为更大的利益而绿化:绿色长城土地恢复的社会经济影响

IF 6.6 2区 经济学 Q1 ECOLOGY Ecological Economics Pub Date : 2024-07-24 DOI:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2024.108311
{"title":"为更大的利益而绿化:绿色长城土地恢复的社会经济影响","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.ecolecon.2024.108311","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Our study examines the mid-term socioeconomic impacts of landscape restoration in highly desertification-prone Northern Nigeria through the Action Against Desertification (AAD) program. AAD implemented large-scale restoration and livelihood development activities aimed at increasing household income generation from restoration efforts and fostering alternative agricultural activities in an improved ecosystem. Using a multi-method strategy, we assess the impacts of landscape restoration at the household level. We leverage pre-restoration remote-sensed data and machine learning algorithms to identify comparable land sites to the program's restoration areas. Comparison households are selected from communities bordering these sites, replicating the AAD's targeting process. Our impact evaluation strategy employs the doubly-robust inverse-probability weighting regression adjustment model. Key findings indicate that land restoration activities did not negatively impact participant households' food security levels, despite some communal land use restrictions. Moreover, there was a reduction in moderate food insecurity observed. Household livelihood strategies in restoration areas shifted towards more climate-resilient activities, with decreased reliance on crop sales and increased participation in sales of livestock by-products and high-value Non-Timber Forest Products (NTFP). Compared to participants that were involved in the program at a later stage, early participants experienced larger impacts, further validating these findings. Our results highlight the role of participatory approaches to restoration, and the need for multi-scale approaches that include the identification of communities’ immediate needs but also, increase market access, to enhance the synergies of restoration’s biophysical and socioeconomic outcomes. Our analysis also offers an innovative approach for future ex-post evaluations of land restoration programs. The lack of evidence from rigorous methods is a recurrent issue in environmental interventions.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51021,"journal":{"name":"Ecological Economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Greening for the greater good: Socio-economic impacts of land restoration in the Great Green Wall\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ecolecon.2024.108311\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Our study examines the mid-term socioeconomic impacts of landscape restoration in highly desertification-prone Northern Nigeria through the Action Against Desertification (AAD) program. AAD implemented large-scale restoration and livelihood development activities aimed at increasing household income generation from restoration efforts and fostering alternative agricultural activities in an improved ecosystem. Using a multi-method strategy, we assess the impacts of landscape restoration at the household level. We leverage pre-restoration remote-sensed data and machine learning algorithms to identify comparable land sites to the program's restoration areas. Comparison households are selected from communities bordering these sites, replicating the AAD's targeting process. Our impact evaluation strategy employs the doubly-robust inverse-probability weighting regression adjustment model. Key findings indicate that land restoration activities did not negatively impact participant households' food security levels, despite some communal land use restrictions. Moreover, there was a reduction in moderate food insecurity observed. Household livelihood strategies in restoration areas shifted towards more climate-resilient activities, with decreased reliance on crop sales and increased participation in sales of livestock by-products and high-value Non-Timber Forest Products (NTFP). Compared to participants that were involved in the program at a later stage, early participants experienced larger impacts, further validating these findings. Our results highlight the role of participatory approaches to restoration, and the need for multi-scale approaches that include the identification of communities’ immediate needs but also, increase market access, to enhance the synergies of restoration’s biophysical and socioeconomic outcomes. Our analysis also offers an innovative approach for future ex-post evaluations of land restoration programs. The lack of evidence from rigorous methods is a recurrent issue in environmental interventions.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51021,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ecological Economics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ecological Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800924002088\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecological Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800924002088","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们的研究考察了通过 "防治荒漠化行动"(AAD)计划在极易发生荒漠化的尼日利亚北部进行景观恢复所产生的中期社会经济影响。AAD 实施了大规模的恢复和生计发展活动,旨在通过恢复工作增加家庭创收,并在改善的生态系统中促进替代农业活动。我们采用多种方法评估景观恢复对家庭的影响。我们利用恢复前的遥感数据和机器学习算法来确定与计划恢复区域的可比土地。对比家庭从与这些地点接壤的社区中选出,复制了 AAD 的目标选择过程。我们的影响评估策略采用了双重稳健的反概率加权回归调整模型。主要研究结果表明,尽管存在一些公共土地使用限制,但土地恢复活动并未对参与家庭的粮食安全水平产生负面影响。此外,还观察到中度粮食不安全状况有所缓解。恢复地区的家庭生计战略转向了更具气候适应性的活动,减少了对作物销售的依赖,增加了对畜牧业副产品和高价值非木材森林产品(NTFP)销售的参与。与较晚参与项目的参与者相比,早期参与者受到的影响更大,进一步验证了这些发现。我们的研究结果凸显了参与式恢复方法的作用,以及多尺度方法的必要性,其中包括确定社区的迫切需求,同时增加市场准入,以增强恢复的生物物理和社会经济成果的协同作用。我们的分析还为未来土地恢复计划的事后评估提供了一种创新方法。缺乏来自严格方法的证据是环境干预中经常出现的问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Greening for the greater good: Socio-economic impacts of land restoration in the Great Green Wall

