Search Results (21)

The global mining sector plays a vital economic role but frequently results in the displacement of communities, generating profound environmental, social, and cultural consequences. In South Africa mining remains a key economic driver. The literature on the sustainable livelihood framework (SLF) attests to the impact of mining on communities and the industry’s influence on the five capitals, namely social, physical, natural, financial and human. However, research on SLF offers a limited assessment of the long-term effectiveness of livelihood restoration initiatives directed at communities resettled elsewhere because of mining. The research gap in this study can be explained as the sparseness of research in clarifying and amplifying the voices of mining-resettled communities. Research, besides being limited, has focused on the activities of mining companies and their supposed economic benefit. Adopting a qualitative approach within an interpretivist paradigm, data was collected through semi-structured interviews with seven community leaders and activists from Gauteng, Limpopo, and Mpumalanga. Contestations, inaccessibility and possibilities of victimisation by mining companies, and non-universality in interview sample numbers are some of the issues justifying those seven interviewees in this study. Additionally, the interviewees in this study are leaders, activists, and family and community members directly affected by mining resettlement. Based on the nature of the research inquiry, the number of interviewees is adequate and enabled the study to establish its findings as a multi-case study of the communities in the three provinces. Thematic analysis using ATLAS.ti revealed that resettlement significantly disrupted livelihoods through loss of productive land, diminished agricultural activities, and the erosion of social and cultural networks. Although mining companies provided compensation, housing, and skills training, these measures were largely fragmented, short-term, and insufficient to restore pre-displacement living standards. Weak governance and limited community participation further undermined outcomes. Although limited to seven participants doubling as activists, community leaders, and former farm owners, the study concludes that existing livelihood restoration efforts are largely unsustainable from the perspective of community leaders and activists based in three mining provinces of South Africa. The study proposes a sustainable livelihood framework that embraces justice and guarantees the socio-economic resilience of the resettled communities. Full article

The land transfer system is widely regarded as a key institutional arrangement for advancing agricultural modernization and rural transformation. Drawing on the Sustainable Livelihoods Framework (SLF) and from the perspective of farmer differentiation, this study investigates the effects of land transfer on rural household livelihood resilience using China Family Panel Studies (CFPS) data from 2012 to 2020. The results indicate the following: (1) Land transfer significantly improves rural household livelihood resilience overall, but this effect is mainly driven by land transfer-out. (2) Land transfer exhibits a clear threshold effect on livelihood resilience. Land transfer-out has a negative impact at low levels of off-farm employment but turns positive after the threshold is crossed, with increasing effects at higher levels of non-farm engagement. Land transfer-in has a significant positive effect on livelihood resilience only above a certain asset. (3) Farmer differentiation is a critical mechanism. Heterogeneity analysis reveals that differences in livelihood strategies and initial geographical conditions affect households’ reliance on land and agricultural productivity, thereby altering the impact of land transfer on livelihood resilience. These findings demonstrate that policies should adopt differentiated interventions rather than a one-size-fits-all approach in order to better align land transfer with the livelihood strategies of rural households. Full article

A symbiotic mechanism exists between household livelihood capital and land use transition (LUT). However, previous studies have seldom examined, from a macro perspective, the characteristics of household livelihood capital and its impact on LUT, lacking an in-depth analysis of the spatial spillover effects and regional heterogeneity. Household livelihood capital influences LUT by shaping livelihood strategies. This article incorporates psychological capital into the Sustainable Livelihood Framework (SLF) and utilizes data from the China Family Panel Studies (CFPS) database and land use data spanning 24 provincial-level administrative units in China from 2010 to 2022; this study employs the Spatial Durbin Model to empirically analyze the impact of household livelihood capital on LUT and its regional variability, along with the spatiotemporal evolution patterns of household livelihood capital and land use change. The results demonstrate the following: (1) From 2010 to 2022, household livelihood capital increased, with higher levels of psychological, natural, and human capital, while social, financial, and physical capital were lower. The eastern region exhibited higher livelihood capital levels than the central and western regions, but the gap narrowed annually. (2) Between 2010 and 2022, LUT primarily involved the transition of cropland to construction land, cropland to forest and grassland, and forest and grassland to cropland. The intensity of LUT increased over time and showed a spatial gradient from west to east. (3) LUT positively affected the LUT of adjacent provinces. Various forms of capital and livelihood strategies had different effects on LUT within a province and across neighboring provinces. (4) The heterogeneity analysis reveals that the eastern region is significantly affected by the competitive effect and the spillover effect from neighboring provinces, while the central and western regions are constrained by water resources and inhibited by pure agricultural farmers. The article reveals the mechanism through which household livelihood capital drives LUT and the spatial spillover patterns, providing scientific evidence for regionally differentiated land management and ecological compensation policies, which is of great importance for the sustainable use of regional land resources. Full article

