for both cartographic layers. Then, the information layers converted into raster must be generated, paying special attention to the Pixel size that will be configured for the studied layers and that will be represented in square meters. Next, the procedure will be saved as an image, taking care that both raster maps are composed of the same number of columns and the same number of rows.

The next step is to export the previously saved maps to the Idrisi software and perform a cross-tabulation. The number of pixels in each category of land use change will be visible in the tabulated table.

Without taking into account the zero or total columns and rows, the results of the cross-tabulation are copied and pasted and the values ​​that had been assigned in the attribute table are replaced by the respective land use. The “X” axis is labeled as the cartographic layer of the old year and the “Y” axis as the cartographic layer of the most current year.

Causes

The development, expansion and maintenance of forestry and agricultural activities along with the construction and expansion of urban and/or industrial infrastructure are commonly mentioned as the main causes of land use change. It is evident that those actions generate an immediate change—that is, without intermediate procedures—in the soil, which is why they have been classified as direct causes.

Agricultural activity has used more than a third of the planet's land surface,[3]​ which translates into around 5,000 mega hectares.[16]​ Of the land dedicated to agriculture, approximately one third is used for the production of crops for food purposes and the remaining two-thirds are used for the maintenance of meadows and pastures required for grazing.[16]​ However, mentioning agriculture and livestock as the main direct causes of the Land use change implies encompassing an area that incorporates diverse cultures, companies of all sizes and different methodologies. Therefore, in order not to reflect on the generality, the forms of impact presented by agriculture and livestock activities are described below:

Livestock farming, in the first instance, requires the preparation of the land to operate it as grazing areas and growing forage for livestock. On many occasions, this implies the need to deforest forests or even modify agricultural crops used for the food industry. Its way of manifesting a change in land use includes processes of defoliation, trampling of the land and the return of nutrients through livestock feces and urine.[17]​.

Agriculture, understood as the “set of techniques and knowledge related to the cultivation or tillage of the land[18]​”, has generated changes in land use from the need to increase production. This entails using methods to improve production yield, increase crop intensity (i.e., harvest frequency) and expand the tillage area.[19]​ Practices that are not sustainable, such as monocultures, imply land degradation, salinization and reduction of agricultural genetic diversity.[20]​ On the other hand, good agricultural techniques allow for the enhancement of ecosystem benefits such as carbon storage and the conservation of rural landscapes and their biodiversity.

Forest development is understood as the certainty of conservation and use of the diversity of natural resources that it can give us. Forest management produces different impacts, depending on the interest of a given forest area; either the preservation of species within the area or the planting of species that will be exploited to obtain natural resources (such as wood, resin, among other natural products). Due to the different impacts obtained by forest management, during the years 2001 to 2015 it could be said that 3.5 to 6.5 million hectares per year were lost worldwide, which has generated a great loss of ecosystem services such as carbon sequestration.[7]​.

Given the high productivity rate, that is, due to the harvesting or felling of forest trees, a change in land use can be generated since the trees have the action of protecting the soil from erosion as well as from dehydration. Therefore, when they are cut down, the soil is exposed with a high probability of being eroded.[21]​.

For its part, the occupation of land use in infrastructure, whether due to urbanization or the installation of industries, has been growing since, first of all in terms of urbanization, the increase in urban areas that has doubled since the 1990s does not project to end. According to the UN, today about 55% of the population lives in urban areas and it is estimated that by the year 2050 this population will increase by 13%.[22]​ This Added to the population growth that implies greater demand for products, they generate this type of change in land use, which it is worth highlighting mainly affects the surface of forests, wetlands and grasslands.}.

However, in addition to the direct causes described, factors are also considered that, despite not directly changing land use, do influence the management of the negative consequences and the direct causes mentioned; These factors are classified as indirect causes.

According to the IPBES report[3]​ (2019), the direct drivers that impact terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems—among them, Land Use Change—are associated with other indirect drivers. These, therefore, can be understood as indirect causes of land use change that, although they do not generate an immediate impact, do influence the way in which agricultural activities and the development of infrastructure are carried out. These are incorporated into headings: 1) Demographic and sociocultural, 2) Technological and economic, 3) Institutions and governance and 4) Conflicts and epidemics. Likewise, conceptual ambiguity can play a relevant role when managing measures seeking to reduce the consequences of land use change.

Policies that promote activities related to direct causes without sustainable management influence changes in land use (1). In such a way that legislation and economic incentives can facilitate those activities. As happened in Chile, with Decree Law 701, which encouraged the forestry area through bonuses and tax benefits; However, this process was based on the introduction of exotic species (or introduced species), and in the long term it was one of the main causes of landscape change and the loss of the native forest.[5]​ Or, the decrease of tropical forest, humid and subhumid forest of the Amazon territory present in Mexico, for use in cattle farming; procedure financed by international organizations[23]​ (including the World Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank).

It is worth mentioning that, despite not being mentioned within the indirect drivers of IPBES, conceptual ambiguity, that is, confusion or misuse of concepts, can cause serious problems or misinterpretations that lead to uncertainty about the information to be applied, which will be used to solve a problem.

Great importance should be given to this issue of conceptual ambiguity because it has already happened in research, for example in an FAO report that was developed in 2015, in which there was uncertainty about the data that was provided. By not differentiating between the concepts of natural forests and their difference with forest plantations, the estimates that had to be made in relation to the dynamics of their loss were affected and, consequently, the data were not close to reality.[7]​.

Consequences

The change in land use has consequences within the ecosystem, whether at a global or local level. However, it is worth mentioning that this is presented as a multidimensional problem, which implies consequences in both environmental and social and economic aspects. When carried out for agricultural, livestock or industrial purposes, it can have different consequences. Both positive and negative are distinguished.

