Which components or attributes of biodiversity influence which dimensions of poverty?

Abstract Background There is an explicit assumption in international policy statements that biodiversity can help in efforts to tackle global poverty. This systematic map was stimulated by an interest in better understanding the evidence behind this assumption by disaggregating the terms and asking...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Dilys Roe, Max Fancourt, Chris Sandbrook, Mxolisi Sibanda, Alessandra Giuliani, Andrew Gordon-Maclean
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2014-02-01
Series:Environmental Evidence
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1186/2047-2382-3-3
_version_ 1797784786296635392
author Dilys Roe
Max Fancourt
Chris Sandbrook
Mxolisi Sibanda
Alessandra Giuliani
Andrew Gordon-Maclean
author_facet Dilys Roe
Max Fancourt
Chris Sandbrook
Mxolisi Sibanda
Alessandra Giuliani
Andrew Gordon-Maclean
author_sort Dilys Roe
collection DOAJ
description Abstract Background There is an explicit assumption in international policy statements that biodiversity can help in efforts to tackle global poverty. This systematic map was stimulated by an interest in better understanding the evidence behind this assumption by disaggregating the terms and asking - as our review question - which components or attributes of biodiversity influence which dimensions of poverty? Methods We employed a search strategy that covered peer-reviewed and grey literature. Relevant studies included in the map were those that described an interaction by poor people with biodiversity in non-OECD countries and documented some kind of contribution (positive or negative) to different aspects of their well-being. Results A total of 387 studies were included in the final systematic map. Of these 248 met our additional criteria that studies should include a measure of the contribution to poverty alleviation. The studies were widely distributed geographically. Ecological distribution was less well spread, however, with the largest number of studies focussed on forests. We found studies addressing 12 different dimensions of poverty/well-being – although the most commonly studied was income. Similarly we found studies addressing all levels of biodiversity from genes to ecosystems. The largest number of studies was focussed on groups of resources – particularly non-timber forest products. In most cases, abundance was the attribute that made biodiversity important for poverty alleviation/well-being, while diversity was the least frequently noted attribute. Conclusions The map highlights a number of apparent gaps in the evidence base. Very few studies documented any causal link between use of biodiversity and an impact on poverty. In the majority of the studies biodiversity was framed in terms of its value as a resource – in the form of specific goods that can be used to generate tangible benefits such as cash, food fuel. Very few studies explored the underpinning role of biodiversity in ecosystem service delivery for poverty alleviation, and fewer investigated the benefits of diversity as a form of insurance or adaptive capacity. This is where we suggest research should be prioritised.
first_indexed 2024-03-13T00:44:50Z
format Article
id doaj.art-ac445dfcccbc4fcfb4437a587c3eef61
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2047-2382
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-13T00:44:50Z
publishDate 2014-02-01
publisher BMC
record_format Article
series Environmental Evidence
spelling doaj.art-ac445dfcccbc4fcfb4437a587c3eef612023-07-09T11:06:36ZengBMCEnvironmental Evidence2047-23822014-02-013111510.1186/2047-2382-3-3Which components or attributes of biodiversity influence which dimensions of poverty?Dilys Roe0Max Fancourt1Chris Sandbrook2Mxolisi Sibanda3Alessandra Giuliani4Andrew Gordon-Maclean5International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED)United Nations Environment Programme - World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC)United Nations Environment Programme - World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC)International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED)International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED)International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED)Abstract Background There is an explicit assumption in international policy statements that biodiversity can help in efforts to tackle global poverty. This systematic map was stimulated by an interest in better understanding the evidence behind this assumption by disaggregating the terms and asking - as our review question - which components or attributes of biodiversity influence which dimensions of poverty? Methods We employed a search strategy that covered peer-reviewed and grey literature. Relevant studies included in the map were those that described an interaction by poor people with biodiversity in non-OECD countries and documented some kind of contribution (positive or negative) to different aspects of their well-being. Results A total of 387 studies were included in the final systematic map. Of these 248 met our additional criteria that studies should include a measure of the contribution to poverty alleviation. The studies were widely distributed geographically. Ecological distribution was less well spread, however, with the largest number of studies focussed on forests. We found studies addressing 12 different dimensions of poverty/well-being – although the most commonly studied was income. Similarly we found studies addressing all levels of biodiversity from genes to ecosystems. The largest number of studies was focussed on groups of resources – particularly non-timber forest products. In most cases, abundance was the attribute that made biodiversity important for poverty alleviation/well-being, while diversity was the least frequently noted attribute. Conclusions The map highlights a number of apparent gaps in the evidence base. Very few studies documented any causal link between use of biodiversity and an impact on poverty. In the majority of the studies biodiversity was framed in terms of its value as a resource – in the form of specific goods that can be used to generate tangible benefits such as cash, food fuel. Very few studies explored the underpinning role of biodiversity in ecosystem service delivery for poverty alleviation, and fewer investigated the benefits of diversity as a form of insurance or adaptive capacity. This is where we suggest research should be prioritised.https://doi.org/10.1186/2047-2382-3-3BiodiversityNature conservationWildlife conservationPovertyLivelihoods
spellingShingle Dilys Roe
Max Fancourt
Chris Sandbrook
Mxolisi Sibanda
Alessandra Giuliani
Andrew Gordon-Maclean
Which components or attributes of biodiversity influence which dimensions of poverty?
Environmental Evidence
Biodiversity
Nature conservation
Wildlife conservation
Poverty
Livelihoods
title Which components or attributes of biodiversity influence which dimensions of poverty?
title_full Which components or attributes of biodiversity influence which dimensions of poverty?
title_fullStr Which components or attributes of biodiversity influence which dimensions of poverty?
title_full_unstemmed Which components or attributes of biodiversity influence which dimensions of poverty?
title_short Which components or attributes of biodiversity influence which dimensions of poverty?
title_sort which components or attributes of biodiversity influence which dimensions of poverty
topic Biodiversity
Nature conservation
Wildlife conservation
Poverty
Livelihoods
url https://doi.org/10.1186/2047-2382-3-3
work_keys_str_mv AT dilysroe whichcomponentsorattributesofbiodiversityinfluencewhichdimensionsofpoverty
AT maxfancourt whichcomponentsorattributesofbiodiversityinfluencewhichdimensionsofpoverty
AT chrissandbrook whichcomponentsorattributesofbiodiversityinfluencewhichdimensionsofpoverty
AT mxolisisibanda whichcomponentsorattributesofbiodiversityinfluencewhichdimensionsofpoverty
AT alessandragiuliani whichcomponentsorattributesofbiodiversityinfluencewhichdimensionsofpoverty
AT andrewgordonmaclean whichcomponentsorattributesofbiodiversityinfluencewhichdimensionsofpoverty