The COVID-19 pandemic has underscored and intensified existing structural inequalities, particularly in urban centers of the Global South. This paper revisits the Sustainable Livelihoods Framework (SLF), originally designed for rural contexts, proposing its adaptation to centralize mobility as a critical analytical axis in urban contexts. Through an examination of São Paulo, Brazil, we explore how mobility restrictions, access to natural capital, and health outcomes intersected during the pandemic, disproportionately affecting vulnerable populations. To explore the application of the adapted framework, we analyze two contrasting neighborhoods in São Paulo, highlighting how different urban contexts mediate the impacts of systemic crises. By integrating mobility into the SLF, we aim to provide a more nuanced tool for analyzing and addressing urban vulnerabilities in times of systemic crises. Full article

Sandstone quarrying in Lekokoaneng contributes to both local and national economic development, yet it raises concerns about environmental degradation and community livelihoods. Using a mixed-methods design framed by the Sustainable Livelihood Framework (SLF) and the Sustainable Development Theory (SDT), 203 households were surveyed across five buffer zones (0–1000 m) around the formal quarry site in Lekokoaneng, Berea District, Lesotho. Quantitative data were analysed descriptively, while qualitative responses underwent thematic analysis and were transformed into quantifiable categories. Quarrying generated employment and small-business opportunities concentrated within 0–600 m of the site, alongside elevated reports of dust, soil degradation and water contamination that undermined agriculture and health. Households nearest the quarry reported the highest income benefits (e.g., 35% via employment) but also the greatest environmental burdens. Households furthest away reported fewer risks but also limited economic gain. Thematic analysis yielded four domains: Socio-Economic Empowerment, Livelihood Vulnerability, Health and Safety Risks, and Environmental Degradation and Control. Integrating SLF and SDT shows quarrying as a double-edged livelihood system with short-term financial gains that coincide with erosion of natural, human and social capitals. Targeted environmental safeguards, labour formalisation and community-inclusive governance are essential to realign quarrying with resilience and sustainability goals. Full article

Joint ventures (JVs) are an example of a government facilitated arrangement geared towards water allocation reform (WAR) designed to improve the lives of emerging farmers through participation in the agricultural economy in South Africa and other emerging countries around the world with segregated agricultural sectors. This paper will qualitatively analyse semi-structured, in-depth interviews with emerging farmers and key institutional actors to investigate the extent that JVs produced perceptible socio-economic benefits for emerging farmers in the Eastern Cape, South Africa. Socio-economic benefits are operationalised across five types of capital assets (human, natural, financial physical, social). The paper posits that an analysis of the socio-economic benefits derived from emerging farmers in JVs can be useful for informing the governance and institutional arrangements geared towards accelerating equity imperatives. The findings of the analysis, which is conducted using a sustainable livelihoods framework (SLF), reveal that factors such as level of education, formal training in agriculture, and power differentials within the partnership arrangements determine whether JVs produce tangible benefits for emerging farmers. This paper recommends the SLF be used in conjunction with concepts, tools, and modes of analysis used in other fields to address differential conditions, assets, and strategies of differentiated groups. Full article

