سهم اقتصادی مصرف منابع جنگلی در معیشت روستایی (مورد مطالعه: منطقه هزارجریب شهرستان بهشهر)

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد اقتصاد کشاورزی، دانشگاه علوم کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی ساری

2 دانشیار و عضو هیئت علمی گروه اقتصاد کشاورزی، دانشگاه علوم کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی ساری

3 استادیار و عضو هیئت علمی گروه اقتصاد کشاورزی، دانشگاه علوم کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی ساری

چکیده

منابع جنگل نقش مهمی در معیشت و رفاه صدها میلیون نفر از مردم کشورهای درحال توسعه دارند. هدف از این مطالعه بررسی اهمیت محصولات جنگل در درآمد خانوار روستایی و سطح فقر و نابرابری است. داده­ها و اطلاعات اقتصاد­ی- اجتماعی 160 خانوار روستایی حاشیة جنگل منطقة هزارجریب از طریق پرسشنامه و مصاحبة حضوری جمع­آوری شد. با استفاده از خط فقر روستایی سال 1389 و تعدیل آن برای سال تحقیق (1392)، شاخص­های فقر و نابرابری (ضریب جینی) در دو مرحله محاسبه شد: اول، با احتساب درآمد جنگل و دوم، بدون درنظرگرفتن درآمد جنگل در درآمد کل خانوار. نتایج نشان داد منابع زیست‌محیطی ترکیبی مهم در معیشت خانوار روستایی است، به‌طوری‌که جنگل دومین سهم درآمدی (30 درصد) را از متوسط ​​کل درآمد خانوار دربر دارد. همچنین، با حذف درآمد جنگل از اقتصاد خانوار، تعداد فقرا 8/1 برابر می‌شود و فاصلة آن‌ها از خط فقر افزایش می­یابد (2/4 برابر). نابرابری توزیع درآمد نیز با حذف درآمد جنگل 28/1 برابر می‌شود و سطح رفاه جامعة روستاییان به میزان 2/323 میلیون ریال کاهش می­یابد؛ بنابراین، ترکیب درآمد جنگل در حساب درآمد خانوار، فقر و نابرابری روستایی را به میزان شایان توجهی کاهش می‌دهد که پیش‌زمینة پایداری محیط زیست است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

The economic contribution of forest resources use to rural livelihoods (Case study: Hezar Jarib area of Behshahr City)

نویسندگان [English]

  • Nazi Heidari Zahiri 1
  • Hamid Amirnejad 2
  • Seyed Ali Hosseini Yekani 3
1 Graduate Student, Agricultural Economics, Sari University, Iran
2 Associate Professor, Agricultural conomics, Sari University, Iran
3 Assistant Professor, Agricultural Economics, Sari University, Iran
چکیده [English]

Forest resources play an important role in rural livelihoods and wellbeing of hundred millions of people in developing countries. The aim of this study is determining the importance of forest products in rural household’s income and poverty levels and inequality. Economic-Social data of 160 forest fringe households of Hezar Jabir area of Behshahr city were collected using questionnaires and interviews. According to the rural poverty linein 2010 adjusted for survey year (2013), we measure poverty indices in two stages (with and without forest income). For measuring income inequality, Gini coefficient in two staged (with and without forest income) was used. We found that products from environmental resources represent an important component in rural livelihoods. Our analyses indicate that in the study area, income from forest environmental resources occupies the second largest share (%30) in average total household income. Also, by eliminating forest income, the numbers of poor people were been 1.8 times and the distance is greater than the poverty line (4.2 times). Income inequality is 1.28 times, the welfare of the rural population without forest income decrease to the extent of 323.2 million Rials. Poverty and inequality analyses show that incorporating forest environmental incomes in household accounts significantly reduces measured rural poverty and income inequality, beside poverty reduction is the background of environmental sustainability.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • economic dependence
  • forest income
  • poverty gap
  • poverty line

