What Is the Evidence Base Linking Gender with Access to Forests and Use of Forest Resources for Food Security in Low- and Middle-Income Countries? A Systematic Evidence Map
Abstract
:1. Background
1.1. Objective of the Map
1.2. Stakeholder Workshop
1.3. Research Questions
- i.
- What is the evidence that women’s access to forest resources (or assets) improves household food security compared to that of men?
- ii.
- What does the evidence show as gender disparities in access to and use of forests?
1.4. Elements of the Review Question
2. Methods
2.1. Search Strategy
- AGRIS; (1974–current) (www.agris.fao.org)
- CAB Abstracts (1910–current, accessed through Web of Science)
- Google (www.google.com)
- Google Scholar (scholar.google.com)
- JSTOR (www.jstor.org)
- ProQuest Dissertations & Theses (1995–current) (www.proquest.com)
- MEDLINE Opens (1950–current, accessed through Web of Science)
- Scopus (http://www.scopus.com) (1823–current)
- Web of Science Core Collection (1945–current)(www.wokinfo.com)
- Zoological Record (1990–current, accessed through Web of Science)
2.2. Search Terms and Languages
2.3. Article Screening and Study Inclusion Criteria
2.4. Study Inclusion Criteria
2.5. Study Quality Assessment
2.6. Data Extraction and Coding
3. Results
3.1. Search Results
3.2. Year of Publication
3.3. Location of First Author’s Institution
3.4. Location of Studies
- (a)
- Country where data were collected is shown in Figure 3.
- (b)
- Whether study site was coastal or not (coastal = up to 10 km from coast or large lake) is shown in Figure 4.
- (c)
- Elevation of study sites
- (d)
- Rainfall at study sites
- (e)
- Urban/rural study sites
- (f)
- Details of forests and access to forest
- (g)
- Market access
3.5. Governance of the Forest
3.6. Study Design
- (a)
- Number of study sites in the analysis
- (b)
- Sample unit and size
- (c)
- Duration of data collection
3.7. Forest Resources and Food Security, Nutrition Security, and Income
3.8. Research Design
3.9. Impact of Gender
3.10. Quality of the Evidence Base
4. Key Findings
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- World Bank. Sustaining Forests: A Development Strategy; World Bank Group: Washington DC, USA, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Aguilar, L.; Shaw, D.M.; Quesada-Aguilar, A.E. Forests and Gender; IUCN/WEDO: Gland, Switzerland, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Arnold, M.; Powell, B.; Shanley, P.; Sunderland, T.C.H. Forests, biodiversity and food security. Int. For. Rev. 2011, 13, 259–264. [Google Scholar]
- Binnqüist, C.L.; Shanley, P.; Fantini, A.C. (Eds.) Riches of the Forest: Fruits, Remedies and Handicrafts in Latin America; CIFOR: Bogor, Indonesia, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Shyamsundar, P.; Ghate, R. Responsibilities and Resources: Examining Community Forestry in South Asia; Working Paper; South Asian Network for Development and Environmental Economics (SANDEE): Kathmandu, Nepal, 2011; p. 16. [Google Scholar]
- Agarwal, B. Gender and command over property: A critical gap in economic analysis and policy in South Asia. World Dev. 1994, 22, 1455–1478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- FAO. Global Forest Resources Assessment—Main Report; Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations: Rome, Italy, 2010; p. 340. [Google Scholar]
- Ribot, J.C.; Peluso, N.L. A Theory of Access. Rural Sociol. 2003, 68, 153–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- World Bank. Gender in Agriculture Source Book; World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Bose, P. Forest Rights: The Micro-Politics of Decentralisation and Forest Tenure Reform in Tribal India. Ph.D. Thesis, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Coulibaly-Lingani, P.; Tigabu, M.; Savadogo, P.; Oden, P.C.; Ouadba, J.M. Determinants of access to forest products in southern Burkina Faso. For. Policy Econ. 2009, 11, 516–524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schlager, E.; Ostrom, E. Property-rights regimes and natural resources: A conceptual analysis. Land Econ. 1992, 68, 249–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Baland, J.M.; Bardhan, P.; Das, S.; Mookherjee, D.; Sarkar, R. The environmental impact of poverty: Evidence from firewood collection in rural Nepal. Econ. Dev. Cult. Chang. 2010, 59, 23–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Banana, A.Y.; Bukenya, M.; Arinaitwe, E.; Birabwa, B.; Ssekindi, S. Gender, Tenure and Community Forests in Uganda; CIFOR Working Paper; CIFOR: Bogor, Indonesia, 2012; p. 36. [Google Scholar]
- Mairena, E.; Lorio, G.; Hernández, X.; Wilson, C.; Müller, P.; Larson, A.M. Gender and Forests in Nicaragua’s Autonomous Regions. Legal Architecture; CIFOR: Bogor, Indonesia, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Shackleton, S.; Paumgarten, F.; Kassa, H.; Husselman, M.; Zida, M. Opportunities for enhancing poor women’s socioeconomic empowerment in the value chains of three African non-timber forest products (NTFPs). Int. For. Rev. 2011, 13, 136–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ogle, B. People’s dependency on forests for food security: Some lessons learnt from a programme of case studies. In Current Issues in Non-Timber Forest Products Research; Perez, M.R., Arnold, J.E.M., Eds.; CIFOR: Bogor, Indonesia, 1996; ISBN 979-8764-06-4. [Google Scholar]
- World Food Summit. Rome Declaration on World Food Security and World Food Summit Plan of Action. Rome, Italy. Available online: http://www.fao.org/3/w3613e/w3613e00.htm (accessed on 12 July 2020).