This study aimed to investigate cattle farmer livelihoods that relate to cattle welfare in the region with the newly emerging Lumpy Skin Disease (LSD) in Indonesia. A semi-structured interview survey was conducted with randomly selected cattle farmers (n = 102), in Riau. Cattle were bled for analysis of LSD-post-vaccinal seroconversion. The Sustainable Livelihood Framework (SLF) was used; data on livelihood assets, activities, and outcomes were analysed using Multiple Correspondence Analysis (MCA), two-step clustering, and the radar chart of asset possessions. The survey showed that vaccination and veterinary services covered 82.4% and 90.2% of farms. Seroconversion was detectable in vaccinated (15.0%, n = 173) and in non-vaccinated animals (23.1%, n = 13). Farmers mostly fed only grass to cattle (92.2%), with neither pastoral management nor ad libitum water provision. The MCA and cluster analyses indicated that cattle shelter roofing and flooring and manure disposal were the most important markers of the community’s livelihood. Poverty among cattle farmers was 23.5%. The cluster with lower income per capita had lower quality of shelter roofing and flooring, a lack of regular manure disposal, jobless second children, and the lowest possession of natural and physical assets. Helping to possess natural and physical assets might improve cattle farmers’ well-being and cattle welfare. Full article

The implementation and impact of inclusivity and accessibility in the banking sector are crucial to the banking sector’s participation of any country in achieving the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 1, 4, 5, 8, 10, 11, 16 and 17. This study examines the implementation and impact of inclusivity and accessibility in the South African banking sector, with a focus on the Free State province. Guided by the Sustainable Livelihoods Framework (SLF) and Institutional Theory, this research employs a quantitative, deductive approach to assess two core objectives: (1) the alignment of fintech banking practices with selected Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and (2) the identification of barriers to inclusivity and accessibility for women and youth. A stratified random sample of 208 banking professionals—comprising front-line employees, supervisors, and managers—was surveyed using a Likert-type questionnaire. Data were analysed using SPSS version 21. The findings reveal significant progress toward SDGs 1, 4, 5, 8, 10, 11, 16, and 17, reflected in a female-majority workforce, a youthful and educated employee base, and a nationally oriented employment strategy. These attributes signal a strong institutional commitment to inclusive growth and sustainable development. The sector also demonstrates readiness for fintech innovation, supported by high levels of training adequacy, relevance, and accessibility, indicating robust human capital and institutional adaptability to the Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR) and AI-driven transformation. However, persistent structural barriers—particularly in leadership representation and digital access for women and youth—highlight the need for targeted policy interventions. Integrating inclusive fintech strategies, equitable training frameworks, and development programs is essential to sustaining progress and achieving the goals of the National Development Plan (NDP) and the SDGs. The Free State banking sector offers a promising model for inclusive institutional transformation aligned with global sustainability agendas. Full article

This study integrates the Sustainable Livelihoods Framework (SLF) and the Sustainability Assessment of Food and Agriculture Systems (SAFA) to evaluate the sustainability and livelihood dynamics of the Amazonian Chakra system, recently designated as a Globally Important Agricultural Heritage System (GIAHS) by the FAO. Using data from 330 producers across three associations (Kallari, Wiñak, and Tsatsayaku) in the Ecuadorian Amazon, the study employed discriminant analysis to assess governance, environmental integrity, economic resilience, social well-being, and livelihood capitals. Results revealed significant disparities across associations in key sustainability dimensions. Kallari and Wiñak demonstrated stronger governance, environmental integrity and economic resilience, linked to mature organizational structures and effective governance mechanisms. In contrast, Tsatsayaku excelled in demographic diversity and larger landholdings but lagged in governance and environmental practices. Extreme poverty affected 82% of households, with Tsatsayaku having the lowest rate (69%) compared to Wiñak (89%) and Kallari (87%). Chakra income contributed significantly to livelihoods, accounting for 44% of total income in Kallari, 37% in Wiñak, but only 16% in Tsatsayaku, whose producers relied more on off-farm activities and livestock. The integration of SLF and SAFA methodologies offered a nuanced understanding of sustainability, highlighting the importance of governance, financial strategies, and environmental conservation in promoting resilience. Policies should prioritize participatory governance, market transparency, and credit access to address disparities and strengthen sustainability. These findings underscore the critical role of the Amazonian Chakra as a sustainable agroforestry system, providing economic and cultural benefits, while emphasizing the need for tailored interventions to enhance the sustainability of Amazonian producer associations. Full article