مراجع

  1. Amirnejad, h.(2006). Natural  Resource  economic.University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources of Sari.Forest publishing ,PP30-31.(In farsi)
  2. Appiah, M., Blay, D., Damnyag, L., Dwomoh, F.K., Pappinen, A., & Luukanen, O. (2009). Dependence on forest resources and tropical deforestation in Ghana. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 11 (3), 471–487.
  3. Asfaw,A., Lemenih,M., Kassa,H., & Ewnetu,Z.( 2013). Importance, determinants and gender dimensions of forest income in eastern highlands of Ethiopia: The case of communities around Jelo Afromontane forest .Forest  Policy and Economics, 28, 1-7.
  4. Babulo, B., Muys, B., Nega, F., Tollens, E., Nyssen, J., Deckers, J., & Mathijs, E.(2009).The economic contribution of forest resource use to rural livelihoods in Tigray, Northern Ethiopia. Forest Policy and Economics, 11, 109–117.                                                                            
  5. Cavendish, W. (1999). Poverty, inequality and environmental resources: quantitative analysis of rural households. Working Paper Series 99-9. Center for the study of Africa Economies, Oxford.
  6. Cavendish, W.(2000). Empirical regularities in the poverty-environment relationship of rural households: evidence from Zimbabwe. World Development, 28,1979–2003.
  7. Cavendish, W.(2002). Quantitative methods for estimating the economic value of resource use to rural household. In: Campbell, B. M. Luckert, M.K. (Eds.), Uncovering the hidden harvest:FAO, Food and Agriculture Organization. 2003. State of the World's Forests. FAO, Rome.
  8. Campbell, M.B., & Luckert, K.M.(Eds.).(2002). Uncovering the Hidden Harvest: Valuation Methods for Woodland and Forest Resources. Earthscan Publications Ltd., London.
  9. Economy World newspaper, (2012). Retrieved June23, 2012,from  www.donya-e-eqtesad.com ,( 2678) , pp 8. (In farsi)
  10. Central Bank of Islamic Rebublic of Iran (2003-2013) Consumption Price Index. From http:// www. CBA. ir. (In farsi)
  11. Ellis, F.( 2001).Rural Livelihoods and Diversity in Developing Countries. Oxford University Press, New York.
  12. FAO, Food and Agriculture Organization.(2003). State of the World's Forests. FAO, Rome.
  13. Fisher, M.(2004).Household welfare and forest dependence in Southern Malawi Environment and Development Economics, 9,135–154.
  14. Jalali, M. , (2006). Decomposition of the Gini coefficient and income elasticity. Professiona and   Scientifi Journal of Central Bank of the Islamic Republic of Iran, 63(4). (In farsi)
  15. Kamanga, P., Vedeld, P., & Sjaastad, E.(2009).Forest incomes and rural livelihoods in Chiradzulu District, Malawi. Ecological Economics, 68, 613–624.
  16. Koning, F.D. aga, M.A. Bravo, m., & Chiu, M.(2011).Bridging the gap between forest conservation and poverty alleviation: the Ecuadorian Socio Bosque program environmental science & policy, 14, 531–542.
  17. Lingani, P. C. Tigabu, M. Savadogo, P. Oden, P.C., & Ouad, J.M.(2009). Determinants of access to forest products in southern Burkina Faso.    Forest policy and Economics, 11, 516–524.
  18. Mamo, G., Sjaastad, E., & Vedeld, P.(2007). Economic dependence on forest resources: acase from Dendi District, Ethiopia. Forest Policy and Economics, 9, 916–927.
  19. Narain, U., Gupta, S., & van't Veld, K.(2008). Poverty and resource dependence in rural India. Ecological Economics, 66, 161–176.
  20. Nielsen ,M.R., Pouliot,M., & Bakkegaard,R.K.(2012). Combining income and assets measures to include the transitory nature of poverty in assessments of forest dependence: Evidence from the Democratic Republic of Congo. Ecological Economics, 78, 37–46.
  21. Ravallion, M. (1998). “Poverty Lines in Theory and Practice” Paper No.133 LSMS, Working, World Bank.
  22. Rayamajhi,S., Smith-Hall,C., & Helles,F.(2012). Empirical evidence of the economic importance of Central Himalayan forests to rural households. Forest Policy and Economics 20, 25–35.
  23. Reddy, S.R.C., & Chakravarty, S.P.(1999).Forest dependency and income distribution in a subsistence economy: evidence from India. World Development, 27, 1141-1149.
  24. Sen, A.(1976). "Poverty: An Ordinal Approach to Measurment" Econometrica,vol. 44, 219- 231.
  25. Shackleton, C.M., Shackleton, S.E., Buiten, E., & Bird, N.(2007). The importance of dry woodlands and forests in rural livelihoods and poverty alleviation in South Africa. Forest Policy and Economics, 9 (5), 558–577.
  26. Soltani, A., Shamekhi, T., Noori Naieni, M. S., Arabmazar,A.(2010). Effects of forest resources on income distribution and poverty(Case study: watershed of Tang Tamoradi). Journal of jungle and  wood productions, 63(4), 369-385. (In farsi)
  27. Sunderlin, W., angelsen, A., & Wonder, S. (2003). Forests and poverty alleviation, in the State of the World's Forests, Rome: FAO.
  28. Vedeld, P., Angelsen, A., Sjaastad, E., & Berg, G.K.(2004). Counting on the environment: forest incomes and the rural poor. Environ. Econ. Ser. Paper, vol. 98. World Bank Environmental Department.
  29. Vedeld, p., Jumane, A., Wapalila, G., & Songorwa, A.(2012). Protected areas, poverty and conflicts A livelihood case study of Mikumi National Park, Tanzania. Forest Policy and Economics 21, 20–31.
  30. World Bank.(2002). A revised Forest Strategy for the World Bank Group. Washington D.C.:The World Bank.
  31. World Bank.(2004). Sustaining Forests: A Development Strategy. World Bank, Washington D.C, pp 81.
  32. World Bank.(2005). Introduction to poverty Analysis, STATA Manual, J H Revision, World Bank Institute.
  33. World Commission on Environment and Development(WCED). (1987). Our common future, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  34. Yakhkeshi,A.(2006). Integrated management in the North Caspian forests with community participation. Tehran, Mir-moon publishing, Vol 1,PP 18-20. (In farsi)
  35. Yemiru, T., Roos, A., Campbell, B.M., & Bohlin, F.(2010). Forest incomes and poverty alleviation under participatory forestmanagement in the Bale Highlands, Southern Ethiopia. International Forestry Review, 12 (1),66–77.

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار