Household Livelihood Strategies and Forest Resource Use in Rural West Bengal,India

Abstract

The economic contributions of forest resources to the well-being of rural households are enormous. However, the level of forest benefits and degree of forest reliance vary across households. Drawing on a sustainable livelihood framework, this article explores how these forest resource uses correlate to the choice of livelihood strategies of rural forest-dependent households with a specific focus on the increased income of households, filling income shortfall, coping with shocks and livelihood diversification. Data were collected from 407 rural forest-dependent households in West Bengal, India. Based on the share of forest income in total household income, households were classified into different livelihood strategy groups. One-way ANOVA was run to test the income differences among these groups. The forest extractive strategy was found least income-generating of all livelihood strategies. Multinomial logit regression was carried out to identify the asset-based explanatory variables that influence livelihood strategy choices and forest dependency of the studied households. Analyses show that households’ differential access to or endowment of livelihood assets determines the choice of a rural household’s livelihood strategy and that forest resource uses of the households are livelihood strategy driven. Asset-poor households should be given opportunities to pursue livelihood activities with higher economic returns.

JEL Classifications: Q23, Q56, Q57

Keywords

India forests livelihood strategy safety net gap-filling income diversification

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Adhikari

(2005). Poverty, property rights and collective action: Understanding the distributive aspects of common property resource management. Environment and Development Economics , 10(1), 7–31.

Babulo

, Muys

, Nega

, Tollens

, Nyssen

, Deckers

, & Mathijs

(2008). Household livelihood strategies and forest dependence in the highlands of Tigray, Northern Ethiopia. Agricultural Systems , 98(2), 147–155.

Barbier

E. B.

(2017). How environmental degradation impoverishes the poor. In Oxford research encyclopedia of environmental science . Oxford University Press.

Carney

D. (ed.)

. (1998). Sustainable rural livelihoods: What contribution can we make? . Department for International Development.

Carney

(2002). Sustainable livelihoods approaches: Progress and possibilities for change . Department for International Development.

Cochran

W. G.

(1977). Sampling techniques . John Wiley & Sons.

Das

(2012). Impact of participatory forestry program on sustainable rural livelihoods: Lessons from an Indian province. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy , 34(3), 428–453.

Dasgupta

(1993). An inquiry into well-being and destitution . Oxford University Press.

Dercon

(2002). Income risk, coping strategies, and safety nets. The World Bank Research Observer , 17(2), 141–166.

10.

DfID

U. K.

(1999). Sustainable livelihoods guidance sheets . https://www.livelihoodscentre.org/documents/114097690/114438878/Sustainable+livelihoods+guidance+sheets.pdf/594e5ea6-99a9-2a4e-f288-cbb4ae4bea8b?t=1569512091877

11.

Ellis

(2000). Rural livelihoods and diversity in developing countries . Oxford University Press.

12.

Felkner

J. S.

, Lee

, Shaikh

, Kolata

, & Binford

(2022). The interrelated impacts of credit access, market access and forest proximity on livelihood strategies in Cambodia. World Development , 155, 105795.

13.

Fisher

(2004). Household welfare and forest dependence in Southern Malawi. Environment and Development Economics , 9(2), 135–154.

14.

Fisher

, Shively

G. E.

, & Buccola

(2005). Activity choice, labor allocation, and forest use in Malawi. Land Economics , 81(4), 503–517.

15.

Goodman

L. A.

(1961). Snowball sampling. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics , 32, 148–170.

16.

Gotschi

, Njuki

, & Delve

(2009). Equal numbers, equal chances? A case study of gender differences in the distribution of social capital in smallholder farmer groups in Búzi District, Mozambique. The European Journal of Development Research , 21(2), 264–282.

17.

GoWB. (2009). Annual report of forest management . BTR, Office of the Field Director, Buxa Tigre Reserve, Government of West Bengal.

18.

GoWB. (2021). Annual administrative report 2019–20 . Department of Forests, Government of West Bengal.

19.

Jiao

, Pouliot

, & Walelign

S. Z.

(2017). Livelihood strategies and dynamics in rural Cambodia. World Development , 97, 266–278.

20.

Kamanga

, Vedeld

, & Sjaastad

(2009). Forest incomes and rural livelihoods in Chiradzulu District, Malawi. Ecological Economics , 68(3), 613–624.

21.

Kropko

(2007). Choosing between multinomial logit and multinomial probit models for analysis of unordered choice data [Doctoral Dissertation]. The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

22.

