2012
DOI: 10.1505/146554812800923426
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Household dependence on forests around lobeke Nationa l Park, Cameroon

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
32
1
1

Year Published

2013
2013
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 33 publications
(36 citation statements)
references
References 33 publications
2
32
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Figure 5 presents some detail about the absolute and relative contributions of forest-related income to households in different income quintiles. These results are typical of the commonly reported trend whereby higher income households use greater amounts of forest products (and have higher absolute forest income) than lower income households, which have lower absolute forest income but a higher relative forest income (as a proportion of their total income; Byron & Arnold, 1999;Campbell & Luckert, 2002;Cavendish, 2000;Tieguhong & Nkamgnia, 2012;Vedeld, Angelsen, Bojö , Sjaastad, & Berg, 2007;Yemiru et al, 2010). This is because higher income households have high levels of cash income from other sources (especially off-farm sources), while lower income households have fewer income sources (see Figure 3), thus making their forest income proportionally more important.…”
Section: (E) the Contribution Of Forest-related Income To Household Esupporting
confidence: 68%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Figure 5 presents some detail about the absolute and relative contributions of forest-related income to households in different income quintiles. These results are typical of the commonly reported trend whereby higher income households use greater amounts of forest products (and have higher absolute forest income) than lower income households, which have lower absolute forest income but a higher relative forest income (as a proportion of their total income; Byron & Arnold, 1999;Campbell & Luckert, 2002;Cavendish, 2000;Tieguhong & Nkamgnia, 2012;Vedeld, Angelsen, Bojö , Sjaastad, & Berg, 2007;Yemiru et al, 2010). This is because higher income households have high levels of cash income from other sources (especially off-farm sources), while lower income households have fewer income sources (see Figure 3), thus making their forest income proportionally more important.…”
Section: (E) the Contribution Of Forest-related Income To Household Esupporting
confidence: 68%
“…For example, a 24-country comparative study called the Poverty Environment Network (PEN, 2007a) is currently under way; focusing on household income generation from forest and environmental sources (data from this China case study are included). There are also a suite of recently published case-studies that investigate a range of forest-livelihood interactions, and show forest-related income contributions ranging from 6% to 45%; (Ambrose-Oji, 2003;Appiah et al, 2009;Babulo et al, 2008;Campbell & Luckert, 2002;Cavendish, 2000;Fisher, 2004;Illukpitiya & Yanagida, 2008;Mamo, Sjaastad, & Vedeld, 2007;McElwee, 2008;Shackleton, Shackleton, Buiten, & Bird, 2007;Takasaki, Barham, & Coomes, 2001;Tieguhong & Nkamgnia, 2012;Vedeld et al, 2004;Yemiru, Roos, Campbell, & Bohlin, 2010) levels that in some cases are equal to, or exceed the contributions from agriculture. The majority of such studies are, however, located in sub-Saharan African countries, and most are focused on forest-related income derived from natural forests only (i.e., environmental income).…”
Section: World Developmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Possibly, those who were employed were able to afford alternative products from the market, hence reducing reliance on forest products. Studies conducted from elsewhere found income from employment and other regular paid activities to be significantly and negatively influencing households' forest dependency (Hegde and Enters 2000;Mamo et al 2007;Tieguhong and Nkamgnia 2012). In these studies, extraction of NTFPs was not a preferred and regular activity but only indulged in during off-employment periods as a substitute.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…Puustjarvy et al [40] reported a contribution from forest products to total household income of about 50 % in Luapula and Northwestern Provinces of Zambia. NTFPs are particularly important in supporting poor households because of inexpensive extraction technology and ease of access [41,42] even though a minimum level of technical skills is required for a fruitful exploitation of the forest.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%