Refine
Document Type
- Article (10)
Language
- English (10)
Has Fulltext
- yes (10)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (10)
Keywords
- - (9)
- Central Asia (2)
- Germany (2)
- Lake Balkhash (2)
- <i>Phragmites australis</i> (1)
- Berlin Brandenburg Airport (1)
- CA–Markov (1)
- Caucasus (1)
- China (1)
- Creighton’s principles (1)
Institute
Diversified livelihoods combining farming, livestock keeping and non-farm income arecharacteristic of many rural households worldwide. For the Central Asian and Caucasian region,livestock keeping is especially important in terms of land use and socio-cultural heritage. We contributeto the literature with data from the under-researched Caucasus region and investigate: (i) the extent ofdiversification in smallholder households; (ii) the role of livestock keeping in diversification; (iii) theinfluence of household-specific and location-specific variables and diversification on householdincome. Based on a dataset of 303 households, we calculate contribution margins for the mainagricultural activities, household income, and diversification indices and analyze the influence ofdiversification, asset and location variables on household income with a regression model. Householdincome is generally diversified and a combination of four income sources (crops, livestock, poultry/beesand social benefits) was the most frequent. The econometric analysis shows that higher householdincomes are positively correlated with higher household land and livestock assets, the presence ofnon-farm work and social benefit income sources and with an increasing specialization as measuredby the diversification index. For enhancing rural household incomes and slowing down rural-urbanmigration, the development of non-farm job opportunities is recommended.
Water Consumption of Agriculture and Natural Ecosystems along the Ili River in China and Kazakhstan
(2017)
Production-Integrated Compensation in Environmental Offsets—A Review of a German Offset Practice
(2018)
Abstract
Monitoring the general public's support toward wildlife species is a strategy to identify whether a specific human–wildlife conflict (HWC) is escalating or de‐escalating over time. The support can change due to multiple factors, such as mass media news of HWC or providing information about ecological traits of a species. Methods such as the rating scale (RS) and the allocation of a fixed amount of money (money allocation [MA]) have been used in the human–wildlife dimension as a proxy to measure support toward wildlife species. We compared these two methods' capacity to assess the general public's support changes toward wildlife species in an experimental design setting. Face‐to‐face interviews were applied among urban dwellers (n: 359) in Valdivia, Chile. In each interview, the support toward 12 wildlife species was elicited using an RS and MA methods, on two occasions, before and after disclosing ecological traits of the species. The results indicate that the MA grouped the wildlife species based on shared ecological traits, information disclosed to the participants, while the RS did not obtain the same results. Specifically, the MA identified an increase and decrease of support toward the wildlife species, and the RS only an increment of support. These results could be partly explained due to the conceptual foundation of each method. The MA was designed to elicit preferences in a constrained choice, while the RS measures attitudes. As a constrained choice, the MA does allow maximum support to be given to one species only if all other species are left unsupported, while in the RS, it is possible to provide maximum support for all species. The mentioned characteristics of the MA make it more suitable than the RS when the objective is to identify support changes.