The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW article
Front. Environ. Econ.
Sec. Resource Economics
Volume 3 - 2024 |
doi: 10.3389/frevc.2024.1408794
What matters? A global meta-analysis of environmental income and reliance determinants
Provisionally accepted- 1 University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
- 2 International Centre for Evaluation and Development (ICED), Greater Accra, Ghana
- 3 School of Economics, College of Business and Economics, University of Gondar, Gondar, Amhara Region, Ethiopia
A recent body of literature has documented the importance of environmental income to rural households in the Global South. However, this literature has not been analyzed to establish which findings are robustwhat determines rural households' absolute and relative environmental income? We conducted a metaanalysis using published articles that measured environmental reliance from the Web of Science, Scopus, WorldCat.org, and MPDI databases. We examined the effect of socioeconomic, demographic, and resource site proximity variables on environmental income and reliance. We applied a meta-regression approach and included moderator variables such as sample size, survey frequency, and the types of journal to control for variations in effect estimates and assess risks of biases. We analyzed 112 studies published between 1996 and 2021 that together surveyed about 52,000 households in 35 countries. The findings confirmed that environmental income matters in total household income: environment, forest, and non-timber forest product reliance were, on average, 25±11%, 27±16%, and 27±16%. The level of reliance was moderated by region and the type of environmental products. On average, the proportions of significantly negative, positive, and statistically insignificant effect estimates were 25%, 18%, and 57%. All covariates, except distance to the resource sites, were weakly correlated with environmental income and reliance, indicating no globally robust covariates. Thus, policies and interventions should build on regional specificities.
Keywords: covariates, Effect estimates, forests, non-timber forest products, Global comparative, Household income surveys, Systematic review
Received: 28 Mar 2024; Accepted: 29 Oct 2024.
Copyright: © 2024 Siltanu, Smith-Hall and Walelign. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence:
Gebretsadik Teshager Siltanu, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.