Protected area (PA) assessments rarely evaluate socio-economic and environmental impacts relative to competing land uses, limiting understanding of socio-environmental trade-offs from efforts to protect 30% of the globe by 2030. This study assesses deforestation and poverty outcomes (fiscal income, income inequality, sanitation, and literacy) between 2000 and 2010 of strict PAs (SPAs), sustainable-use PAs (SUPAs), and Indigenous territories (ITs) compared with different land uses (agriculture and mining concessions) across ~5,500 census tracts in the Brazilian Legal Amazon. ITs reduced deforestation but had smaller socio-economic benefits compared with other protection types and land uses, indicating socio-economic trade-offs for Indigenous communities. SUPAs and SPAs did not reduce deforestation relative to small-scale agriculture but did so relative to larger agricultural landholdings. These reductions often occurred without negative socio-economic outcomes. While PAs substantially reduced deforestation without compromising local socio-economic development, efforts to secure Indigenous rights need additional interventions.

Bowy den Braber, Johan A Oldekop, Katie Devenish, Javier Godar, Christoph Nolte, Marina Schmoeller, Karl L Evans