all.data.final.csv

pre.cjk { font-family: "Courier New", monospace; }p { margin-bottom: 0.1in; line-height: 120%; }a:link { } <pre>Data for paper "Rural Protein Insufficiency <br>in a Wildlife-Depleted West African <br>Farm-Forest Landscape"</pre

Incorporating basic needs to reconcile poverty and ecosystem services

Conservation managers frequently face the challenge of protecting and sustaining biodiversity without producing detrimental outcomes for (often poor) human populations that depend on ecosystem services for their well‐being. However, mutually beneficial solutions are often elusive and can mask trade‐offs and negative outcomes for people. To deal with such trade‐offs, ecological and social thresholds need to be identified to determine the acceptable solution space for conservation. Although human well‐being as a concept has recently gained prominence, conservationists still lack tools to evaluate how their actions affect it in a given context. We applied the theory of human needs to conservation by building on an extensive historical application of need approaches in international development. In an innovative participatory method that included focus groups and household surveys, we evaluated how human needs are met based on locally relevant thresholds. We then established connections between human needs and ecosystem services through key‐informant focus groups. We applied our method in coastal East Africa to identify households that would not be able to meet their basic needs and to uncover the role of ecosystem services in meeting these. This enabled us to identify how benefits derived from the environment were contributing to meeting basic needs and to consider potential repercussions that could arise through changes to ecosystem service provision. We suggest our approach can help conservationists and planners balance poverty alleviation and biodiversity protection and ensure conservation measures do not, at the very least, cause serious harm to individuals. We further argue it can be used as a basis for monitoring the impacts of conservation on multidimensional poverty

The importance of bushmeat in the livelihoods of West African cash-crop farmers living in a faunally-depleted landscape.

Bushmeat is an important resource in the livelihoods of many rural communities in sub-Saharan Africa and may be a crucial safety-net for the most vulnerable households, especially during times of economic hardship. However, little is known about the impacts of wildlife depletion on these functions. This study quantifies the role of bushmeat in diversified rural household economies in a wildlife depleted forest-farm landscape in Ghana, assessing its importance overall, as well as differentiated by the relative vulnerability of households. Using repeat socioeconomic questionnaires (N=787) among 63 households over a one-year period, the following hypotheses were tested: (a) vulnerable households harvest more bushmeat; (b) bushmeat contributes a greater proportion of household production in vulnerable households; (c) bushmeat is more important for cash income than consumption in vulnerable households; and (d) bushmeat sales are more important for vulnerable households. The bushmeat harvest value averaged less than US$1.0 per day for 89% of households and comprised less than 7% of household production value. Household wealth and gender of the household head had little effect on the importance of bushmeat. However, bushmeat harvest and sales were highest during the agricultural lean season. Overall, most harvested bushmeat (64%) was consumed, enabling households to spend 30% less on meat/fish purchases. These findings suggest that, despite heavily depleted wildlife and diversified livelihoods, bushmeat continues to have an important role in rural livelihoods by acting as a safety net for income smoothing and reducing household expenditure during times of economic hardship

Trends in bushmeat trade in a postconflict forest town: implications for food security

Food insecurity and malnutrition can be major, yet often overlooked, consequences of armed conflicts because of the disruption of rural-urban trade networks and human migration toward safe urban centers. Bushmeat has been shown to act as an important safety net for conflict-affected urban populations, contributing the provisioning of basic needs and postconflict peace building efforts. However, the widely documented unsustainability of bushmeat hunting questions whether reliance of an urban population on bushmeat can be sustained for prolonged periods. To assess the potential contribution of bushmeat to sustainable food systems and peace building processes in a postconflict setting in the Democratic Republic of Congo, we use bushmeat trade data from the Kisangani market collected during three annual surveys in 2002, 2008/2009, and 2015/2016. Overall, we found a decreasing supply of bushmeat that, combined with an increasing human population size, limited the contribution of bushmeat to food security. Although bushmeat was the cheapest source of animal protein available in 2002, substitutes became more affordable over time, thereby reducing the need for bushmeat, especially among the urban poor. Finally, assessing the sustainability of bushmeat supply showed an ambiguous pattern depending on the indicator used, which may have been influenced by changes in the geographical trade routes, possibly mediating negative effects of local resource depletion on urban bushmeat supplies. This study provides insights into the contribution and the sustainability of bushmeat to urban postconflict food security. At the same time we also highlight the need for improved understanding of temporal supply/trade trajectories and especially the interaction between the sustainability of bushmeat harvest and the availability of affordable substitutes for ensuring sustainable food systems in support of peace building processes

