Ecosystem services from forest and farmland: Present and past access separates beneficiaries in rural Ethiopia

Publikation: Beiträge in ZeitschriftenZeitschriftenaufsätzeForschungbegutachtet

Standard

Ecosystem services from forest and farmland : Present and past access separates beneficiaries in rural Ethiopia. / Schultner, Jannik; Dorresteijn, Ine; Manlosa, Aisa O.; von Wehrden, Henrik; Hylander, Kristoffer; Senbeta, Feyera; Fischer, Joern.

in: Ecosystem Services, Jahrgang 48, 101263, 01.04.2021.

Publikation: Beiträge in ZeitschriftenZeitschriftenaufsätzeForschungbegutachtet

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Bibtex

@article{aede2d29f88941c78af7841b7ae3133d,
title = "Ecosystem services from forest and farmland: Present and past access separates beneficiaries in rural Ethiopia",
abstract = "Ecosystem services are essential to human well-being. Different mechanisms modify people's access to the benefits from ecosystem services, but who benefits from which services, and the underlying factors that shape such variability, often remain unclear. To address this, we surveyed current and past ecosystem service flows from forest and farmland into rural Ethiopian households. After disaggregating beneficiary groups, we explored current and past mechanisms that impeded or facilitated their access. We found five groups of current ecosystem service beneficiaries that received varying degrees of service flows from forest and farmland. Important access barriers were economic problems and shortage of land, particularly for worse-off households, and wildlife damage and labour shortage. Over time, flows from forest and those directly benefiting human well-being (e.g. food, energy) were perceived to have declined, especially for worse-off groups. In contrast, access to emerging market-oriented services with indirect benefits (such as cash crops) increased, but especially so for better-off groups who capitalised on market opportunities and agricultural intensification. Forest cover loss and protection caused decreased access across groups. Identifying group-specific access problems and trajectories, removing economic, land- and labour-related barriers, and addressing environmental challenges, are important to facilitate equitable sharing of the benefits of rural ecosystems.",
keywords = "Agricultural landscape mosaic, Beneficiary disaggregation, Ecosystem service flows, Equity, Historical access, Land use, Ecosystems Research, Environmental planning",
author = "Jannik Schultner and Ine Dorresteijn and Manlosa, {Aisa O.} and {von Wehrden}, Henrik and Kristoffer Hylander and Feyera Senbeta and Joern Fischer",
year = "2021",
month = apr,
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.ecoser.2021.101263",
language = "English",
volume = "48",
journal = "Ecosystem Services",
issn = "2212-0416",
publisher = "Elsevier B.V.",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Ecosystem services from forest and farmland

T2 - Present and past access separates beneficiaries in rural Ethiopia

AU - Schultner, Jannik

AU - Dorresteijn, Ine

AU - Manlosa, Aisa O.

AU - von Wehrden, Henrik

AU - Hylander, Kristoffer

AU - Senbeta, Feyera

AU - Fischer, Joern

PY - 2021/4/1

Y1 - 2021/4/1

N2 - Ecosystem services are essential to human well-being. Different mechanisms modify people's access to the benefits from ecosystem services, but who benefits from which services, and the underlying factors that shape such variability, often remain unclear. To address this, we surveyed current and past ecosystem service flows from forest and farmland into rural Ethiopian households. After disaggregating beneficiary groups, we explored current and past mechanisms that impeded or facilitated their access. We found five groups of current ecosystem service beneficiaries that received varying degrees of service flows from forest and farmland. Important access barriers were economic problems and shortage of land, particularly for worse-off households, and wildlife damage and labour shortage. Over time, flows from forest and those directly benefiting human well-being (e.g. food, energy) were perceived to have declined, especially for worse-off groups. In contrast, access to emerging market-oriented services with indirect benefits (such as cash crops) increased, but especially so for better-off groups who capitalised on market opportunities and agricultural intensification. Forest cover loss and protection caused decreased access across groups. Identifying group-specific access problems and trajectories, removing economic, land- and labour-related barriers, and addressing environmental challenges, are important to facilitate equitable sharing of the benefits of rural ecosystems.

AB - Ecosystem services are essential to human well-being. Different mechanisms modify people's access to the benefits from ecosystem services, but who benefits from which services, and the underlying factors that shape such variability, often remain unclear. To address this, we surveyed current and past ecosystem service flows from forest and farmland into rural Ethiopian households. After disaggregating beneficiary groups, we explored current and past mechanisms that impeded or facilitated their access. We found five groups of current ecosystem service beneficiaries that received varying degrees of service flows from forest and farmland. Important access barriers were economic problems and shortage of land, particularly for worse-off households, and wildlife damage and labour shortage. Over time, flows from forest and those directly benefiting human well-being (e.g. food, energy) were perceived to have declined, especially for worse-off groups. In contrast, access to emerging market-oriented services with indirect benefits (such as cash crops) increased, but especially so for better-off groups who capitalised on market opportunities and agricultural intensification. Forest cover loss and protection caused decreased access across groups. Identifying group-specific access problems and trajectories, removing economic, land- and labour-related barriers, and addressing environmental challenges, are important to facilitate equitable sharing of the benefits of rural ecosystems.

KW - Agricultural landscape mosaic

KW - Beneficiary disaggregation

KW - Ecosystem service flows

KW - Equity

KW - Historical access

KW - Land use

KW - Ecosystems Research

KW - Environmental planning

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85101624790&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.ecoser.2021.101263

DO - 10.1016/j.ecoser.2021.101263

M3 - Journal articles

AN - SCOPUS:85101624790

VL - 48

JO - Ecosystem Services

JF - Ecosystem Services

SN - 2212-0416

M1 - 101263

ER -

DOI