- Hasalkar, S.; Jadhav, V. Role of Women in the use of Non-Timber Forest produce: A Review. J. Soc. Sci. 2004, 8, 203–206. [Google Scholar]
- Ogle, B.M.; Xuan Dung, N.N.; Thanh Do, T.; Hambraeus, L. The contribution of wild vegetables to micronutrient intakes among women: An example from the Mekong Delta, Vietnam. Ecol. Food Nutr. 2001, 40, 159–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Collaboration for Environmental Evidence. Guidelines and Standards for Evidence Synthesis in Environmental Management. Version 5.0. Pullin, A.S., Frampton, G.K., Livoreil, B., Petrokofsky, G., Eds.; Available online: www.environmentalevidence.org/information-for-authors (accessed on 12 July 2020).
- Chiwona-Karltun, L.; Kimanzu, N.; Clendenning, J.; Bergman Lodin, J.; Ellingson, C.; Lidestav, G.; Mkwambisi, D.; Mwangi, E.; Nhantumbo, I.; Ochieng, C.; et al. What is the evidence that gender affects access to and use of forest assets for food security? A systematic map protocol. Environ. Evid. 2017, 6, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bilotta, G.S.; Milner, A.M.; Boyd, I.L. Quality assessment tools for evidence from environmental science. Environ. Evid. 2014, 3, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Wells, K.; Littell, J.H. Study quality assessment in systematic reviews of research on intervention effects. Res. Soc. Work Pract. 2009, 19, 52–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Farrington, D.P.; Gottfredson, D.C.; Sherman, L.W.; Welsh, B.C. The Maryland Scientific Methods Scale. In Evidence-Based Crime Prevention; Sherman, L., Ed.; Routledge: London, UK, 2002; pp. 13–21. [Google Scholar]
- Haddaway, N.R.; Macura, B.; Whaley, P.; Pullin, A.S. ROSES RepOrting standards for Systematic Evidence Syntheses: Pro forma, flow-diagram and descriptive summary of the plan and conduct of environmental systematic reviews and systematic maps. Environ. Evid. 2018, 7, 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Angelsen, A.; Jagger, P.; Babigumira, R.; Belcher, B.; Hogarth, N.J.; Bauch, S.; Börner, J.; Smith-Hall, C.; Wunder, S. Environmental Income and Rural Livelihoods: A Global-Comparative Analysis. World Dev. 2014, 64, S12–S28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Babulo, B.; Muys, B.; Nega, F.; Tollens, E.; Nyssen, J.; Deckers, J.; Mathijs, E. Household Livelihood Strategies and Forest Dependence in the Highlands of Tigray, Northern Ethiopia. Agric. Syst. 2008, 98, 147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Das, N. Can gender-sensitive forestry programmes increase women’s income? Lessons from a forest fringe community in an Indian province. Rural Soc. 2011, 20, 160–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Heubach, K.; Wittig, R.; Nuppenau, E.A.; Hahn, K. The economic importance of non-timber forest products (NTFPs) for livelihood maintenance of rural west African communities: A case study from northern Benin. Ecol. Econ. 2011, 70, 1991–2001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lybbert, T.J.; Magnan, N.; Aboudrare, A. Household and local forest impacts of Morocco’s argan oil bonanza. Environ. Dev. Econ. 2010, 15, 439–464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mbuvi, D.; Boon, E. The livelihood potential of non-wood forest products: The case of Mbooni Division in Makueni District, Kenya. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2009, 11, 989–1004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Misra, M.K.; Dash, S.S. Biomass and energetics of non-timber forest resources in a cluster of tribal villages on the Eastern Ghats of Orissa, India. Biomass Bioenergy 2000, 18, 229–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Narayanan, M.K.R.; Kumar, N.A. Gendered knowledge and changing trends in utilization of wild edible greens in Western Ghats, India. Indian J. Tradit. Knowl. 2007, 6, 204–216. [Google Scholar]
- Noss, A.J.; Hewlett, B.S. The contexts of female hunting in central Africa. Am. Anthropol. 2001, 103, 1024–1040. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Odebode, S.O. Contributions of selected non-timber forest products to household food security in Nigeria. J. Food Agric. Environ. 2005, 3, 138–141. [Google Scholar]
