Counting on the environment: forest incomes and the rural poor

2004

186 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/efd8fb6d79794a94bf1e012ff599375ce18de5e6

Citations in the corpus

• Agroforestry Tree Products (AFTPs): Targeting Poverty Reduction and Enhanced Livelihoods (2005, unknown): “Winners and losers: Impacts on livelihoods The importance of non-timber forest products for the livelihoods of poor forest dwellers has been recognised for some time (Peters et al., 1989; Sunderland & Ndoye, 2004; Vedeld et al., 2004).”
• The Role of Forest-Related Income in Household Economies and Rural Livelihoods in the Border-Region of Southern China (2013, unknown): “…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.”
• Links between the Local Trade in Natural Products, Livelihoods and Poverty Alleviation in a Semi-arid Region of South Africa (2008, unknown): “Greater dependence on natural product income by more impoverished households has been revealed in other studies ([Cavendish, 2000] and [Vedeld et al., 2004]), although this is not necessarily universal ([Ambrose-Oji, 2003] and [Schreckenberg et al.”
• Managing the Miombo Woodlands of Southern Africa: Policies, Incentives and Options for the Rural Poor (2010, unknown): “…about 15 percent of total income (Cavendish 2002; Campbell et al. 2002), but this figure was greater than 50 percent in some Zambian sites (Mutamba, Technical Annex 2).13 The Zambian dependency levels are some of the highest so far recorded globally (see Vedeld et al. 2004 for a global overview).”
• Forests, Livelihoods, and Conservation: Broadening the Empirical Base (2014, unknown): “Vedeld et al. (2004) found a forest income of on average 22%, i.e., one percentage point more than in the PEN data.”
• Non-timber forest products and their contribution to households income around Falgore Game Reserve in Kano, Nigeria (2017, unknown): “For example, the collection of firewood and medicinal plants are jointly carried out in most part of Africa by both men and women (Bishop and LandellMills 2002; Vedeld et al. 2004; Agrawal et al. 2013), while the collection of honey and gum arabic are exclusively done by men.”
• Environmental Income and Rural Livelihoods: A Global-Comparative Analysis (2014, unknown): “…(Jagger et al., 2012; Lund et al., 2008), inconsistent operationalization of key variables (e.g., definitions of forest, NTFPs, etc.), incompatibilities in methods (Vedeld et al., 2004), and survey implementation problems (e.g., varying intra-household respondents) (Fisher, Reimer, & Carr, 2010).”
• Role of non-timber forest products in sustaining forest-based livelihoods and rural households' resilience capacity in and around protected area: a Bangladesh study† (2015, unknown): “Several methodological choices are available for assessing households’ income and dependency on forests (see Wollenberg and Nawir 1998; Wollenberg 2000; IIED 2003; Vedeld et al. 2004). To measure a household’s forest dependency, we considered the annual cash contribution of the forest to households’”