Type of publication:
Peer-reviewed published grey literature
Mechanism by which biodiversity affects poverty:
Biodiversity component details:
Harvesting of the crops, tourism based on the uniqueness of the indigenous varieties.
Intervention employed other:
The conservation of rare indigenous crop varieties in order to facilitate poverty reduction.
Measure of poverty impact used:
Income generated from tourism, from selling the local varieties at market and from beekeeping.
Assessment of impact on poverty:
Evidence assesses the scale of impact:
Scale of impact details:
The micro-entrepreneurial initiatives have greatly improved household incomes: those engaged in tourism receive approximately US$ 120 per month, those in the agribusiness US$316 per month, and those in beekeeping US$195 per month. By far the most valuable aspect of this activity [tourism] has proven to be the process of improving the self-esteem of family members (particularly women) and supporting a revaluation of cultural identity and of the elements associated with it, including native crops.
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
Mechanism affects poverty precisely how:
The harvested indigenous crops can be sold to generate a cash income, due to other aims of the project being to create better markets this has resulted in a increase in the cash income generated. Additionally the indigenous crops can be harvested to meet immediate subsistence needs. The uniqueness crop varieties has been used to start a agro-tourism venture in the area which has created a number of jobs directly and brought income to area. In addition to a strengthening of cultural identity and pride.
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?:
General biodiversity status described:
Cash income has often been prioritised at the expense of biodiversity, water quality, carbon fixation capacity, and land resources in general. Over time, over exploitation of natural resources....
Does the evidence describe the biodiversity status of the site?:
Does the evidence mention the general poverty status of the country/region?:
Site poverty status described:
Difficult for the rural producers to meet even basic food security needs.....poverty is rife. Malnutrition affects approximately 40% of the population. Farmers in the region have received limited technological and economic support from formal institutions.
Does the evidence discuss the governance regime at the site?:
Does the evidence describe the poverty/socioeconomic status of the site?:
Private property, therefore determined by the landowner (and who they chose to ask for assistance).
What is the resource rights regime?:
Resource rights regime details:
What is the land tenure regime?:
Land tenure regime details:
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: