Type of publication:
Peer-reviewed published grey literature
Mechanism by which biodiversity affects poverty:
Biodiversity component details:
The forest and many of its ecosystem services, and many NTFPs that can be collected from the forest.
Harvesting of NTFPs and benefiting from improved ecosystem services.
Intervention employed other:
The planting of 30,000 trees and a living fence in order to reduce conflict between the ethnic groups of the village, provide fodder for animals, increased water security, and a number of additional NTFPs from which incomes can be derived.
Measure of poverty impact used:
Income generated from the sale of NTFPs, qualitative description of many other benefits derived from the planted forest.
Assessment of impact on poverty:
Evidence assesses the scale of impact:
Scale of impact details:
In total 60 members of the community have benefited from the project, from sales of forage seed from calliandra trees planted by the initiative provides the community with an average annual income of US$500. Some of the trees used for fence construction and paddock subdivision are medicinal providing a reserve source of income for community members. The trees also serve as forage for livestock in the dry season when most of the vegetation is dry and feed resources are scarce, while flowering tree stands planted in the grazing area have allowed farmers to supplement pastoralism incomes with the sale of honey.
Sustainability of biodiversity use:
Attribute of biodiversity affecting poverty:
Does the evidence relate to a specific intervention?:
How does the mechanism affect poverty?:
It supports immediate subsistence needs
It generates income/tradeable surplus
It contributes to long term resilience
It acts as a safety net
Mechanism affects poverty precisely how:
The NTFPs collected can be used to meet immediate subsistence needs for example the medicinal plants, can be sold to generate a cash income, for example honey, can be used as a safety net, for example the fodder within the forest is only used during the dry parts of the year when the grazing fields are low on grass. Finally the ecosystem services the trees provide in terms of maintain water quality have resulted in a noticeable increase in water quality for both humans and livestock.
Evidence provides measure of poverty impact:
Evidence is site-specific:
Unit of analysis and sample size:
Does the evidence mention the general biodiversity status of the country/region?:
Does the evidence describe the biodiversity status of the site?:
Site biodiversity status described:
High diversity of flora and fauna, including two endemic bird species.
Does the evidence mention the general poverty status of the country/region?:
Does the evidence discuss the governance regime at the site?:
Does the evidence describe the poverty/socioeconomic status of the site?:
The graze land is communal area that has been demarcated by government and traditional authorities to serve as an alternative grazing pasture for livestock. The planted forest is also of communal usage.
What is the resource rights regime?:
Resource rights regime details:
What is the land tenure regime?:
Land tenure regime details:
Community owned and managed.
Does the evidence mention the power relations?:
Does the evidence consider possible trade-offs/costs as well as benefits?:
Measure of poverty impact tag:
Distribution impacts considered:
Duration of impact considered:
Outcome replicable elsewhere considered:
Thresholds/boundary limits/tipping points of achieving the outcome considered:
How costs and benefits/impacts might vary across different spatial scales considered:
Presence of possible confounding factors acknowledged: