Looking for medium-term conservation and development impacts of community management agreements in Uganda's Rwenzori Mountains National Park.

Clicks: 398
ID: 54785
2018
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #2 of 43 articles by views in ecological economics : the journal of the international society for ecological economics

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
We evaluate the impact of collaborative management agreements (CMAs) designed to protect forests and raise incomes for smallholders living adjacent to Rwenzori Mountains National Park (RMNP), Uganda. We use a quasi-experimental study design to estimate changes in several income measures, as well as land cover using three waves (2003, 2007, and 2012) of household survey and remote sensing data. Overall, we find no significant impact of CMAs on any of our income measures. However, when disaggregating households by income quartile, we find that access to forest resources in RMNP may have had an income stabilizing effect for poor households. Forest income grew significantly faster among the poorest quartile of treatment relative to control households, partially because poor households recorded very low income from forests at baseline. The effect of CMAs on forest cover is minimal, although we find that conversion of woody savanna and savanna to cropland is more pronounced in villages with CMAs. These findings suggest that in the medium-term, CMAs have failed to deliver conservation or development benefits related to enhancing livelihoods or conserving forests near RMNP. Practitioners should consider different CMA models or other strategies for improving welfare and forest health outcomes in communities neighboring protected areas.
Reference Key
jagger2018lookingecological Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Jagger, Pamela;Sellers, Samuel;Kittner, Noah;Das, Ipsita;Bush, Glenn K;
Journal ecological economics : the journal of the international society for ecological economics
Year 2018
DOI
10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.06.006
URL
Keywords
governance livelihoods protected areas devolution forests

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.