- Ogle, B.M.; Tuyet, H.T.; Duyet, H.N.; Dung, N.N.X. Food, Feed or Medicine: The Multiple Functions of Edible Wild Plants in Vietnam. Econ. Botany 2003, 57, 103–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Padmanabhan, M. Institutions of Agrobiodiversity Management in Kerala-Gendered Collective Action. Soc. Nat. Resour. 2011, 24, 174–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pouliot, M. Contribution of Women’s Gold to West African Livelihoods: The Case of Shea (Vitellaria paradoxa) in Burkina Faso. Econ. Botany 2012, 66, 237–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shackleton, S.E.; Campbell, B.M. The traditional broom trade in Bushbuckridge, South Africa: Helping poor women cope with adversity. Econ. Botany 2007, 61, 256–268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shumsky, S.A.; Hickey, G.M.; Pelletier, B.; Johns, T. Understanding the contribution of wild edible plants to rural social-ecological resilience in semi-arid Kenya. Ecol. Soc. 2014, 19, 34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Sinclair, J.; Ham, L. Household adaptive strategies: Shaping livelihood security in the Western Himalaya. Rev. Can. D Etudes Dev. Can. J. Dev. Stud. 2000, 21, 89–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Singh, R.K.; Srivastava, R.C.; Pandey, C.B.; Singh, A. Tribal institutions and conservation of the bioculturally valuable ’tasat’ (Arenga obtusifolia) tree in the eastern Himalaya. J. Environ. Plan. Manag. 2015, 58, 69–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Uzokwe, U.N. Forest dependent survival strategies of rural women in Aniocha South local government area of delta state, Nigeria. Middle East J. Sci. Res. 2014, 20, 14–19. [Google Scholar]
- Van Dijk, H.; Onguene, N.A.; Kuyper, T.W. Knowledge and utilization of edible mushrooms by local populations of the rain forest of south Cameroon. AMBIO 2003, 32, 19–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vazquez-Garcia, V. Gender, Ethnicity, and Economic Status in Plant Management: Uncultivated Edible Plants among the Nahuas and Popolucas of Veracruz, Mexico. Agric. Hum. Values 2008, 25, 65–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Worku, A.; Lemenih, M.; Fetene, M.; Teketay, D. Socio-Economic Importance of Gum and Resin Resources in the Dry Woodlands of borana, Southern ethiopia. For. Trees Livelihoods 2011, 20, 137–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yusuf, M.; Teklehaimanot, Z.; Rayment, M. Traditional knowledge and practices on utilisation and marketing of Yeheb (Cordeauxia edulis) in Ethiopia. Agrofor. Syst. 2013, 87, 599–609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Asfaw, A.; Lemenih, M.; Kassa, H.; Ewnetu, Z. Importance, determinants and gender dimensions of forest income in eastern highlands of Ethiopia: The case of communities around Jelo Afromontane forest. For. Policy Econ. 2013, 28, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chukwuone, N.A.; Okeke, C.A. Can non-wood forest products be used in promoting household food security? Evidence from savannah and rain forest regions of Southern Nigeria. For. Policy Econ. 2012, 25, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gatiso, T.T.; Wossen, T. Forest dependence and income inequality in rural Ethiopia: Evidence from Chilimo-Gaji community forest users. Int. J. Sustain. Dev. World Ecol. 2015, 22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hegde, R.; Enters, T. Forest products and household economy: A case study from Mudumalai Wildlife Sanctuary, Southern India. Environ. Conserv. 2000, 27, 250–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jones, J.G.; Andriahajaina, F.B.; Ranambinintsoa, E.H.; Hockley, N.J.; Ravoahangimalala, O. The economic importance of freshwater crayfish harvesting in Madagascar and the potential of community-based conservation to improve management. Oryx 2006, 40, 168–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kabubo-Mariara, J. Forest-poverty nexus: Exploring the contribution of forests to rural livelihoods in Kenya. Nat. Resour. Forum 2013, 37, 177–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kamanga, P.; Vedeld, P.; Sjaastad, E. Forest Incomes and Rural Livelihoods in Chiradzulu District, Malawi. Ecol. Econ. 2009, 68, 613–624. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Madge, C. Ethnography and agroforestry research: A case study from the Gambia. Agrofor. Syst. 1995, 32, 127–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marshall, E.; Newton, A.C. Non-timber forest products in the community of El Terrero, Sierra de Manantlán Biosphere Reserve, Mexico: Is their use sustainable? Econ. Botany 2003, 57, 262–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martin del Campo-Hermosillo, L.E. Genderscape: The Ecology of a Gendering Landscape. