Safety nets, gap filling and forests: a global-comparative perspective

dc.creator	Wunder, Sven
dc.creator	Börner, J.
dc.creator	Shively, G.E.
dc.creator	Wyman, M.
dc.date	2014-12
dc.date	2018-07-03T10:56:18Z
dc.date	2018-07-03T10:56:18Z
dc.date.accessioned	2026-06-27T14:09:15Z
dc.description	In the forest–livelihoods literature, forests are widely perceived to provide both common safety nets to shocks and resources for seasonal gap-filling. We use a large global-comparative dataset to test these responses. We find households rank forest-extraction responses to shocks lower than most common alternatives. For seasonal gap-filling, forest extraction also has limited importance. The minority of households using forests for coping is asset-poor and lives in villages specialized on forests, in particular timber extraction. Overall, forest resources may be less important as a buffer between agricultural harvests and in times of unforeseen hardship than has been found in many case studies.
dc.identifier	https://hdl.handle.net/10568/93736
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/123456789/75550
dc.language	en
dc.publisher	Elsevier
dc.rights	Open Access
dc.source	Wunder, S., Börner, J., Shively, G., Wyman, M. . 2014. Safety nets, gap filling and forests : a global-comparative perspective. World Development, 64 (Supplement 1) : S29-S42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2014.03.005
dc.subject	livelihoods
dc.subject	risk
dc.subject	income
dc.subject	diversification
dc.subject	household income
dc.title	Safety nets, gap filling and forests: a global-comparative perspective
dc.type	Journal Article

Colecciones