Over the past few decades, the use of vulnerability assessments has grown substantially to support rural communities in developing countries. These studies aim to help these communities achieve their livelihood goals, such as sustainable resource use and adaptation to global changes, by evaluating their susceptibility to climate change impacts. This systematic review critically examines the extensive body of literature on Livelihood Vulnerability Index (LVI) assessments related to climate change impacts in developing countries. By synthesizing findings from various studies, this review highlights patterns and methodologies used to understand the effects of climate change on vulnerable populations. Key focus areas include geographical distribution, methodological approaches, and the frameworks utilized in vulnerability assessments. The review identifies prominent frameworks, such as the LVI and LVI-IPCC, which integrate indicators of sensitivity, exposure, and adaptive capacity to evaluate climate risks. Findings reveal a concentration of studies in Asia and Africa, with a strong emphasis on agricultural and coastal ecosystems. Methodologically, there is a notable reliance on stratified random sampling to accurately capture community and household-level vulnerabilities. A detailed comparative analysis of the LVI, LVI-IPCC, and Sustainable Livelihood Framework (SLF) is also presented, highlighting their characteristics, benefits, and limitations. The review underscores the need for methodological refinements to better address temporal and regional variations in vulnerability. It concludes with recommendations for future research, integrating broader climate scenarios, exploring sectoral interdependencies, and adopting dynamic approaches to enhance the accuracy and applicability of vulnerability assessments. Full article

In semi-arid Northern Ghana, smallholder farmers face food insecurity and financial risk due to climate change. In response, the Village Savings and Loan Association (VSLA) model, a community-led microfinance model, has emerged as a promising finance and climate resilience strategy. VSLAs offer savings, loans, and other financial services to help smallholder farmers cope with climate risks. In northern Ghana, where formal financial banking is limited, VSLAs serve as vital financial resources for smallholder farmers. Nevertheless, it remains to be seen how VSLAs can bridge financial inclusion and climate resilience strategies to address food insecurity. From a sustainable livelihoods framework (SLF) perspective, we utilized data from a cross-sectional survey of 517 smallholder farmers in northern Ghana’s Upper West Region to investigate how VSLAs relate to food insecurity. Results from an ordered logistic regression show that households with membership in a VSLA were less likely to experience severe food insecurity (OR = 0.437, p < 0.01). In addition, households that reported good resilience, owned land, had higher wealth, were female-headed, and made financial decisions jointly were less likely to experience severe food insecurity. Also, spending time accessing the market increases the risk of severe food insecurity. Despite the challenges of the VSLA model, these findings highlight VSLAs’ potential to mitigate food insecurity and serve as a financially resilient and climate-resilient strategy in resource-poor contexts like the UWR and similar areas in Sub-Saharan Africa. VSLAs could contribute to achieving SDG2, zero hunger, and SDG13, climate action. However, policy interventions are necessary to support and scale VSLAs as a sustainable development and food security strategy in vulnerable regions. Full article

There are close dynamic relationships among the livelihood, well-being, and ecological environment of farmer households. It is of great significance to scientifically clarify the impact of the Grain for Green policy on the livelihoods and well-being of farmer households in mountainous areas. Based on data from a survey of 392 farmer households in Zhangbei County, the system of indicators for livelihood assets and well-being of farmer households were constructed using the sustainable livelihood framework (SLF). The livelihood assets and well-being levels of different types of farmer households were measured, and a multiple linear regression model was used to analyze the impact of the Grain for Green policy implementation on the well-being levels of farmer households. The results showed that (1) the Grain for Green project caused changes in the livelihood of farmer households. The average livelihood diversity of farmer households was 3.008, and the returned farmland households (3.022) were higher than the nonreturned farmland households (2.975) in Zhangbei County. The level of natural assets among the total average livelihood assets of farmer households was the highest at 0.374, while the level of physical assets was the lowest at 0.018. The level of livelihood assets of returned farmland households (0.948) was lower than that of nonreturned farmland households (1.117). (2) The Grain for Green policy had an improving effect on the level of well-being of farmer households, but the effect was not significant. The level of well-being of all farmer households in Zhangbei County was 0.517, with the level of wealth contributing the most to the well-being of farmer households at 40.20% and the quality of the ecological environment contributing the least at 11.99%. The level of well-being of returned farmland households (0.518) was slightly higher than that of nonreturned farmland households (0.514). (3) The influencing degree of each factor on the level of well-being varied significantly. There are three main paths through which the Grain for Green policy affects the well-being of farmer households: by reallocating human assets, optimizing natural assets, and enhancing financial assets. The factor of household size had the highest degree, at 0.366, while educational attainment of household members, household labor capacity, annual household expenditure, livelihood diversity, number of large production tools, and total value of livestock were also important drivers of household well-being, and area of arable land was negatively associated with household well-being. There were also differences in the factors influencing the level of well-being of different types of farmer households. Full article