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Mishra, S.; Chaudhury, S.S. Ethnobotanical flora used by four major tribes of Koraput, Odisha, India. Genet. Resour. Crop Evol. 2012, 59, 793–804. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Morsello, C.; Ruiz-Mallen, I.; Diaz, M.D.M.; Reyes-Garcia, V. The Effects of Processing Non-Timber Forest Products and Trade Partnerships on People’s Well-Being and Forest Conservation in Amazonian Societies. PLoS ONE 2012, 7, e43055. [Google Scholar]
- Mujawamariya, G.; Karimov, A.A. Importance of socio-economic factors in the collection of NTFPs: The case of gum arabic in Kenya. For. Policy Econ. 2014, 42, 24–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nesheim, I.; Stoelen, K.A. The Socio-Economic Role of Xate: A Case Study from a Returnee Community in the Maya Biosphere Reserve in Guatemala. J. Sustain. Dev. 2012, 5, 46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ojo, C.O.; Nuhu, H.S.; Igbankwe, T.A. Gender Analysis of Rural Dwellers Accessibility to Free Natural Resources in Ussa Local Government Area of Taraba State, Nigeria. Asian J. Agric. Rural Dev. 2013, 3, 609–614. [Google Scholar]
- Ostwald, M.; Baral, R. Local Forest Protection, Gender and Caste: Dhani Hill, Orissa, India. Geografiska Annaler. Ser. B Hum. Geogr. 2000, 82, 115–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pouliot, M.; Treue, T. Rural People’s Reliance on Forests and the Non-Forest Environment in West Africa: Evidence from Ghana and Burkina Faso. World Dev. 2013, 43, 180–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Powell, B.; Hall, J.; Johns, T. Forest cover, use and dietary intake in the east usambara mountains, Tanzania. Int. For. Rev. 2011, 13, 305–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Quinonez-Martinez, M.; Ruan-Soto, F.; Aguilar-Moreno, I.E.; Garza-Ocanas, F.; Lebgue-Keleng, T.; Lavin-Murcio, A.; Enriquez-Anchondo, I.D. Knowledge and use of edible mushrooms in two municipalities of the Sierra Tarahumara, Chihuahua, Mexico. J. Ethnobiol. Ethnomed. 2014, 10, 67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Remis, M.J.; Robinson, C.A.J. Examining short-term nutritional status among BaAka foragers in transitional economies. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 2014, 154, 365–375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shackleton, S. Livelihood benefits from the local level commercialization of savanna resources: A case study of the new and expanding trade in marula (Sclerocarya birrea) beer in Bushbuckridge, South Africa. S. Afr. J. Sci. 2004, 100, 651–657. [Google Scholar]
- Shackleton, S.E.; Shackleton, C.M.; Netshiluvhi, T.R.; Geach, B.S.; Ballance, A.; Fairbanks, D.H.K. Use Patterns and Value of Savanna Resources in Three Rural Villages in South Africa. Econ. Botany 2002, 56, 130–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shams, N.; Ahmed, M. Common and Private Property Linkages in the Low-Land Forest-Fishery-Farming Systems of Cambodia. J. Sustain. Agric. 2000, 15, 59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sharaunga, S.; Mudhara, M.; Wale, E. Values rural households in KwaZulu-Natal hold towards forests and their participation in community-based forest management. Agrekon 2013, 52, 113–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shrestha, M.; Dhillion, S.S. Diversity and Traditional Knowledge Concerning Wild Food Species in a Locally Managed Forest in Nepal. Agrofor. Syst. 2006, 66, 55–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Singh, A.K.; Singh, M.K.; Mascarenhas, O.A.J. Community forestry for revitalising rural ecosystems: A case study. For. Ecol. Manag. 1985, 10, 209–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Siren, A.; Machoa, J. Fish, wildlife, and human nutrition in tropical forests: A fat gap? Interciencia 2008, 33, 186–193. [Google Scholar]
- Sunderland, T.; Achdiawan, R.; Angelsen, A.; Babigumira, R.; Ickowitz, A.; Paumgarten, F.; Reyes-Garcia, V.; Shively, G. Challenging Perceptions about Men, Women, and Forest Product Use: A Global Comparative Study. World Dev. 2014, 64, S56–S66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Tadesse, G.; Zavaleta, E.; Shennan, C.; FitzSimmons, M. Local Ecosystem Service Use and Assessment Vary with Socio-ecological Conditions: A Case of Native Coffee-Forests in Southwestern Ethiopia. Hum. Ecol. 2014, 42, 873–883. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Toksoy, D.; Alkan, S. Labor force participation of women in forest villages and their income status: A case study of Trabzon. Afr. J. Agric. Res. 2010, 5, 910–915. [Google Scholar]
