Safety nets, gap filling and forests: a global-comparative perspective

Safety nets, gap filling and forests: a global-comparative perspective

In the forest–livelihoods literature, forests are widely perceived to provide both common safety nets to shocks and resources for seasonal gap-filling. We use a large global-comparative dataset to test these responses. We find households rank forest-extraction responses to shocks lower than most common alternatives. For seasonal gap-filling, forest extraction also has limited importance. The minority of households using forests for coping is asset-poor and lives in villages specialized on forests, in particular timber extraction. Overall, forest resources may be less important as a buffer between agricultural harvests and in times of unforeseen hardship than has been found in many case studies

Authors: Wunder, S.; Borner, J.; Shively, G.; Wyman, M.

Topic: livelihoods,risk,income,diversification,household income

Publication Year: 2014

ISSN: 0305-750X

Source: World Development

DOI: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2014.03.005


Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.

Download

Export Citation

Related viewing

Top