Solomon Zena Walelign

Combining Household Income and Asset Data to Identify Livelihood Strategies and Their Dynamics

ABSTRACT Current approaches to identifying and describing rural livelihood strategies, and household movements between strategies over time, in developing countries are imprecise. Here we: (i) present a new statistical quantitative approach combining income and asset data to identify household activity choice variables, characterise livelihood strategy clusters, and analyse movements between strategies, and (ii) apply the approach using an environmentally-augmented three-wave household (n = 427) level panel dataset from Nepal. Combining income and asset data provides a better understanding of livelihood strategies and household movements between strategies over time than using only income or asset data. Most households changed livelihood strategy at least once over the two three-year periods. A common pathway out of poverty included an intermediate step during which households accumulate assets through farming, petty trading, and migratory work.

Livelihood strategies, environmental dependency and rural poverty: the case of two villages in rural Mozambique

This article attempts to explore the nexus between rural households’ environmental dependency, poverty and livelihood strategies. Households’ income from each livelihood activities formed the basis for categorizing households according to livelihood strategies. The principal component analysis, agglomerative hierarchical and the k-means cluster analysis were employed to determine the four livelihood clusters and to assign households to the identified livelihood strategies. Households’ environmental dependency, poverty and asset holding were compared across the strategies, and the determinants of livelihood choice were analyzed using multinomial logit model. The results indicate the existence of marked differences in environmental dependency, rural poverty and asset endowments across the livelihood groups. Household’s total saving, access to credit, production implements, business cost, exposure to agricultural shock determined household’s access to a more remunerative livelihood strategy. Incomes from each livelihood activities for the identified livelihood strategies were analyzed, and their implications were also discussed.

Drivers of Forests and Tree-based Systems for Food Security and Nutrition

With the establishment of the Global Forest Expert Panels (GFEP) initiative in the year 2007, the Collaborative Partnership on Forests (CPF) created an international mechanism which effectively links scientific knowledge with political decision-making on forests. The GFEP responds directly to key forest-related policy questions by consolidating available scientific knowledge and expertise on these questions at a global level. It provides decision-makers with the most relevant, objective and accurate information, and thus makes an essential contribution to international forest governance. This report entitled “Forests, Trees and Landscapes for Food Security and Nutrition” presents the results of the fourth global scientific assessment undertaken so far in the framework of GFEP. Previous assessments addressed the adaptation of forests and people to climate change; international forest governance; and the relationship between biodiversity, carbon, forests and people. All assessment reports were prepared by internationally recognised scientists from a variety of biophysical and social science disciplines. They have all been presented to decision-makers across relevant international policy fora. In this way, GFEP supports a more coherent policy dialogue about the role of forests in addressing broader environmental, social and economic challenges. The current report reflects the importance of policy coherence and integration more than any previous GFEP assessment. It comes at a time when the United Nations General Assembly seeks to adopt a set of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) which build upon the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and converge with the post-2015 development agenda. In this context, the eradication of hunger, realisation of food security and the improvement of nutrition are of particular relevance. By 2050, the international community will face the challenge of providing 9 billion people with food, shelter and energy. Despite impressive productivity increases, there is growing evidence that conventional agricultural strategies will fall short of eliminating global hunger and malnutrition. The assessment report in hand provides comprehensive scientific evidence on how forests, trees and landscapes can be – and must be - an integral part of the solution to this global problem. In other words, we must connect the dots and see the bigger picture. The review of the International Arrangement on Forests by the member states of the United Nations Forum on Forests provides a unique opportunity to integrate forests into the SDGs in a holistic manner and to promote synergies in the implementation of the post-2015 development agenda across multiple levels of governance. It is my hope that those with a responsibility for forests, food security and nutrition at all levels will find this report, and its accompanying policy brief, a useful source of information and inspiration.

Is households’ risk attitude robust to different experimental payoffs?

ABSTRACT We compared risk attitudes among rural people in Tanzania and Kenya using an experimental design where payoffs were defined and quantified in maize and milk production. About 42% of the sample revealed different risk attitude between the two payoff types. The difference was mainly explained by household livelihood strategy, geographical location and ethnicity. Hence, appropriate pay-off metrics differ across contexts and different metrics may provide noncomparable results that does not reflect intrinsic risk attitude.

Environmental Income as a Pathway Out of Poverty? Empirical Evidence on Asset Accumulation in Nepal

Abstract Using unique, environmentally augmented household panel data reflecting households’ annual cash and subsistence income portfolios, we model change over time in the value of four assets – livestock, implements, savings, and jewellery. A seemingly unrelated regression model reveals that although environmental resources on average contribute 16 per cent of the total household income, the contribution to asset accumulation is limited. Hence, environmental income does not constitute a pathway out of poverty in Nepal under the current set of regulations and tenure regimes. Asset accumulation was instead associated (both negatively and positively) with agricultural income (particularly as subsistence income), wage and business income. Most environmental income was obtained as subsistence income indicating that the environmental resources that households have access to present little opportunity for cash generation. Securing access of the poor to environmental resources may increase its role in poverty alleviation.