Search results

Human beings are inseparable from the environment because of their dependence on ecosystems and their services (Schroter, 2009). The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) identifies ecosystem services as vital links between humans and ecosystems because these services are essential for human well-being, especially in terms of security, basic materials for a good life, health, good social relations, and freedom of choice and action. Ecosystem services include flows of materials, energy, and information from natural resources that combined with manufactured and human resources contribute to human well-being (Costanza et al., 1997). These include provisioning services (e.g., food, fresh water, wood and fiber, fuel), regulating services (e.g., climate, flood and disease regulation, water purification), supporting services (e.g., nutrient cycling, soil formation, primary production), and cultural services (e.g., aesthetic, spiritual, educational, and recreational value). The regulating services provided by ecosystems, in particular, are critical for disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation. Ecosystems primarily affect both the probability and the severity of events and modulate the effects of extreme events. For example, soils store large amounts of water, facilitate transfer of surface water to groundwater, and prevent or reduce flooding, and natural buffers reduce hazards by absorbing runoff peaks and storm surges.

This study aims to explore the scientific research progress in the field of “Rural Livelihood” from 1991 to 2022.

A total of 2,122 documents were extracted from the Web of Science Core Collection using the key terms “Rural Livelihood” OR “Rural Livelihoods” in the “Title-Abstract-Keyword” field. The statistical analysis was performed through VOSviewer, Bibliometrix, Biblioshiney open-source package of R language environment, and MS Office software.

The results show that the first research article related to the field of rural livelihood was published in 1991, and the rapid growth in the publications of rural livelihood was observed since 2000, with a positive annual growth rate of 14.87%. Shackleton CM (n = 30 articles) and Belcher B (n = 1235 citations) are the most productive and highly cited authors in the field of rural livelihood, respectively. World Development is the most prolific and dominant journal, followed by Sustainability and Land Use Policy. The citation analysis disclosed that “Capitals and capabilities: a framework for analysing peasant viability, rural livelihoods and poverty” is the most cited research paper published in the field of rural livelihood by Anthony Bebbington. University of Copenhagen, Wageningen University and Rhodes University emerged as the topmost organizations engaged in rural livelihood research. The USA and the UK are the most productive and cited countries in rural livelihood. The keyword analysis revealed that most of the research published in the field of rural livelihood has focussed on rural livelihoods, management, conservation, poverty, strategies, climate change, etc.; however, the least emphasis is given on the subjects like food security, income diversification, biodiversity, deforestation, soil fertility management, bio-economy and environmental intervention. The thematic evolution reflects that the field of rural livelihood has been extensively researched and has undergone many dimensions, such as agriculture, management, conservation, climate change, households, policy and biodiversity.

The study’s findings provide an insight into global research trends, latest advances, hot issues, leading topics, and the thematic evolution of rural livelihood research over the last 31 years approximately. This study is quite useful to researchers and stakeholders to obtain rigorous bibliographic knowledge on literature related to the topic and work accordingly for R&D activities.

Sustainable luxury has often been seen to offer both environmental sustainability and the possibility for innovative entrepreneurial development of natural and cultural heritage. The possibility and challenges of sustainable luxury tourism for Indigenous groups have been discussed by Poelina and Nordensvärd (2018) at some length by including a cultural governance perspective that brings culture and nature together. They stressed how protecting our shared human heritage and human culture can be aligned with a new wave of sustainable luxury tourism. To achieve this, we need to create links to both management and protection of landscapes and ecosystems as vital parts of heritage protection and social development. This chapter explores how and why we need to integrate social sustainability into sustainable luxury tourism, where we can foresee potential pitfalls and conceptualise nature-based and Indigenous tourism to empower local Indigenous communities and provide them with sustainable employment, economic development and community services. The sustainable tourism model provides brokerage necessary to strengthen their capacity for innovation, entrepreneurship and transformational change. This transformational change requires tourist visitors and non-Indigenous tourism operators to be open to a new experience with Indigenous guides and tourism operators to see, share and learn how to feel ‘Country’ (Poelina, 2016; Poelina & Nordensvärd, 2018). We will use Martuwarra (Fitzroy River) and its communities in Kimberley (Western Australia) as a case study to develop a sociocultural sustainable luxury tourism framework that includes governance, legal and management and social policy perspective.

