Suchergebnisse

AbstractWe analyze links between exposure to climate extremes and shocks, vulnerability and coping strategies, environmental reliance and poverty among 7,300 households in forest adjacent communities in 24 developing countries. We combine observed income with predicted income to create four categories of households:income & asset poor(structurally poor),income rich & asset poor(stochastically non-poor),income poor & asset rich(stochastically poor) andincome & asset rich(structurally non-poor), and assess exposure and vulnerability across these groups. The income poor are more exposed to extreme climate conditions. They tend to live in dryer (and hotter) villages in the dry forest zones, in wetter villages in the wet zones, and experience larger rainfall fluctuations. Among the income-generating coping strategies, extracting more environmental resources ranks second to seeking wage labor. The poorest in dry regions also experience the highest forest loss, undermining the opportunities to cope with future climate shocks.

AbstractRural households in developing countries depend on crops, forest extraction and other income sources for their livelihoods, but these livelihood contributions are sensitive to climate change. Combining socioeconomic data from about 8,000 smallholder households across the tropics with gridded precipitation and temperature data, we find that households have the highest crop income at 21°C temperature and 2,000 mm precipitation. Forest incomes increase on both sides of this agricultural maximum. We further find indications that crop income declines in response to weather shocks while forest income increases, suggesting that households may cope by reallocating inputs from agriculture to forests. Forest production may thus be less sensitive than crop production to climatic fluctuations, gaining comparative advantage in extreme climates and under weather anomalies. This suggests that well-managed forests might help poor rural households to cope with and adapt to future climate change.

AbstractThe article analyzes the links between poverty, forest use and dependence, and forest degradation by combining household and forest resource data from two sites in the Zagros Mountains, Iran: Ghamishale and Tange Tamoradi. At both sites, traditional forms of forest management are practised; in Ghamishale management is mainly family based, whereas in Tange Tamoradi it is village based. The poverty–forest dependence link is strongly influenced by population density, carrying capacity and institutions for forest management. In addition, the study revealed the tradeoff between equity and sustainable resource use as outputs of different institutional arrangements. We do not find any evidence that poor households or households with high forest dependence contribute more to forest degradation than others. The results therefore raise concerns about the potential consequences of policies globally that address forest degradation only through poverty alleviation and forest-dependence reduction.

AbstractPrevious research suggests that forest-dependent households tend to be poorer than other groups, and that extreme reliance on forest resources might constitute a poverty trap. We provide an example in which a non-timber forest product – charcoal – appears to be providing a pathway out of poverty for some rural households in Uganda. Data come from households living adjacent to natural forests, some of whom engage in charcoal production. We use a semi-parametric method to identify the determinants of participation in charcoal production and a quantile regression decomposition to measure the heterogeneous effect of participation on household income. We find that younger households and those with few productive assets are more likely to engage in charcoal production. We also show that, as a result of their participation, charcoal producers are better off than non-charcoal producers in terms of income, even though they are worse off in terms of productive assets.

Thousands of surveys on rural livelihoods in developing countries are being done every year. Unfortunately, many suffer from weaknesses in methods and problems in implementation. Quantifying households' dependence on multiple environmental resources (forests, bush, grasslands and rivers) is particularly difficult and often simply ignored in the surveys. The results therefore do not reflect rural realities. In particular, 'the hidden harvest' from natural resources is generally too important to livelihoods for development research, policies and practice to ignore. Fieldwork using state-of-the-a.