Forests provide grounds for human well-being through direct material, indirect environmental, and immaterial contributions. Here, we analyze the example of Hispaniola to understand reasons for (un)sustainable forest use. We pursue a dynamic comparative case study of the island's two countries from a political ecology perspective. From the literature, we derive a set of socio-economic hypotheses for the cause of de- and reforestation. Methodologically, we combine historical analysis and longitudinal comparisons with institutional analysis. We find that it was a governance mix of economic incentives, civil society driven initiatives, and alternative sources of energy that made the difference between reforestation in the Dominican Republic and deforestation in Haiti. We do not find evidence that it was population density or education levels that caused the difference. Colonial history can explain older differences but not divergent trends that started in the 1980s. Our findings suggest that if people shall stop overusing forests, they need alternative opportunities to maintain their livelihood and show how this has been accomplished in the Dominican Republic.

森林通过直接物质、间接环境和非物质贡献为人类福祉提供基础。在这里，我们分析了伊斯帕尼奥拉的例子，以了解（不）可持续森林利用的原因。我们从政治生态学的角度对岛内两国进行动态比较案例研究。从文献中，我们得出了一组关于森林砍伐和重新造林原因的社会经济假设。在方法论上，我们将历史分析和纵向比较与制度分析相结合。我们发现，多米尼加共和国的重新造林和海地的森林砍伐之间的差异是经济激励、民间社会推动的倡议和替代能源的治理组合。我们没有发现证据表明是人口密度或教育水平导致了这种差异。殖民历史可以解释较早的差异，但不能解释始于 1980 年代的分歧趋势。我们的研究结果表明，如果人们停止过度使用森林，他们需要其他机会来维持生计，并展示多米尼加共和国是如何实现这一目标的。