Lancaster

(1966). A new approach to consumer theory. Journal of Political Economy , 74, 132–157.

23.

Mahapatra

A. K.

, Albers

H. J.

, & Robinson

E. J. Z.

(2005). The impact of NTFP sales on rural households’ cash income in India’s dry deciduous forest. Environmental Management , 35(3), 258–265.

24.

Mehta

A. K.

, & Shah

(2003). Chronic poverty in India: Incidence, causes and policies. World Development , 31(3), 491–511.

25.

Minot

, Epprecht

, Tran

, Tram

, & Le Quang

(2006). Income diversification and poverty in the Northern Uplands of Vietnam Research report . International Food Policy Research Institute.

26.

Mukherjee

(2019). Forest co-management and rural livelihoods in West Bengal [Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation]. Department of Economics, University of Calcutta.

27.

Mukherjee

, Ray

, Bhattacharya

R. N.

(2017). Status differences in collective action and forest benefits: Evidence from joint forest management in India. Environment, Development and Sustainability , 19(5), 1831–1854.

28.

Nguyen

T. T.

, Do

T. L.

, Bühler

, Hartje

, & Grote

(2015). Rural livelihoods and environmental resource dependence in Cambodia. Ecological Economics , 120, 282–295.

29.

Nielsen

Ø.

, Rayamajhi

, Uberhuaga

, Meilby

, & Smith-Hall

(2013). Quantifying rural livelihood strategies in developing countries using an activity choice approach. Agricultural Economics , 44(1), 57–71.

30.

Ray

(2018). The impacts of forest income on rural livelihoods in West Bengal [Working Paper]. Institute of Development Studies Kolkata.

31.

Ray

, & Bhattacharya

R. N.

(2011). Transaction costs, collective action and survival of heterogeneous co-management institutions: Case study of forest management organisations in West Bengal, India. The Journal of Development Studies , 47(2), 253–273.

32.

Ray

, & Mukherjee

(2023). Forest income and rural livelihoods in West Bengal, India. Studies in Microeconomics , 11(1), 10–35.

33.

Ray

, & Mukherjee

(2022). Economics of gender in resource-dependent communities. In

Kahn

(ed.), Oxford research encyclopedia of environmental economics . Oxford University Press.

34.

Ray

, Mukherjee

, & Bhattacharya

R. N.

(2017a). Gender differences in social capital and collective action: Does social identity matter in joint forest management? In

Mukhopadhyay

, Nawn

, & Das

(Eds.), Global change, ecosystems, sustainability: Theory, methods, Practice (pp. 225–244). Sage.

35.

Ray

, Mukherjee

, & Bhattacharya

R. N.

(2017b). Attitudes and cooperation: Does gender matter in community-based forest management?. Environment and Development Economics , 22(5), 594–623.

36.

Roy

, Bose

, Basak

, & Chowdhury

I. R.

(2023). Towards sustainable society: The sustainable livelihood security (SLS) approach for prioritizing development and understanding sustainability: An insight from West Bengal, India. Environment, Development and Sustainability , 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-023-03456-x

37.

Scoones

(1998). Sustainable rural livelihoods: A framework for analysis [IDS Working Paper 72]. Brighton.

38.

Soltani

, Angelsen

, Eid

, Noori Naieni

M.S

, & Shamekhi

(2012). Poverty, sustainability, and household livelihood strategies in Zagros, Iran. Ecological Economics , 79, 60–70.

39.

Sharp

J. L.

, Mobley

, Hammond

, Withington

, Drew

, Stringfield

, & Stipanovic

(2012). A mixed methods sampling methodology for a multisite case study. Journal of Mixed Methods Research , 6(1), 34–54.

40.

Thurstone

(1927). A law of comparative judgement. Psychological Review , 4, 273–286.

41.

Vedeld

, Angelsen

, Bojö

, Sjaastad

, & Berg

G. K.

(2007). Forest environmental incomes and the rural poor. Forest Policy and Economics , 9(7), 869–879.

42.

Walelign

S. Z.

, & Jiao

(2017). Dynamics of rural livelihoods and environmental reliance: Empirical evidence from Nepal. Forest Policy and Economics, 83, 199–209.

43.

World Bank. (2001). World development report: Attacking poverty [World Development Report]. Oxford University Press.

44.

Wunder

, Börner

, Shively

, & Wyman

(2014). Safety nets, gap filling and forests: A global-comparative perspective. World Development , 64, S29–S42.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

1.03 MB