Household-specific variables and forest dependency in an Indian hotspot of biodiversity: challenges for sustainable livelihoods

Jha, Sachida

doi:10.1007/s10668-008-9175-y

Cited by 12 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Respondents with larger households (11-20 family members per household, in our case) had higher likelihoods of access to NTFPs, whereas those with medium to large households had a better chance of access to the forest for livestock grazing. These findings support the view that fairly large household size may be the motivation for dependency on forest products (Godoy et al, 1997;Jha, 2008). Individuals from larger families may find it difficult to access alternative sources of subsistence, and thus become dependent on forest resources.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 76%

Determinants of access to forest products in southern Burkina Faso

Coulibaly-Lingani

Tigabu

Savadogo

et al. 2009

Forest Policy and Economics

108

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 76%

Determinants of access to forest products in southern Burkina Faso

Coulibaly-Lingani

Tigabu

Savadogo

et al. 2009

Forest Policy and Economics

108

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Due to the low education level, the livelihood activities pursued by local rural households mainly focus on farming, work outside or retail and other business, which require less education but are low-return and low-income. These results are also consistent with other studies for developing countries [51,52].…”

Section: Key Influencing Factors On Livelihood Strategy Choice In Earsupporting

confidence: 93%

Livelihood Strategies of Rural Households in Ning’er Earthquake-Stricken Areas, Yunnan Province, China

Wei

et al. 2019

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Natural hazards not only cause direct losses of household income and assets but also affect the choice and outcome of livelihood strategies. Based on the questionnaire survey from 2007 on Mw 6.1 Ning'er earthquake-hit areas in Southwest China, we analyzed the relationship between livelihood assets (or capitals) and livelihood strategies of local rural households and identified the main factors influencing the choice of livelihood strategy. The results indicate that statistically significant differences exist in livelihood assets among livelihood strategies. The choice of livelihood strategies is affected significantly by the status of livelihood assets. High financial capitals enable households to engage in higher-returns or capital-intensive livelihood activities. Improving vocational education and skills training for rural residents, especially for the youth, is also important in developing new livelihood strategies beyond their traditional lifestyle. Higher social capitals provide households the opportunity to select a higher return and income livelihood strategy. In addition, as part of efforts to enhance physical capitals, housing construction planning and technical guidance are of critical importance to improve the anti-seismic performance of rural buildings and decrease their livelihood risk in earthquake-prone areas. It is important for farmers to improve and diversify their livelihood strategies according to regional geographical environment and the comparative advantages of their own livelihood assets.Sustainability 2019, 11, 5905 2 of 18 livelihood assets, natural disasters and livelihood strategies [8][9][10], the work on quantitatively studying their internal connections is still very scarce [11,12].China is a country affected by some of the most serious natural disasters in the world. The frequent occurrence of natural disasters has a serious impact on local social economy, which is also a main factor leading to the poverty in rural areas. Compared with urban households, rural households are more vulnerable to disasters and more prone to hard daily life after a disaster. In natural disaster-prone areas, disasters could impact the accumulation of livelihood asset, limiting the capability of rural households to recover from the disasters. Rural households usually spend their limited resources for basic lifestyle need after a disaster, hindering their ability to regain agriculture and animal husbandry activities. As a result, their poverty is further intensified by increasing livelihood vulnerability [13,14]. Most studies have been conducted to evaluate rural household livelihood in China. Li et al. [15] analyzed rural households' vulnerability by developing a livelihood asset assessment system for 4 areas in China. Yan et al. [16] established a livelihood vulnerability assessment method based on the sustainable livelihood framework in Tibetan Plateau area. He et al. [17] analyzed the spatial distribution of famers' livelihood asset using clustering analysis in Southwest China. Liu et al. [18] applied ...

show abstract

“…The quotation above supports the assertion that large households have more mouths to feed and the livelihood burden is especially more on households with more dependent members (Jha, 2009) than is the case with smaller households.…”

Section: Determinants Of Forest Dependencesupporting

confidence: 52%

Forest Dependence among Rural Households in Southern Ghana: Implications for Conservation and Poverty Reduction

Mantey

Teye

2021

Ghana J. Geography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While it is widely acknowledged that an understanding of the determinants of rural households’ forest extraction and dependence on forest resources is important for policies on forest conservation and rural development, the factors that determine Ghanaian households’ dependence on forests are neither adequately explored nor well-understood. Against this background, this paper examines the extraction and dependence on forest resources among rural households in the forest communities of Southern Ghana. Data were collected through a household livelihood survey and in-depth interviews in two forest communities. Regression models were then used to investigate key factors that condition the households' dependence on forests in the study communities. The findings indicate that almost all households are engaged in forest extraction. The average overall contribution of forests to household income in the study communities was 21 percent and constituted the third largest contributor to household income following crop income and non-farm income. The findings also indicate that forests also play an essential safety net role in the face of unforeseen income shortfalls and ultimately, in poverty alleviation. The results further reveal that the rural household's extraction of forest resources and consequently its dependence on forests (livelihood strategy) are a function of its access to other livelihood assets, its vulnerability context as well as other context variables. Recommended policy interventions for forest conservation and sustainable rural development include securing the natural resource base, broadening poor people's livelihood options and improving access to education in rural communities.

show abstract

Household-specific variables and forest dependency in an Indian hotspot of biodiversity: challenges for sustainable livelihoods

Cited by 12 publications

References 7 publications

Determinants of access to forest products in southern Burkina Faso

Determinants of access to forest products in southern Burkina Faso

Livelihood Strategies of Rural Households in Ning’er Earthquake-Stricken Areas, Yunnan Province, China

Forest Dependence among Rural Households in Southern Ghana: Implications for Conservation and Poverty Reduction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About