Impacts of Protected Areas on Local Livelihoods in Cambodia

By T. Clements, S. Suon, D. Wilkie, E. Milner‐Gulland. 2014

167 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Impact evaluation methods (mixed effects models and matching) were used to investigate the effect of protected areas (PAs) on poverty and livelihoods in Cambodia, comparing households inside PAs with bordering villages and controls. There was no evidence that PAs exacerbated local poverty or reduce agricultural harvests in comparison with controls. Households bordering the PAs were significantly better off due to greater access to markets and services. Non-timber forest product (NTFP) collectors inside PAs were significantly better off than controls and had greater rice harvests, because they had more secure access to land and forest resources. The PAs in Cambodia therefore have some positive impacts on households that use forest and land resources for their livelihoods.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Global and Planetary Change, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/9e245b9cd44becf041f351c56ba21848d8df2d73

How researchers see this paper

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

In Economics and Econometrics

1. A. Angelsen
2. Sven Wunder
3. B. Belcher
4. S. Engel
5. P. McElwee
6. A. Vatn
7. E. Corbera
8. S. Pagiola

In Global and Planetary Change

1. A. Angelsen
2. B. Belcher
3. Sven Wunder
4. S. Engel
5. C. Shackleton
6. P. McElwee
7. Katharine R. E. Sims
8. S. Pagiola

In Sociology and Political Science

1. A. Angelsen
2. Sven Wunder
3. B. Belcher

Citations in the corpus

• Forests, Livelihoods, and Conservation: Broadening the Empirical Base (2014, background): “So far unpublished, their pilot assessments in 24 countries, principally in Africa, also lend support to a picture portrayed in this Special Issue: rural smallholders derive high household incomes from forests and other environmental sources (Shepherd et al., 2011).”
• Parks versus PES: Evaluating direct and incentive-based land conservation in Mexico (2017, unknown): “With respect to the impact of PAs on local livelihoods, prior research shows mixed results, with improvements due to PAs found in Costa Rica, Thailand, Uganda, Bolivia, and Indonesia (Andam et al. 2010, Sims 2010, Naughton-Treves et al. 2011, Canavire-Bacarreza and Hanauer 2013, Gurney et al. 2014),”