The Cash
A two-year cash pilot paid 211 adults in the Peruvian Amazon about two pounds a day, with no spending rules. Households unable to afford nutritious food fell from 73 percent to 26 percent. It is not a randomised trial.
Two pounds a day. The forest was not a condition.
Cool Earth, a UK climate charity, gave 211 adults in three Indigenous communities in the Peruvian Amazon an unconditional cash transfer. Each payment was 1,032 soles. There were six payments over two years, from late 2023 to mid-2025. That is about two pounds a day. There was no rule about how to spend it, and no forest clause in the payment.
The University of Bath released its analysis on 20 October 2026. Households that could not afford nutritious food fell from 73 percent to 26 percent. People skipping meals fell from 49 percent to 22 percent. People who had to leave the community to find temporary work fell from 43 percent to 18 percent. Households with savings rose from 49 percent to 70 percent.
Close to 90 percent of participants adopted practices the researchers classed as environmentally beneficial. Bath said 87 percent took part in collective actions: native reforestation, less forest burning, restoring springs. Nick Langridge, a co-author, said security and autonomy made protection more possible.
The before-and-after comparison used surveys of 82 participants, plus 24 interviews and three focus groups. It is not a randomised trial. It does not publish a satellite measure of forest cover. The communities are Asháninka, and some secondary reports also name Yanesha. The cash was accompanied by voluntary training in finances, rights, and conservation. The payment had no condition. The programme around it was not only a payment.
Key Facts
- 211 adults, three communities, six payments of 1,032 soles
- About two pounds a day, no spending conditions
- Nutritious-food gap: 73 percent to 26 percent
- Meal-skipping: 49 percent to 22 percent
- Temporary migration for work: 43 percent to 18 percent
- Survey comparison on 82 participants, not a randomised trial
- No published satellite measure of forest lost or kept
Why This Matters
The money had no forest clause. People reported eating better and leaving less. The rainforest sentence is what they said they did, not a map. That is still a result. It is not a hectare.
What We Don't Know Yet
How much canopy actually changed. Whether the 82-person survey stands for all 211. Whether the result survives without the charity's organising alongside the cash. A pilot in three communities is not a national policy.