- Uberhuaga, P.; Smith-Hall, C.; Helles, F. Forest income and dependency in lowland Bolivia. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2012, 14, 3–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Van Hoang, S.; Baas, S.; Keßler, J.A. Uses and conservation of plant species in a national park—A case study of Ben En, Vietnam. Econ. Botany 2008, 62, 574–593. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Velasquez Runk, J.; Negria, G.O.; Garcia, W.Q.; Ismare, C.Q. Political Economic History, Culture, and Wounaan Livelihood Diversity in Eastern Panama. Agric. Hum. Values 2007, 24, 93–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wickramasinghe, A. Anthropogenic factors and forest management in Sri Lanka. Appl. Geogr. 1997, 17, 87–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wickramasinghe, A.; Pérez, M.R.; Blockhus, J.M. Nontimber forest product gathering in ritigala forest (Sri Lanka): Household strategies and community differentiation. Hum. Ecol. 1996, 24, 493–519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Viet Quang, D.; Anh, T.N. Commercial collection of NTFPs and households living in or near the forests. Case study in Que, Con Cuong and Ma, Tuong Duong, Nghe An, Vietnam. Ecol. Econ. 2006, 60, 65–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vodouhe, F.G.; Adegbidi, A.; Coulibaly, O.; Sinsin, B. Parkia biglobosa (Jacq.) R. Br. ex Benth. harvesting as a tool for conservation and source of income for local people in Pendjari Biosphere Reserve. Acta Bot. Gall. 2011, 158, 595–608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vodouhe, F.G.; Coulibaly, O.; Greene, C.; Sinsin, B. Estimating the Local Value of Non-Timber Forest Products to Pendjari Biosphere Reserve Dwellers in Benin. Econ. Botany 2009, 63, 397–412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wong, G.Y.; Godoy, R. Consumption and vulnerability among foragers and horticulturalists in the rainforest of Honduras. World Dev. 2003, 31, 1405–1419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Worku, A.; Pretzsch, J.; Kassa, H.; Auch, E. The significance of dry forest income for livelihood resilience: The case of the pastoralists and agro-pastoralists in the drylands of southeastern Ethiopia. For. Policy Econ. 2014, 41, 51–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yasuoka, H. Long-term foraging expeditions (Molongo) among the baka hunter-gatherers in the northwestern Congo Basin, with special reference to the wild yam question. Hum. Ecol. 2006, 34, 275–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Becker, L.C. Garden Money Buys Grain: Food Procurement Patterns in a Malian Village. Hum. Ecol. 2000, 28, 219–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cavendish, W. Empirical regularities in the poverty-environment relationship of rural households: Evidence from Zimbabwe. World Dev. 2000, 28, 1979–2003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hue, L.T.V. Gender, Doi Moi and Mangrove Management in Northern Vietnam. Gend. Technol. Dev. 2006, 10, 37–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Illukpitiya, P.; Yanagida, J.F. Farming vs forests: Trade-off between agriculture and the extraction of non-timber forest products. Ecol. Econ. 2010, 69, 1952–1963. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jumbe, C.B.L.; Angelsen, A. Do the Poor Benefit from Devolution Policies? Evidence from Malawi’s Forest Co-Management Program. Land Econ. 2006, 82, 562–581. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Koizumi, M.; Mamung, D. Levang Hunter-gatherers’ culture, a major hindrance to a settled agricultural life: The case of the Penan Benalui of East Kalimantan. For. Trees Livelihoods 2012, 21, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Meaza, H.; Demssie, B. Managing fragile homestead trees to improve livelihoods of land-poor farmers in the Northern Highlands of Ethiopia. Singap. J. Trop. Geogr. 