Our study examines the mid-term socioeconomic impacts of landscape restoration in highly desertification-prone Northern Nigeria through the Action Against Desertification (AAD) program. AAD implemented large-scale restoration and livelihood development activities aimed at increasing household income generation from restoration efforts and fostering alternative agricultural activities in an improved ecosystem. Using a multi-method strategy, we assess the impacts of landscape restoration at the household level. We leverage pre-restoration remote-sensed data and machine learning algorithms to identify comparable land sites to the program's restoration areas. Comparison households are selected from communities bordering these sites, replicating the AAD's targeting process. Our impact evaluation strategy employs the doubly-robust inverse-probability weighting regression adjustment model. Key findings indicate that land restoration activities did not negatively impact participant households' food security levels, despite some communal land use restrictions. Moreover, there was a reduction in moderate food insecurity observed. Household livelihood strategies in restoration areas shifted towards more climate-resilient activities, with decreased reliance on crop sales and increased participation in sales of livestock by-products and high-value Non-Timber Forest Products (NTFP). Compared to participants that were involved in the program at a later stage, early participants experienced larger impacts, further validating these findings. Our results highlight the role of participatory approaches to restoration, and the need for multi-scale approaches that include the identification of communities’ immediate needs but also, increase market access, to enhance the synergies of restoration’s biophysical and socioeconomic outcomes. Our analysis also offers an innovative approach for future ex-post evaluations of land restoration programs. The lack of evidence from rigorous methods is a recurrent issue in environmental interventions.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Ecological Economics
Ecological Economics 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
12.00
自引率
5.70%
发文量
313
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: Ecological Economics is concerned with extending and integrating the understanding of the interfaces and interplay between "nature''s household" (ecosystems) and "humanity''s household" (the economy). Ecological economics is an interdisciplinary field defined by a set of concrete problems or challenges related to governing economic activity in a way that promotes human well-being, sustainability, and justice. The journal thus emphasizes critical work that draws on and integrates elements of ecological science, economics, and the analysis of values, behaviors, cultural practices, institutional structures, and societal dynamics. The journal is transdisciplinary in spirit and methodologically open, drawing on the insights offered by a variety of intellectual traditions, and appealing to a diverse readership. Specific research areas covered include: valuation of natural resources, sustainable agriculture and development, ecologically integrated technology, integrated ecologic-economic modelling at scales from local to regional to global, implications of thermodynamics for economics and ecology, renewable resource management and conservation, critical assessments of the basic assumptions underlying current economic and ecological paradigms and the implications of alternative assumptions, economic and ecological consequences of genetically engineered organisms, and gene pool inventory and management, alternative principles for valuing natural wealth, integrating natural resources and environmental services into national income and wealth accounts, methods of implementing efficient environmental policies, case studies of economic-ecologic conflict or harmony, etc. New issues in this area are rapidly emerging and will find a ready forum in Ecological Economics.
期刊最新文献
If there is waste, there is a system: Understanding Victoria's circular economy transition from a systems thinking perspective Raising awareness of climate change: Nature, activists, politicians? Back to the future: An experiment on ecological restoration Buzzword or breakthrough beyond growth? The mainstreaming of the Wellbeing Economy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1