Understanding the factors driving the farmers’ decisions to diversify their crop production is important for management strategies and policies promoting climate-smart agricultural development. Options for diversification and its associated drivers might be shaped by livelihood context, and it remains as a general gap in knowledge. This study aimed to reveal the driving factors behind households’ decisions to diversify their crops in different livelihood contexts. This information could be useful to inform stakeholders on a set of context-fitted options for improving natural resources and rural livelihood resilience to climatic variability and risks. This study applied the Sustainable Livelihood Framework (SLF) to guide surveys and multivariate analyses that identified agricultural livelihood context types at the village level, and also evaluated both the common and type-specific drivers encouraging households to diversify their agricultural production in two rural villages in the Aral Sea region. This study objectively identified three distinct agricultural livelihood types and the main factors differentiating these types from each other. When the total sampled population was analyzed, the results indicated that the agricultural experience of the household heads, levels of education, sources of income, number of cattle and land endowments, and proximity to markets were common and significant drivers in diversifying these households’ crop production. Analyzing the decisions behind diversifying crop production for each agricultural livelihood type revealed type-specific drivers of diversification. The findings suggested that considering both common and type-specific drivers of diversification would allow better understanding of household decisions and provide more insights to develop effective policies promoting climate-smart agriculture through diversification, rather than continuing to use the current “uniform blanket” approach. Full article

Sustainable livelihood of farmers is the key to rural revitalization. The purpose of this study was to establish livelihood capital cultivation models suitable for farmers in different agricultural regions and to enhance the sustainability of farmers’ livelihoods by selecting four agricultural regions (suburban agriculture, intensive agriculture, plain field agriculture, and mountain agriculture) and 1025 rural households and employing Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) to systematically analyze the characteristics of livelihood capital and livelihood stability of farmers in different agricultural regions and the coupling coordination relationship between them based on a Sustainable Livelihood Framework (SLF). The results show that: (1) The average household livelihood capital is highest in intensive agricultural regions and lowest in mountain agricultural regions. (2) Farmers in suburban agricultural regions have a variety of sources of income; thus, the livelihood stability is the highest. while it is lowest in intensive agricultural regions. (3) The coupling coordination degree of livelihood capital and livelihood stability in suburban agricultural regions and plain field agricultural regions is primary coordination, while in intensive agricultural regions and mountain agricultural regions, livelihood capital and stability are slightly out of balance. Full article

Land use decision-making is a vital livelihood strategy associated with the rational collocation of livelihood asset endowments by rural households. Based on the perspective of livelihood heterogeneity, this paper collected the data from 540 farm households in 27 villages in three Sichuan Province counties to identify the land use decision-making characteristics of the household groups. A land use decision-making framework (LUDF) based on the sustainable livelihood framework (SLF) was established and dynamic and dual indicators were developed to divide the sample into six household groups. The household livelihood capital, livelihood strategies, and livelihood diversity were then analyzed at the regional and household group level, and the land use decisions of these household groups were explored, from which the following was found. (1) Overall livelihood capital in the study area was low, and except for human assets, there were few other assets, with households in the survey areas being more inclined to engage in non-farming livelihood activities; however, households in Nanjiang and Qionglai had greater livelihood activities choices than Luxian. (2) The LL-type household was the chief household group; the household group distribution in Qionglai was well-proportioned but uneven in Nanjiang and Luxian; and the HL-type, ML-type, and LL-type household livelihood strategy choices were polarized. (3) Most households were involved in land self-cultivation, followed by land transfer-in, land transfer-out, and land abandonment households. Specifically, there were more households that cultivated fragmented landholdings than specialized households with large-scale landholdings, the land transfer rate was relatively low, the transfer-in land area was far greater than the transfer-out land areas, and a small number of households that had abandoned their land were still involved in agricultural production. (4) There were obvious discordant human–land relationships and inefficient land uses in the study area. Based on these findings, relevant policy recommendations are given to improve farm household livelihood capital, optimize livelihood strategies, and assist in land use decision-making. Full article