2015, 36, 57–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moktan, M.R.; Norbu, L.; Dukpa, K.; Rai, T.B.; Dorji, R.; Dhendup, K.; Gyaltshen, N. Bamboo and Cane Vulnerability and Income Generation in the Rural Household Subsistence Economy of Bjoka, Zhemgang, Bhutan. Mt. Res. Dev. 2009, 29, 230–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mulenga, B.P.; Richardson, R.B.; Tembo, G.; Mapemba, L. Rural Household Participation in Markets for Non-timber Forest Products in Zambia. Environ. Dev. Econ. 2014, 19, 487–504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mutenje, M.J.; Ortmann, G.F.; Ferrer, S.R.D.; Darroch, M.A.G. Rural Livelihood Diversity to Manage Economic Shocks: Evidence from South-East Zimbabwe. Agrekon 2010, 49, 338–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nielsen, M.R.; Pouliot, M.; Bakkegaard, R.K. Combining income and assets measures to include the transitory nature of poverty in assessments of forest dependence: Evidence from the Democratic Republic of Congo. Ecol. Econ. 2012, 78, 37–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Obua, J.; Banana, A.Y.; Turyahabwe, N. Attitudes of local communities towards forest management practices in Uganda: The case of Budongo forest reserve. Commonw. For. Rev. 1998, 77, 113–118. [Google Scholar]
- Thomaso, O. Mangroves, people and cockles: Impacts of the shrimp-farming industry on mangrove communities in Esmeraldas Province, Ecuador. In Environment and Livelihoods in Tropical Coastal Zones: Managing Agriculture—Fishery—Aquaculture Conflicts; Hoanh, C.T., Tuong, T., Gowing, J.W., Hardy, B., Eds.; CABI Publishing: Wallingford, UK, 2006; Chapter 11. [Google Scholar]
- Paniagua-Zambrana, N.Y.; Camara-Leret, R.; Bussmann, R.W.; Macia, M.J. The influence of socioeconomic factors on traditional knowledge: A cross scale comparison of palm use in northwestern South America. Ecol. Soc. 2014, 19, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Subject | Forest resources and assets in low- and middle-income countries (as defined by the World Bank, 2014) |
Exposure | Women- or female-headed households that access and use forest resources and assets |
Outcomes | Changes in food security, defined by a range of indicators |
Subject | Exposure | Outcomes |
---|---|---|
(forest *; tree *; agroforest *; woodland; mangrove; savanna *; shrub; wood; bush; “rights to land”; biodiversity) | (Gender; “female headed”; “male headed”; “sexual roles”; “role conflicts”; “woman’s status”; “women’s rights”; “man’s status”; “men’s rights”; “sexual discrimination”; household *; widow) | (“food security”; income; cash; wealth; poverty; hunger; nutrition *; malnutrition; vitamin *; diet; livelihood *; rights; diversity; consumption; equity) |
AND | AND | |
[List of 150 low- and middle-income countries—see Supplementary Materials—Table S3 for details] | (Labour *; “cash crop”; tenure; “tenure system *”; “land tenure”; “agricultural tenure”; “agricultural households”; nonfarm; property; forage *; “staple food”; “land rights”; asset *; resource *; bushmeat; fuelwood; firewood; charcoal; vegetable; plant; fruit; mushroom; timber; honey; access; “forest product”; NTFP; participatory; education) |
Article Details (Nature of Evidence) | ID |
---|---|
Citation | |
Publication type | |
Source type | |
Year of publication | |
Location of primary author (country) | |
Coverage of evidence | Location of data collection (country) |
Coastal (coastal = up to 10 km from coast or large lake)/not coastal | |
Elevation | |
Rainfall (annual, mm) | |
Rural/urban | |
Forest type accessed | |
Study design | Qualitative or quantitative |
Method | |
Scale of study (local, regional or national, international) | |
Number of study sites in analysis | |
Sample size at each study site (e.g., number of interviews or focus groups) | |
Sample unit (person, household, focus group) | |
Duration of data collection | |
Access to forest and markets | Distance to forest |
Market access | |
Main NTFP accessed | |
Forest tenure | |
Study details (food security outcomes) | Is food security assessed? |
Is nutrition security assessed? | |
Is income assessed? | |
Food security outcome through specific engagement | |
Gender effects | Positive, neutral, negative effects |
Notes | Details of gender effects (extracts from primary studies) |
Critical appraisal | QUALITATIVE studies rating |
QUANTITATIVE studies rating | |
Bilotta’s risk of bias (for all studies) |
Ethiopia | 7 | Netherlands | 2 |
India | 6 | Sri Lanka | 2 |
USA | 7 | Bhutan | 1 |
South Africa | 5 | Brazil | 1 |
