Trade-offs and synergies between carbon storage and livelihood benefits from forest commons

By A. Chhatre, Arun Agrawal. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2009

656 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Global and Planetary Change

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/67857feae36abe8693c092c1d82a7e637546aa4d

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Global and Planetary Change

1. A. Angelsen
2. T. Sikor
3. Sven Wunder
4. R. Muradian
5. B. Matzdorf
6. Sarah Schomers
7. Arun Agrawal
8. B. Belcher

Citations in the corpus

• Forest biodiversity, ecosystem functioning and the provision of ecosystem services (2017, background): “…because different tree species provide different ecosystem functions and services (Gamfeldt et al. 2013; van der Plas et al. 2016a), while others are driven by forest management, which often maximises certain ecosystem services at the cost of others (Chhatre and Agrawal 2009; Verkerk et al. 2014).”
• Forest Clearing in Rural Livelihoods: Household-Level Global-Comparative Evidence (2014, background): “…focuses on how the institutions, and more specifically different forest tenure regimes, affects forest use, e.g., whether forests managed ing in Rural Livelihoods: Household-Level Global-Comparative lddev.2014.03.002 by local communities are better protected than others (Chhatre & Agrawal, 2009).”
• Who are forest-dependent people? A taxo nomy to aid livelihood and land use decision-making in forested regions (2016, background): “Secure land tenure and forst management rights can empower communities to manage the orests in a manner that contributes to sustainable livelihood benets (Chhatre and Agrawal, 2009; Ming’ate et al., 2014).”
• Between markets and hierarchies: The challenge of governing ecosystem services (2012, background): “To sum up, rules and rule-making autonomy and participation (that is, how rules are designed and enforced, and how they evolve over time) matter more than the property regime or the generic type of coordination between transacting parties (Banana et al., 2007; Chhatre and Agrawal, 2009; Cox et al., ”
• Payments for ecosystem services: A review and comparison of developing and industrialized countries (2013, background): “Also bi- and multilateral donors such as the Global Environment Facility (GEF), the World Bank, Conservation International or the German aid agency KfW support the program and pay for the preservation of biodiversity and global benefits such as carbon sequestration (Blackman and Woodward, 2009; Pagi”
• Community Participation and Benefits in REDD+: A Review of Initial Outcomes and Lessons (2013, methodology): “First, we consider theory and reviews from Ostrom [17,18] on institutions and sustainability and recent empirical International Forestry Resources and Institutions (IFRI) research, which finds that in forest commons, extent of local rulemaking (considering both tenure and autonomy in decision-making”
• Forests, Livelihoods, and Conservation: Broadening the Empirical Base (2014, background): “Interestingly, global-comparative findings from IFRI have underlined the role of both forest ownership and governance (Chhatre & Agrawal, 2009; Persha, Agrawal, & Chhatre, 2011).”
• Property Rights Regimes and Natural Resources: A Conceptual Analysis Revisited (2017, positive): “Natural resource management tends to be more sustainable if local people participate actively in resource governance, as demonstrated for forests (Andersson & Gibson, 2006; Baland et al. , 2010; Chhatre & Agrawal, 2009).”
• Increasing human dominance of tropical forests (2015, background): “Furthermore, a pan-tropical study of 80 forest commons in 10 countries showed that collective long-term use-rights maintains forest cover and carbon stocks better than other management systems (87).”
• Hard choices: Making trade-offs between biodiversity conservation and human well-being (2011, background): “…livelihoods and conservation (Faith and Walker, 2002; Adams et al., 2004; Brown, 2004; McShane and Wells, 2004; Garnett et al. 2007; Cheung and Sumaila, 2008; Sunderland et al., 2008; Chhatre and Agrawal, 2009; Dahlberg and Burlando, 2009; Sandker et al., 2009; but see also Nelson et al., 2009).”
• Beyond Markets and States: Polycentric Governance of Complex Economic Systems (2010, neutral): “In a second major analysis, Chhatre and Agrawal (2009) focus on factors that affect tradeoffs and synergies between the level of carbon storage in forests and their contributions to livelihoods.”