Abstract
The poverty and environmental degradation vicious circle hypothesis considers the poor as agents and victims of environmentally degrading activities. Despite some studies, however, there still has not been a sufficient empirical examination of the poverty-environment nexus. Based on participatory poverty assessment (PPA) methods with two hundred farm households categorized by wealth status in southern Burkina Faso, six indicators of environmental degradation and a set of land management practices were examined to answer the following questions: (i) Which households (non-poor, fairly-poor, or poorest) are responsible for environmental degradation? (ii) Does poverty constrain adoption of land management practices considered to improve the land? Results indicate deforestation is highest for non-poor farmers, and non-poor and fairly-poor farmers have higher rates of overgrazing. In addition, the entire non-poor group, mainly recent migrants to the area, occupy borrowed lands with tenure perceived as insecure, considered by farmers to be a disincentive for assisted natural regeneration of vegetation. Thus, non-poor and fairly-poor farmers participate most in activities locally identified as environmentally degrading, and the former contribute more than the latter. On the other hand, adoption of land management practices considered to improve the land is relatively low amongst the poorest farmers.
Highlights
Until the last decade, the concept of a vicious circle, fostered by the World Bank [1,2] and related international agencies [3], dominated the debate on poverty–environment linkages
This case study of the poverty–environment nexus reveals that the relationship between wealth or poverty status and environmentally degrading activities is site specific in general, as well as activity specific; it provides insights into resource management practices across different wealth groups at this site
The current study reveals that non-poor and fairly poor farmers engaged more often in environmentally degrading activities compared to the poorest farmers
Summary
The concept of a vicious circle, fostered by the World Bank [1,2] and related international agencies [3], dominated the debate on poverty–environment linkages. This concept first appeared in the Brundtland Report launched by the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) [4]. Show that poverty–environment linkages do not conform to a simple downward-spiraling two-way relationship According to these findings, existing social networks and institutions that govern access to natural resources mediate the relationships between poverty and environmental degradation and improvement. The popular portrayal of the vicious circle has treated poverty in uniform and generic ways and thereby caused the broader context behind this poverty to be
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
