Contribution of forest provisioning ecosystem services to rural livelihoods in Copperbelt’s Miombo woodlands, Zambia

Type Working Paper
Title Contribution of forest provisioning ecosystem services to rural livelihoods in Copperbelt’s Miombo woodlands, Zambia
Author(s)
Publication (Day/Month/Year) 2012
URL http://www.see.leeds.ac.uk/fileadmin/Documents/research/sri/workingpapers/SRIPs-41.pdf
Abstract
Global policy interest in forest ecosystem services has increased in the past two decades because of the significance of forests in mitigating climate change and providing services which are important to the livelihoods of rural people in developing countries. A better understanding of the relationship between African Miombo forest ecosystem services and livelihood strategies and outcomes, differentiated by wealth and gender, is particularly needed if the UN-REDD programme and Climate Compatible Development initiatives are to achieve their aims. In this paper, we present a case study from two Miombo woodland regions (a National Forest Reserve and a Joint Forest Management Scheme) in Copperbelt Province, Zambia. We employed focus groups, in-depth interviews, and interviewed 244 households stratified into three wealth classes and by gender of household heads, to examine the patterns of use of forest provisioning ecosystem services (FPES) in Miombo agro-ecosystems. Our results show that FPES are vitally important in providing food, medicine, fodder, and construction materials. Wealth of households significantly affected household’s ranking of provisioning services, with foods ranked as the most important products by households. Wealth classes, as opposed to gender of household head, were the key determinant of the sale of FPES as a source of income. We further examined the use of PFES in coping with household shocks and stresses over a period of 12 months and found it as the most widely used coping strategy by households (33%). We conclude that FPES contribute immensely to livelihoods for consumption, as a source of income and as a coping strategy to shocks. As a result, high deforestation and forest degradation will negatively affect livelihood options. To reconcile the policy goals set by REDD+ of reducing poverty and enhancing carbon stores, it is vital that we better understand the use of PFES in livelihoods, the factors affecting their use, and households’ responses to shocks and stresses through local level livelihoods analysis, engaging detailed livelihood surveys using a variety of participatory tools.

Related studies

»