Combining offtake and participatory data to assess the sustainability of a hunting system in northern Congo

Research suggests that bushmeat is hunted at unsustainable rates throughout much of the Congo basin, although accurately measuring hunting sustainability is challenging. Offtake data can contribute towards sustainability assessments, and when incorporated with information on hunters' strategies, can be used to monitor changes in hunting dynamics. We used a combination of (1) a long-term, quantitative yet low-resolution hunting offtake data set, (2) qualitative data acquired through participatory methods, and (3) a high-resolution offtake survey, to examine the changes in a hunting system undergoing change due to new roads and associated socio-economic developments in northern Republic of the Congo. Our results indicated that while the conclusions drawn from the different data sets were broadly the same (indicating wildlife depletion, particularly in one hunting zone), the results of the analysis of the participatory and the high-resolution offtake data set provided an explanation for trends in the long-term low-resolution offtake data set, including the degree to which long-term trends are due to changes in hunting strategy, or in underlying wildlife populations. We discuss how participatory hunter surveys can be used to distinguish between changes in prey populations and changes in hunting strategy in long-term low-resolution hunting offtake data sets, therefore, improving the effectiveness of long-term offtake data sets to assess sustainability of hunting

Rural protein insufficiency in a wildlife-depleted West African farm-forest landscape

<div><p>Introduction</p><p>Wildlife is an important source of protein for many people in developing countries. Yet wildlife depletion due to overexploitation is common throughout the humid tropics and its effect on protein security, especially for vulnerable households, is poorly understood. This is problematic for both sustainable rural development and conservation management.</p><p>Methods</p><p>This study investigates a key dimension of protein security in a cash-crop farming community living in a wildlife-depleted farm-forest landscape in SW Ghana, a region where protein–energy malnutrition persists. Specifically, we monitored protein sufficiency, defined as whether consumption met daily requirements, as benchmarked by recommended daily allowance (RDA). We focus on whether more vulnerable households were less likely to be able to meet their protein needs, where vulnerability was defined by wealth, agricultural season and gender of the household head. Our central hypothesis was: (a) vulnerable households are less likely to consume sufficient protein. In the context that most plant proteins were home-produced, so likely relatively accessible to all households, while most animal proteins were purchased, so likely less accessible to vulnerable households, we tested two further hypotheses: (b) vulnerable households depend more on plant protein to cover their protein needs; and (c) vulnerable households are less likely to earn sufficient cash income to meet their protein needs through purchased animal sources.</p><p>Results</p><p>Between 14% and 60% of households (depending on plant protein content assumptions) consumed less than the RDA for protein, but neither protein consumption nor protein sufficiency co-varied with household vulnerability. Fish, livestock and food crops comprised 85% of total protein intake and strongly affected protein sufficiency. However, bushmeat remained an important protein source (15% of total consumption), especially during the post-harvest season when it averaged 26% of total protein consumption. Across the year, 89% of households experienced at least one occasion when they had insufficient income to cover their protein needs through animal protein purchases. The extent of this income shortage was highest during the lean season and among poorer households.</p><p>Conclusions</p><p>These findings indicate that despite wildlife depletion, bushmeat continues to make a substantial contribution to protein consumption, especially during the agricultural lean season. Income shortages among farmers limit their ability to purchase bushmeat or its substitutes, suggesting that wildlife depletion may cause malnutrition.</p></div

Results of GLMM analysing the effect of household wealth (wealth), gender of the household head (gender) and seasonality (season) on the contribution of bushmeat protein for households that consumed bushmeat (scale of the response) (assuming 2% protein content of low-protein food crops; for corresponding GLMM results assuming 1% protein content, see S6 Table).

<p>Analysed were mean consumption estimates per household per season (N = 136).</p

Results of binomial GLMM assessing the likelihood of 50% of household gross income exceeding the amount needed to purchase animal protein > RDA in relation to household wealth (wealth), gender of the household head (gender) and seasonality (season).

<p>Results of binomial GLMM assessing the likelihood of 50% of household gross income exceeding the amount needed to purchase animal protein > RDA in relation to household wealth (wealth), gender of the household head (gender) and seasonality (season).</p

The percentage of interviews with insufficient gross cash income (50%) to cover the RDA through purchase of the cheapest animal protein source available across seasons.

<p>Standard errors are shown.</p