This chapter examines the bamboo-based livelihoods of the tribal artisans of Tripura and studies entrepreneurship, through the perspective of innovative small and medium enterprises, as a way to achieve sustainable development. Under a cluster-based approach of the Tripura Bamboo Mission, this chapter intends to understand how tribal entrepreneur’s belief in sustainability motivates them to develop and enhance livelihood opportunities. It is in addressing this basic question of an entrepreneur’s ‘drive’ in achieving sustainable livelihood that the development goals are met.

Farmland transfer choice is strongly associated with the livelihood strategies of rural households. The 2014 Three Property Rights Separation (TPRS) reform has legalized farmland transfer practices in rural China, hence stimulating the farmland transfer market at the national scale. This paper aims to determine the extent to which rural family livelihood strategies are influenced by their participation decision in farmland transfer practices. Further, the authors examined the effectiveness of the TPRS reform on the impact of farmland transfer participation on rural household livelihood strategy choices.

Based on the sustainable livelihood approach (SLA) using data from a national rural household survey, the authors employ the logit model and the propensity score matching (PSM) method to estimate the impact of household farmland transfer participation. Its interaction effects with household livelihood capital on their livelihood strategy choices and diversification level are also investigated. The difference-in-difference (DID) model is employed to assess the effectiveness of the TPRS reform.

The results indicate that the participation in transferred-out farmland could improve rural households' non-agricultural livelihood strategies. While the participation in transferred-in farmland could improve the probability of rural families' engaging in pure-agricultural (PA) or agricultural-dependent (AD) livelihood strategies, the TPRS reform can attract specialized farmers to increase their farm size through the market solutions and encourage small farmers to leave their farmland to engage in more off-farm work.

This study contributes to the literature on farmers' livelihood by exploring the role of farmland transfer decision and the effectiveness of 2014 TPRS reform through the SLA approach.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the impact of migration on the livelihoods of Ethiopians. It is widely acclaimed that migration has positive effects on livelihoods. This paper investigates whether this claim is a fallacy or a reality. Can migration be conceptualized as a strategy for livelihood enhancement? Although Ethiopia has a large number of migrants both internally and externally, this paper focuses on the impact of external migration on the livelihoods of Ethiopian migrants and their families.

Using primary data, the paper attempts to establish whether migration enhances livelihoods. Qualitative data are used. Primary data were collected and analyzed using SurveyMonkey. SurveyMonkey is an internet-based software that has a facility for interview questions and it analyses data automatically on submission of responses. The survey achieved a response rate of 52 percent (218 out of 420). A follow-up survey, done between March 20 and April 16, 2018 to validate the online responses, involved 12 respondents.

Results show that migration is important in the sustenance of livelihoods. Both pecuniary and non-pecuniary benefits have been realised. In addition, migration also benefits development at home.

The Ethiopian Government should develop policy options that promote the inflow of remittances for livelihood enhancement.

The paper uses SurveyMonkey to gather data from a number of respondents (crowdsourcing data collection). The SurveyMonkey made possible a crowd data gathering process.

The purpose of this paper is to provide statistical and empirical evidence on the motivations, income determinants and livelihood vulnerabilities of female teenage head porters. The paper draws from the motivational theory and the livelihood vulnerability approach to assess the motivations, livelihood vulnerabilities and income determinants of female teenage head porters in Kasoa, Ghana.

The mixed methods data collection instruments were used to collect primary data from 200 randomly sampled female teenage head porters in Kasoa. It includes both close and open-ended questionnaires, one case study and personal observation.

Based on the estimation, the study found that household poverty, unemployment, desire for regular income and quest for personal independence were significant motivational factors drawing teenage girls into head porting. Also, age of respondents and years of experience in the occupation were the significant determinants of income of respondents. Exposure to frequent malaria, stress and physical pains were common livelihood risk factors faced by the respondents. Majority of them were from the northern region of Ghana and less than 20 percent of them had formal education.

The paper proposed for extensive implementation of robust macroeconomic and specific social protection interventions to enhance equal job and income opportunities as well as to protect the vulnerable.

The study provides statistical and empirical results different from other related studies (Opare, 2003; Awumbila, 2007; Baah-Ennumh et al., 2012; Akanle and Chioma, 2013).

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the issue of post‐disaster livelihood recovery through economic rehabilitation, with the illustration of post‐tsunami promotion of microentrepreneurship activities generating employment and income among the affected populations.

The paper examines two field case studies in Aceh (Indonesia) and Tamil Nadu (India), where a well‐established European NGO carried out economic relief and microentrepreneurship rehabilitation in 2005‐2007.

