Understanding the relationships between ecosystem services and poverty alleviation: A conceptual framework

Fisher, Janet; Patenaude, Geneviève; Giri, Kalpana; Lewis, Kristina H.; Meir, Patrick; Pinho, Patrícia; Rounsevell, Mark; Williams, Mathew

doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2013.08.002

Cited by 207 publications

(125 citation statements)

References 79 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

120

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We augment this approach by returning to the MA's focus on multidimensional well-being rather than aggregate value as the end point. Thus we address some additional complexities highlighted by the more holistic model of Ecology and Society 21(2): 11 http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol21/iss2/art11/ Fisher et al (2014) but incorporate these into a more linear flow like the cascade, while maintaining an emphasis on the disaggregation of beneficiaries (Daw et al 2011). …”

Section: A Conceptual Framework To Interrogate Elasticitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Elasticity in ecosystem services: exploring the variable relationship between ecosystems and human well-being

Daw¹,

Hicks²,

Brown³

et al. 2016

E&S

154

113

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Although ecosystem services are increasingly recognized as benefits people obtain from nature, we still have a poor understanding of how they actually enhance multidimensional human well-being, and how well-being is affected by ecosystem change. We develop a concept of "ecosystem service elasticity" (ES elasticity) that describes the sensitivity of human well-being to changes in ecosystems. ES Elasticity is a result of complex social and ecological dynamics and is context dependent, individually variable, and likely to demonstrate nonlinear dynamics such as thresholds and hysteresis. We present a conceptual framework that unpacks the chain of causality from ecosystem stocks through flows, goods, value, and shares to contribute to the well-being of different people. This framework builds on previous conceptualizations, but places multidimensional well-being of different people as the final element. This ultimately disaggregated approach emphasizes how different people access benefits and how benefits match their needs or aspirations.Applying this framework to case studies of individual coastal ecosystem services in East Africa illustrates a wide range of social and ecological factors that can affect ES elasticity. For example, food web and habitat dynamics affect the sensitivity of different fisheries ecosystem services to ecological change. Meanwhile high cultural significance, or lack of alternatives enhance ES elasticity, while social mechanisms that prevent access can reduce elasticity.Mapping out how chains are interlinked illustrates how different types of value and the well-being of different people are linked to each other and to common ecological stocks. We suggest that examining chains for individual ecosystem services can suggest potential interventions aimed at poverty alleviation and sustainable ecosystems while mapping out of interlinkages between chains can help to identify possible ecosystem service trade-offs and winners and losers. We discuss conceptual and practical challenges of applying such a framework and conclude on its utility as a heuristic for structuring interdisciplinary analysis of ecosystem services and human wellbeing.

show abstract

Section: A Conceptual Framework To Interrogate Elasticitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Elasticity in ecosystem services: exploring the variable relationship between ecosystems and human well-being

Daw¹,

Hicks²,

Brown³

et al. 2016

E&S

154

113

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We adopt the ecosystem services (ES) approach to identify how land conversion for Jatropha production has affected the provision of ecosystem services, i.e., the benefits that humans obtain from nature, and the ripple effects for the well-being and poverty alleviation of local communities (MA 2005, TEEB 2010, Fisher et al 2014, Díaz et al 2015. The ES approach is ideal for studying biofuel projects because it links the social and ecological dimensions of biofuel production (Gasparatos et al 2011(Gasparatos et al , 2013b.…”

Section: Local Landscapementioning

confidence: 99%

Jatropha cultivation in Malawi and Mozambique: impact on ecosystem services, local human well-being, and poverty alleviation

Maltitz¹,

Gasparatos²,

Fabricius³

et al. 2016

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Jatropha-based biofuels have undergone a rapid boom-and-bust cycle in southern Africa. Despite strong initial support by governments, donors, and the private sector, there is a lack of empirical studies that compare the environmental and socioeconomic impacts of Jatropha's two dominant modes of production: large plantations and smallholder-based projects. We apply a rapid ecosystem services assessment approach to understand the impact of two Jatropha projects that are still operational despite widespread project collapse across southern Africa: a smallholder-based project (BERL, Malawi) and a large plantation (Niqel, Mozambique). Our study focuses on changes in provisioning ecosystem services such as biofuel feedstock, food, and woodland products that can have important effects on human well-being locally. Qualitative information is provided for other regulating and cultural ecosystem services. Although at this stage no impact is tremendously positive or negative, both projects show some signs of viability and local poverty alleviation potential. However, their long-term sustainability is not guaranteed given low yields, uncertain markets, and some prevailing management practices.

show abstract

“…Not only are they of high value in their own right, because of their importance to human livelihoods, but their inclusion provides a means of facilitating and encouraging wider stakeholder consultation on the identification of key sites for wild plant diversity outside the scientific and protected area communities. Studies have demonstrated a direct positive link between maintaining or enhancing wild biodiversity and human livelihoods and well-being, through the ecosystem services provided by ecological communities, habitats and species diversity (Xu et al 2009;Sunderland 2011;Peh et al 2013;Fisher et al 2014;Harrison et al 2014;Sandifer et al 2015). However, this link is not widely perceived in many parts of the world and protection of sites of high biodiversity value is only likely to be achieved where there is a clear and demonstrable benefit to local communities.…”

Section: Consultation On Revised Ipa Selection Criteriamentioning

confidence: 99%

Important Plant Areas: revised selection criteria for a global approach to plant conservation

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the severe threats to plant habitats and high levels of extinction risk for plant species in many parts of the world, plant conservation priorities are often poorly represented in national and global frameworks because of a lack of data in an accessible and consistent format to inform conservation decision making. The Important Plant Areas (IPAs) criteria system offers a pragmatic yet scientifically rigorous means of delivering these datasets, enabling informed national-or regional-scale conservation prioritisation, and contributing significantly towards global prioritisation systems including the International Union for Conservation of Nature Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) Standard. In this paper, we review the IPA rationale and progress on IPA identification to date, including the perceived limitations of the process and how these may be overcome. We then present a revised set of criteria for use globally, developed through the combined experiences of IPA -017-1336-6 identification over the past decade and a half and through a recent global consultation process. An overview of how the revised IPA criteria can work alongside the newly published KBA Standard is also provided. IPA criteria are based around a sound, scientific, global framework which acknowledges the practical problems of gathering plant and habitat data in many regions of the world, and recognises the role of peer reviewed expert opinion in the selection process. National and sub-national engagement in IPA identification is essential, providing a primary route towards long term conservation of key sites for plant diversity. The IPA criteria can be applied to the conservation of all organism groups within the plant and fungal kingdoms.

show abstract

Understanding the relationships between ecosystem services and poverty alleviation: A conceptual framework

Cited by 207 publications

References 79 publications

Elasticity in ecosystem services: exploring the variable relationship between ecosystems and human well-being

Elasticity in ecosystem services: exploring the variable relationship between ecosystems and human well-being

Jatropha cultivation in Malawi and Mozambique: impact on ecosystem services, local human well-being, and poverty alleviation

Important Plant Areas: revised selection criteria for a global approach to plant conservation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About