Nigeria | 4 | Burkina Faso * | 1 |
UK | 5 | Cambodia | 1 |
Canada | 3 | Ghana * | 1 |
Denmark | 3 | Japan | 1 |
Germany | 3 | Kenya | 1 |
Norway | 3 | Malawi | 1 |
Sweden | 3 | Malaysia | 1 |
Vietnam | 3 | Tanzania | 1 |
Benin | 2 | Turkey | 1 |
Bolivia | 2 | Uganda | 1 |
Indonesia | 2 | Zambia | 1 |
Mexico | 2 | NA | 1 |
Sample Unit | Number of Studies |
---|---|
Households | 58 |
Individuals | 13 |
NR | 6 |
Focus group | 2 |
Study | Gender Effect | Country | Rural/Urban Setting | Market Access | Forest Tenure |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Angelsen et al. (2014) [27] | Positive | Global | Rural | NR | NR |
Babulo et al. (2008) [28] | Positive | Ethiopia | Rural | NR | NR |
Das (2011) [29] | Positive | India | Unknown | NR | NR |
Heubach et al. (2011) [30] | Positive | Benin | Rural | Low | Traditional Land tenure |
Lybbert et al. (2010) [31] | Positive | ||||
Mbuvi & Boon (2009 [32] | Positive | Kenya | Rural | Good | State |
Misra & Dash (2000) [33] | Positive | India | Rural | Good (road and market close) | |
Narayanan & Kumar (2007) [34] | Positive | India | Rural | NR | State |
Noss & Hewlett (2001) [35] | Positive | Central African Republic | Rural | Very low (no road and market far) | State |
Odebode (2005) [36] | Positive | Nigeria | Rural | Good (road and market close) | State |
Ogle et al. (2003) [37] | Positive | Vietnam | Rural | NR | State |
Padmanabhan (2011) [38] | Positive | India | Rural | NR | State |
Pouliot (2012) [39] | Positive | Burkina Faso | Rural | NR | State |
Shackleton & Campbell (2007) [40] | Positive | South Africa | Rural | Good (road and market close) | State |
Shumsky et al. (2014) [41] | Positive | Kenya | Rural | Good (road and market close) | State |
Sinclair & Ham (2000) [42] | Positive | India | Rural | Very low (no road and market far) | State |
Singh et al. (2015) [43] | Positive | India | Rural | NR | State |
Uzokwe (2014) [44] | Positive | Nigeria | Rural | Low (no road or market far) | |
van Dijk et al. (2003) [45] | Positive | Cameroon | Rural | Low (no road or market far) | |
Vazquez-Garcia (2008) [46] | Positive | Mexico | Rural | Low (no road or market far) | State |
Worku et al. (2011) [47] | Positive | Ethiopia | Rural | Low (no road or market far) | |
Yusuf et al. (2013) [48] | Positive | Ethiopia | Rural | Low (no road or market far) | |
Asfaw et al. (2013) [49] | Neutral/mixed | Ethiopia | Rural | Good | NR |
Chukwuone & Okeke (2012) [50] | Neutral/mixed | Nigeria | Rural | NR | NR |
Gatiso & Wossen (2015) [51] | Neutral/mixed | Ethiopia | Rural | Good | Commons |
Hegde & Enters (2000) [52] | Neutral/mixed | India | Rural | Good (road and market close) | NR |
Jones et al. (2006) [53] | Neutral/mixed | Madagascar | Rural | Mixed | NR |
Kabubo-Mariara (2013). [54] | Neutral/mixed | Kenya | Rural | NR | Mixed |
Kamanga et al. (2009). [55] | Neutral/mixed | Malawi | Rural | Mixed | NR |
Madge (1995). [56] | Neutral/mixed | Gambia | Rural | NR | Mixed |
Marshall & Newton (2003). [57] | Neutral/mixed | Mexico | Rural | Mixed | Mixed |
Martin del Campo-Hermosillo (2010). [58] | Neutral/mixed | Mexico | Urban-periurban | Good | Commons |
Mishra & Chaudhury (2012). [59] | Neutral/mixed | India | Rural | Good (road and market close) | Commons |
Morsello et al. (2012). [60] | Neutral/mixed | Brazil and Bolivia | Rural | State | |
Mujawamariya & Karimov (2014). [61] | Neutral/mixed | Kenya | Rural | NR | Commons |
Nesheim & Stoelen (2012). [62] | Neutral/mixed | Guatemala | Rural | Very low (no road and market far) | State |
Ojo et al. (2013). [63] | Neutral/mixed | Nigeria | Rural | NR | State |
Ostwald & Baral (2000). [64] | Neutral/mixed | India | Rural | NR | State |
Pouliot & Treue (2013). [65] | Neutral/mixed | Ghana and Burkina Faso | Rural | NR | State |
Powell & Johns (2011). [66] | Neutral/mixed | Tanzania | Rural | Low (no road or market far) | State |
Quinonez-Martinez et al. (2014). [67] | Neutral/mixed | Mexico | Urban | Good (road and market close) | State |
Remis & Jost Robinson (2014). [68] | Neutral/mixed | Central African Republic | Rural | Low (no road or market far) | State |
Shackleton (2004). [69] | Neutral/mixed | South Africa | Rural | Good (road and market close) | State |
Shackleton et al. (2002). [70] | Neutral/mixed | South Africa | Rural | Good (road and market close) | State |
Shams & Ahmed (2000). [71] | Neutral/mixed | Cambodia | Rural | Good (road and market close) | State |