One of the positive consequences of the change in land use is that the irreversible loss of agricultural soils with the highest productive potential is avoided, since the installations of activities other than forestry and livestock are regulated because it is one of the sectors with the highest productivity, which is why the installation of non-agricultural activities on the soils of classes with lower production is favored.

Within agricultural activities, described in the Direct Causes item, good management of these is capable of keeping the ecosystem stable or favoring its functionality. Livestock farming, for example, allows the return of nutrients from livestock feces and urine.[24]​ On the part of agriculture, the maintenance of vegetation under good management contributes to the storage of carbon and the conservation of rural landscapes and their biodiversity.

Land use change is one of the direct drivers with the greatest impact worldwide in the face of global change in nature in the last 50 years, being the main driver that has triggered crises in terrestrial ecosystems.[3]​ These consequences can be described as: loss of biodiversity, soil degradation and carbon loss.

This is one of the most important consequences. This can generate the fragmentation of habitats and the extinction of species, be it flora or fauna of the area in which a change in land use is made, and environmental services, also without forgetting that it leaves ecosystems and people more vulnerable to any natural disaster (this could be cited with the source of the land in figures).

Land use change is one of the actions that could be said to have the greatest impact on soil degradation. It is an anthropic process that causes the loss of biodiversity, productivity and structure of forests, and that largely causes the emission of carbon dioxide into the environment, thus being direct consequences.

Another direct consequence that has not been mentioned and is of great importance is the loss of carbon which has been determined through research[6]​ which is a 53% to 58% loss that is produced by the change in land use which influences deforestation,[25]​ this is caused by the degradation of peatlands which store up to ⅓ of the carbon which is contained in the soil.

Just as there are direct consequences, “indirect consequences” are also highlighted. These are changes in soil properties that produce favorable conditions for the direct negative consequences described in the previous item and are related to the change in soil properties, whose impacts can transform both the surface layer of the earth and its other horizons;[26]​ depending on the magnitude of the cause (degradation, erosion, among others).

Organic soil, by losing the compounds that characterize it, also loses its characteristic structure. Furthermore, as a result of trampling by grazing animals or other causes that produce pressure on the land, soil compaction increases as well as its porosity decreases. Therefore, conditions are unfavorable for root development due to resistance to soil penetration and obstruction of water infiltration. All of the above implies a negative change in the production capacity of the land for future uses.

Causes and consequences in Chile

In Chile, the native forest has been modified by anthropogenic activities; according to official figures, it is believed that in the period from 1995 to 2016 alone, most of it has been replaced, by 47%, by grasslands and bushes or replaced, by 40%, by forest plantations, followed by approximately 6% by land for agricultural use.[7]​.

Among the main human-driven causes are real estate projects, the expansion of agricultural land, the extraction of minerals, the growth of the forestry industry and last but not least, are illegal logging, which results in both the degradation of native forests and the change to other land uses, such as bushland or agriculture.[7] All of these have resulted in the loss or reduction of forests in Chile, which in turn has harmed "services." ecosystems that they offer, which, in addition to generating damage at an ecological level, have caused a great negative impact at a sociocultural level in the country [7]​.”

Due, in large part, to the plantations of exotic species, urban expansion and expansion of the agricultural frontier, eleven ecosystems have been distinguished so far that are in the situation of "threat in the Mediterranean biome", specifically in the central zone of Chile.[7]​ This highlights the consequences that are being generated with events closely associated with the change in land use, which should not be taken lightly, since an "example of the final result of the threat process of an ecosystem is the collapse of the Aculeo lagoon, which generated the complete disappearance of the ecosystem due to the synergistic effects of climate change and poor territorial management[7].”

In the central-southern area of ​​the country alone, more than 130,000 hectares of native forest have been supplanted by forest plantations. In fact, it is believed that between 1974 and 1992 more than 200 hectares of the native forest of Chile were replaced. This is reflected in scientific evidence, since in the regions of Maule and Biobío, between 1978 and 1987, 48,000 hectares of this type of forest were replaced by plantations of radiata pine[5]​ (pinus insigne), a species of Californian origin (therefore, an exotic species in Chile), which due to its rapid growth is highly used for the use of its wood (FAO. “El pino de Monterrey as an exotic species.” Unasylva, vol. 14, no. 1, 1960, https://www.fao.org/3/x5394s/x5394s03.htm .). And, in subsequent years, in the period 1975-2000, it was reported that between the Maule and Cobquecura rivers, approximately 80 hectares of native forest had been lost, being replaced by forest plantations.[5]​.

As a result of the aforementioned, in south-central Chile “the remaining native forest areas are currently located in sectors with difficult access, steep slopes, altitudes above 800 meters, or inside protected wild areas[5].” Therefore, it can be seen that biodiversity has been affected and decreased, that is, biodiversity has been lost in Chilean territory, with this area of ​​Chile being known and considered by many “as one of the areas with the greatest biodiversity and endemism in the world[27]​”, with its habitat area reduced.

In the Los Lagos region, Osorno Province, during the years 1998 and 2006, slightly more than 4,415 hectares of native forest were replaced. Subsequently, between the years 2006-2013, approximately 1,100 hectares of forests were recorded that were used for plantations by large forestry companies.[27] Although in the period 2006-2013 a decrease in 1,754 ha replaced compared to the previous period, it is predicted that “interest in the production of plantations of exotic species will continue to increase, causing the decrease in the remaining native forest [27]​”.

"By 2019, it is estimated that the use of grasslands will give way to 9,529.7 hectares towards plantations. This can be explained by the growing economic interest in wood production. This is related to studies carried out in southern Chile where the change in land use was evaluated in 500,000 hectares; by 2020, an increase in forest fragmentation was recorded[27]​."