Determinants of forest dependent household’s participation in payment for ecosystem services: Evidence from Plantation Establishment Livelihood Improvement Scheme (PELIS) in Kenya

Waruingi, Esther; Mbeche, Robert; Ateka, Josiah

doi:10.1016/j.gecco.2021.e01514

Cited by 13 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Referring existing research results on the classification of farming households (Liu, 2021;Waruingi et al, 2021), we classified farming Identifying ecosystem services relevant to farmers' livelihoods. household livelihoods type into pure farming households, part-time farming households, and nonfarming households based on the direction of household labor input.…”

Section: Farmers' Livelihood Questionnaire Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

What is the relationship between ecosystem services and farmers’ livelihoods? Based on measuring the contribution of ecosystem services to farmers’ livelihoods

Zhou

Guan²,

Ling-li³

et al. 2023

Front. Ecol. Evol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The relationships between ecosystem services and farmers’ livelihoods are important for ecological and livelihood sustainability. In this paper, Chongqing was picked up as a case to elucidate the contribution of ecosystem services to farmers’ livelihoods. First, we constructed a DPSIR (driver, pressure, state, impact and response) framework of ecosystem services and farmers’ livelihoods through participatory farmers’ livelihoods surveys and empirical data from the literature. Then, a 48-node Bayesian network model were used to explore the explicit and implicit impacts of both ecosystem services and farmers’ livelihoods, and to determine the key factors. Finally, we analyzed the contribution of ecosystem services to different types of farmers’ livelihoods. The results showed that ecosystem services have a significant impact on the farmers’ livelihoods. The probabilities of high state for ecosystem services and livelihood outcomes were 17.6% and 30.7%, respectively. While the probabilities of medium state were 51.2% and 45.4%, respectively. Particularly for low-income farmers, the impact on them increased with the increasing of ecosystem services (such as esthetic landscapes and food production). For different types of farming households, the most important contributor of ecosystem services-related income were pure farming households, part-time farming households and nonfarming households, accounting for 77.3%, 36.3%, and 14.8% of the total average annual household income, respectively. Our findings suggested that in promoting sustainable management of ecosystems, the contribution of ecosystem services to farmers’ livelihoods and their impact on farm income and the ecosystem services value should be considered.

show abstract

Section: Farmers' Livelihood Questionnaire Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

What is the relationship between ecosystem services and farmers’ livelihoods? Based on measuring the contribution of ecosystem services to farmers’ livelihoods

Zhou

Guan²,

Ling-li³

et al. 2023

Front. Ecol. Evol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The Heckpoisson model is estimated in two stages, a selection and a count. Following Waruingi et al. (2021) , the model for the selection part is specified as follow:

where

is the binary indicator (0;1) showing whether the

household demanded extension services or not;

is a vector of predictor variables for the

household,

the parameters to be estimated, and

is the error term for the selection outcome assumed to have a bivariate normal distribution with zero mean and covariance matrix.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The number of times a household uses extension services (

) is only observed when the household demands extension services. Waruingi et al. (2021) also specified the count outcome (intensity of use) equation as follow:

where

is the frequency of extension contacts illustrating intensity of use,

is the error term for the count outcome assumed to have a bivariate normal distribution with zero mean and a covariance matrix and the other variables remain the same as in Eq.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of farmer socio-economic characteristics on extension services demand and its intensity of use in post-conflict Liberia

Sumo¹,

Ritho²,

Irungu³

2022

Heliyon

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…When normality and homoskedasticity assumptions were violated, the presence of discreteness and heteroskedasticity in count data motivate using a Poisson rather than a linear specification. The Heckpoisson model fits the dependent variable better with count data and corrects sampleselection bias (Kingsuwankul et al, 2021;Waruingi et al, 2021). Hence, we used Poisson regression with sampleselection (Heckpoisson model).…”

Section: Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Barriers, risks and risk management strategies in European insect supply chains

Niyonsaba

Höhler

Fels‐Klerx

et al. 2023

JIFF

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite technological developments and regulatory improvements, most actors in the insect sector still face many challenges and uncertainties. While previous research mainly focused on the perception of domain-specific challenges and risks or has been limited to specific stages in the supply chain, this study aims to determine how stakeholders perceive the importance of past barriers and future risks along European insect supply chains, and to identify the applied risk management strategies. Data were collected from stakeholders across four stages of the supply chain (rearers (n=23), processors (n=8), and insect derived feed (n=14), and food (n=12) producers) through an online survey. In total, 60 different barriers and risks, as well as 20 different risk management strategies, were evaluated. We find that stakeholders across all stages of the supply chain perceived ‘financial, cost and market’ barriers and risks as most important, specifically referring to the lack of financial investments and price and demand uncertainties. In addition, legal restrictions were perceived to constrain upscaling opportunities across all supply chain stages. Worker and food safety barriers were generally perceived as least important. The main risk management strategies across all stages of the supply chain related to investments in technologies enhancing stability of both the quality and the quantity of insects and derived products. Stakeholders were most optimistic about the future reduction of ‘operational’ and ‘financial, cost and market’ risks. To further stimulate upscaling of the sector, we recommend to enhance financing opportunities, and to improve authorisations for the use of different substrates and the production of a wider set of insect-based ingredients for feed and food products.

show abstract

Determinants of forest dependent household’s participation in payment for ecosystem services: Evidence from Plantation Establishment Livelihood Improvement Scheme (PELIS) in Kenya

Cited by 13 publications

References 34 publications

What is the relationship between ecosystem services and farmers’ livelihoods? Based on measuring the contribution of ecosystem services to farmers’ livelihoods

What is the relationship between ecosystem services and farmers’ livelihoods? Based on measuring the contribution of ecosystem services to farmers’ livelihoods

Effect of farmer socio-economic characteristics on extension services demand and its intensity of use in post-conflict Liberia

Barriers, risks and risk management strategies in European insect supply chains

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About