Sharaunga et al. (2013). [72] | Neutral/mixed | South Africa | Rural | Good (road and market close) | State |
Shrestha & Dhillion (2006). [73] | Neutral/mixed | Nepal | Rural | NR | State |
Singh et al. (1985). [74] | Neutral/mixed | India | Rural | NR | State |
Siren & Machoa (2008). [75] | Neutral/mixed | Equador | Rural | Very low (no road and market far) | State |
Sunderland et al. (2014). [76] | Neutral/mixed | Global | Rural–urban | Good (road and market close) | Mixed |
Tadesse et al. (2014). [77] | Neutral/mixed | Ethiopia | Rural | Low (no road or market far) | State |
Toksoy & Alkan (2010). [78] | Neutral/mixed | Turkey | Rural | Very low (no road and market far) | State |
Uberhuaga et al. (2012). [79] | Neutral/mixed | Bolivia | Rural | Low (no road or market far) | State |
Van Hoang et al. (2008). [80] | Neutral/mixed | Vietnam | Rural | Low (no road or market far) | |
Velasquez Runk et al. (2007). [81] | Neutral/mixed | Panama | Rural | Low (no road or market far) | State |
Wickramasinghe (1997). [82] | Neutral/mixed | Sri Lanka | Rural | Low (no road or market far) | State |
Wickramasinghe et al. (1996). [83] | Neutral/mixed | Sri Lanka | Rural | Low (no road or market far) | |
Viet Quang & Nam Anh (2006). [84] | Neutral/mixed | Vietnam | Rural | Low (no road or market far) | |
Vodouhe et al. (2011). [85] | Neutral/mixed | Benin | Rural | Low (no road or market far) | State |
Vodouhe et al. (2009). [86] | Neutral/mixed | Benin | Rural | Low (no road or market far) | |
Wong & Godoy (2003). [87] | Neutral/mixed | Honduras | Rural | Low (no road or market far) | State |
Worku et al. (2014). [88] | Neutral/mixed | Ethiopia | Rural | Low (no road or market far) | |
Yasuoka (2006). [89] | Neutral/mixed | Cameroon | Rural | Low (no road or market far) | |
Becker (2000). [90] | Negative | Mali | Rural | Low | Mixed |
Cavendish (2000). [91] | Negative | Zimbabwe | Rural | NR | Commons |
Hue (2006). [92] | Negative | Vietnam | Rural | Good | Commons–private |
Illukpitiya & Yanagida (2010). [93] | Negative | Sri Lanka | Rural | NR | NR |
Jumbe & Angelsen (2006). [94] | Negative | Malawi | Rural | Mixed | NR |
Koizumi et al. (2012) [95] | Negative | Indonesia | Rural | Low (no road or market far) | NR |
Meaza & Demssie (2015) [96] | Negative | Ethiopia | Rural | Mixed | Mixed |
Moktan et al. (2009). [97] | Negative | Bhutan | Rural | NR | Commons |
Mulenga et al. (2014). [98] | Negative | Zambia | Rural | NR | Commons |
Mutenje et al. (2010). [99] | Negative | Zimbabwe | Rural | NR | Commons |
Nielsen & Bakkegaard (2012). [100] | Negative | DRC | Rural | Very low (no road and market far) | State |
Obua et al. (1998). [101] | Negative | Uganda | Rural | Good (road and market close) | State |
Ocampo-Thomason (2006). [102] | Negative | Ecuador | Rural | NR | State |
Paniagua-Zambrana et al. (2014). [103] | Negative | Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, and Bolivia | Rural | State |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Kimanzu, N.; Schulte-Herbrüggen, B.; Clendenning, J.; Chiwona-Karltun, L.; Krogseng, K.; Petrokofsky, G. What Is the Evidence Base Linking Gender with Access to Forests and Use of Forest Resources for Food Security in Low- and Middle-Income Countries? A Systematic Evidence Map. Forests 2021, 12, 1096. https://doi.org/10.3390/f12081096
Kimanzu N, Schulte-Herbrüggen B, Clendenning J, Chiwona-Karltun L, Krogseng K, Petrokofsky G. What Is the Evidence Base Linking Gender with Access to Forests and Use of Forest Resources for Food Security in Low- and Middle-Income Countries? A Systematic Evidence Map. Forests. 2021; 12(8):1096. https://doi.org/10.3390/f12081096
Chicago/Turabian StyleKimanzu, Ngolia, Björn Schulte-Herbrüggen, Jessica Clendenning, Linley Chiwona-Karltun, Kyla Krogseng, and Gillian Petrokofsky. 2021. "What Is the Evidence Base Linking Gender with Access to Forests and Use of Forest Resources for Food Security in Low- and Middle-Income Countries? A Systematic Evidence Map" Forests 12, no. 8: 1096. https://doi.org/10.3390/f12081096
APA StyleKimanzu, N., Schulte-Herbrüggen, B., Clendenning, J., Chiwona-Karltun, L., Krogseng, K., & Petrokofsky, G. (2021). What Is the Evidence Base Linking Gender with Access to Forests and Use of Forest Resources for Food Security in Low- and Middle-Income Countries? A Systematic Evidence Map. Forests, 12(8), 1096. https://doi.org/10.3390/f12081096