Despite unlimited trust in rapid reconstruction capacity, post‐tsunami livelihood recovery has been chaotic and uncoordinated. Contrary to humanitarian agencies in charge of emergency relief, only a few development agencies and NGOs were able to deliver a rapid rehabilitation of microeconomic activities existing locally before the disaster.

There are values but also obvious limits to comparing the micro‐level experiences of a major European NGO in two different locations such as Aceh and Tamil Nadu, and to deducing macro‐ and meso‐level lessons to be learned.

There are difficulties in benchmarking the divison of labour but necessary coordination among development agencies and their humanitarian counterparts in the field of post‐disaster sustainable economic rehabilitation.

Post‐disaster economic security and livelihood recovery are at the forefront of current international policy research in humanitarian and development cooperation circles. Documented case studies and lessons to be learned are still scarce for feeding possible best practices.

This case discusses the journey of SELCO Foundation, a Bengaluru based not-for-profit organization. It provides key learning and insights for social transformation and poverty alleviation. With the vision of “creating inclusive development pathways that were socially and environmentally sustainable,” the Foundation fostered and scaled ecosystems for democratization of access to clean energy and sustainable solutions for the marginalized communities. Using decentralized renewable energy (DRE), SELCO’s initiatives had established linkages between SDG7 (Affordable and Clean Energy) and SDG3 (Good Health and Well-being), SDG4 (Quality Education), SDG8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth), and SDG11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities). Throughout its journey, it continuously challenged normative development paradigms and perceptions about gender issues, poverty, and sustainability as a whole through a people-centric approach; empowering individuals, communities, and institutions. The recent COVID-19 pandemic landed a massive blow to the country’s socioeconomic structure. SELCO Foundation’s teams deployed in remote locations for livelihood interventions programs had faced a multitude of challenges due to COVID-19 lockdown. As a response to COVID-19 crisis, SELCO Foundation rallied its resources to support relief efforts across India. It leveraged its expertise in energy by deploying a pan India network of grass-root partners; community-sourced innovations to ramp-up last mile healthcare infrastructure, build community resilience programs, and strengthen existing capabilities. Leveraging sustainable solutions as a medium, SELCO’s transformative work extended beyond access to clean energy, and sought to address complex issues such as healthcare, education, reduction in drudgery in manual jobs, creating opportunities for dignified work and more. Through this case study, this chapter discusses the emergence, journey, and initiatives of SELCO Foundation. It explores a practice-based pedagogy of social transformation, and challenges faced in ecosystem building during the times of the pandemic. The chapter initiates a discussion for a way forward for the social enterprise in times of uncertainties and stringencies in order to continue impacting underprivileged lives to the best.

With the simultaneous increase of natural hazards and land- and resource-vulnerable women in the rural coasts of Bangladesh, large- and medium-scale infrastructure and livelihood programmes by government and non-government-organisations have been plenty. Yet, gender-responsive and livelihood-integrated infrastructure for these women's adaptation against increasing coastal vulnerabilities has been scarce. This paper outlines an infrastructure framework for improving their livelihood resilience in the scarcity of similar research.

A case study approach was assumed for this research. Based on a conceptual framework, in-depth interviews and focus-group-discussions with vulnerable women and key-informant-interview of NGO/government respondents were primarily used for data collection at Latachapli – a disaster-vulnerable coastal village in Southwest Bangladesh. Findings were derived primarily through inductive thematic coding.

Rural coastal women's livelihood vulnerabilities result from the lack of adequate, spatial/infrastructural and integrated (socio-economic) facilities and institutions. There is a clear need for a community-level and gender-responsive spatio-physical platform to create income generation/livelihood diversification opportunities irrespective of seasonalities, skill/capacity development and sharing/networking possibilities.

Due to case-specificity, research findings are representative but not generalisable. Further research is needed, especially at the intersection of gender, inequality and infrastructure design/planning regarding vulnerable women's resilience.

This proposed infrastructure framework can be considered for similar disaster-vulnerable rural coastal settings as a development policy and a physical infrastructure.

This case study's in-depth probing into vulnerable coastal women's livelihoods contributes to a growing body of knowledge, highlights their complex needs, and re-conceptualises gender-responsive infrastructure in similar communities' sustainable development. Piecemeal funding for social services will be more effective if coordinated with and allocated to appropriate engineering infrastructure. With access to proper community facilities and diverse livelihood opportunities all around the year (in this case, a multipurpose gender-sensitive infrastructure), communities would be more empowered to self-organise and support each other in delivering necessary soft services.