Perceptions of tourism revenue sharing impacts on Volcanoes National Park, Rwanda: a Sustainable Livelihoods framework

Munanura, Ian E.; Backman, Kenneth F.; Hallo, Jeffrey C.; Powell, Robert B.

doi:10.1080/09669582.2016.1145228

Cited by 62 publications

(58 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The five livelihood capitals are closely linked to each other, which calls for an interrelated method to improve livelihood capabilities [40,41]. Income streams are important to villagers, but the evidence suggests that other capitals are equally meaningful for local people.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How Do Conservation and the Tourism Industry Affect Local Livelihoods? A Comparative Study of Two Nature Reserves in China

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Drawing on a comparison of two different nature reserves (NRs) in China, this paper explores the effect of the establishment of the NRs and the associated tourism industry development on local livelihoods, and analyzes why they differed. One hundred semi-structured interviews were administered with local elites, villagers, and government officials to identify livelihood changes. Based on a modified sustainable livelihoods framework, we found that the livelihoods of people living in both NRs had improved, but there was a loss of traditional culture and weakened social connections. The provision of alternative livelihoods options was critical for local people, with these options needing to have strong connections to China's development policies. The results point to the importance of providing alternative livelihood strategies when establishing new conservation areas. This requires holistic management plans that not only address conservation, but also consider the impacts on local people.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How Do Conservation and the Tourism Industry Affect Local Livelihoods? A Comparative Study of Two Nature Reserves in China

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These classes of factors are also identified in the agricultural sector (de Olde, Carsjens, & Eilers, 2017; Dillon et al, 2016; FAO, 2014; Grenz et al, 2009;Komnitsas & Doula, 2017;Reidsma et al, 2011;Speelman et al, 2007;Van Cauwenbergh et al, 2007;Zahm et al, 2008). Environmental factors relate to the quality of production inputs and farming practices; Economic factors relate to productivity, profitability, stability and viability, while Social factors relate to local context, actor participation, and distribution of benefits (Demartini et al, 2015;Dillon et al, 2016;FAO, 2014;Grenz et al, 2009;Harris, 2000;Komnitsas & Doula, 2017;Lehman, Clark, & Weise, 1993;Munanura et al, 2016;Reidsma et al, 2011;Speelman et al, 2007;Van Cauwenbergh et al, 2007;Zahm et al, 2008). In addition to these classes of factors, some literature also distinguishes governancerelated factors that address decision-making structures, institutions and regulations between multiple actors involved in SAD (FAO, 2014;Reidsma et al, 2011;van Zeijl Rozema et al, 2008).…”

Section: Framework Of Participatory Sustainable Agricultural Developmmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Equity of benefits, the main mission of PSAD (Assembe-Mvondo, Brockhaus, & Lescuyer, 2013;Brown & Corbera, 2003;Gebara, 2013;McClanahan & Abunge, 2016;Munanura et al, 2016) refers to factors such as equity of access to natural resources for present and future generations (environmental factor), equal access to resources, e.g. natural resources, finance, market resources (economic), inclusion of all actors in a chain (social) and decentralized decision making structures and processes that enable participation and institution development (governance-related) (Assembe-Mvondo et al, 2013;Brown & Corbera, 2003;Gebara, 2013;McClanahan & Abunge, 2016;Munanura et al, 2016).…”

Section: Framework Of Participatory Sustainable Agricultural Developmmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Participation is defined as 'to be part of a specific larger whole, to be in a reciprocal relationship with a specific larger whole, for actors to have the ability to act and to take responsibility' (Brazier & Nevejan, 2014). Actors need to be aware that they are part of a network and have the ability to contribute and take responsibility for their actions within the context of the common mission of a systemequity of benefits for all actors (Brown & Corbera, 2003;Gebara, 2013;Munanura, Backman, Hallo, & Powell, 2016) in SAD.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Empowering change for sustainable agriculture: the need for participation

Kusnandar

Brazier

Kooten

2019

International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sustainable agricultural development (SAD) requires empowerment and engagement of all actors in the agricultural production and supply chain to enable change. This paper proposes a novel framework for Participatory Sustainable Agricultural Development (PSAD) that distinguishes four main classes of factors that influence participation in SAD: environmental, economic, social and governance-related. The factors in each of these classes are analysed in relation to their effect over time, on the basis of 49 SAD programmes reported in the literature. Findings show that the social factors of engagement and empowerment, not often addressed in existing SAD programmes, are of significant influence to effect over time, as are the environmental factors of food safety, and the economic factors of production and capacity development. As such this paper shows that in in addition to the wellacknowledged need for knowledge and skills related to food safety, production and capacity development, SAD programmes also need to address the social factors of engagement and empowerment to enable sustainable change over time for SAD through participation.

show abstract

“…For instance, Rwanda's goal of increasing agricultural self‐sufficiency through increased fertilizer use (Republic of Rwanda, Ministry of Agriculture, & Animal Resources, ) has not been evaluated against its potential consequences for water quality. Similarly, the future of tourism will depend on forest and wildlife conservation within the country's protected areas; Rwanda's model of revenue sharing with respect to tourism fees has been globally recognized for demonstrating how wildlife conservation and tourism can benefit local communities (Spenceley, Habyalimana, Tusabe, & Mariza, ), though challenges remain (Munanura, Backman, Hallo, & Powell, ). Rwanda's primary linked environment and development challenge is the management of existing resources to meet the needs of a growing population who depend on natural resources for every aspect of their livelihoods.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards ecosystem accounts for Rwanda: Tracking 25 years of change in flows and potential supply of ecosystem services

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rwanda, a small but rapidly developing central African nation, has undertaken development of natural capital accounts to better inform its economic development through the World Bank's Wealth Accounting and Valuation of Ecosystem Services (WAVES) Partnership. In this paper, we develop ecosystem service (ES) models to quantify ecosystem condition and physical supply components of ecosystem accounts in Rwanda from 1990 to 2015. We applied the InVEST carbon storage, sediment delivery ratio, nutrient delivery ratio, and annual and seasonal water yield models to map changes in potential ES supply nationwide. We also quantified flows of sediment, water and nutrients to 96 hydroelectric dam, irrigation dam and water treatment plant sites. Over a 25‐year period, we found declines in all ES, which were most strongly driven by conversion of forests to cropland. Declines were most pronounced from 1990 to 2000 and 2010 to 2015; ES were relatively stable from 2000 to 2010 (with the exception of nutrient exports to water bodies, which jumped most sharply from 2000 to 2010). From 2010 to 2015, over 42% of Rwanda's water‐use sites (representing 9% of the nation's hydroelectric generation capacity and 59% of its water treatment capacity) had upstream increases in sediment export and quick flow greater than the national average. Half of Rwanda's water treatment plants had upstream phosphorus exports greater than the national average. Our results quantify nation‐wide ES trends, their implications for key water‐dependent industries, and the importance of protected areas in safeguarding ES flows and potential supply in Rwanda. They also provide data that can be integrated with existing land, water and economic accounts for Rwanda, as well as a baseline to inform development strategies that better link economic and environmental goals. A free Plain Language Summary can be found within the Supporting Information of this article.

show abstract

Perceptions of tourism revenue sharing impacts on Volcanoes National Park, Rwanda: a Sustainable Livelihoods framework

Cited by 62 publications

References 33 publications

How Do Conservation and the Tourism Industry Affect Local Livelihoods? A Comparative Study of Two Nature Reserves in China

How Do Conservation and the Tourism Industry Affect Local Livelihoods? A Comparative Study of Two Nature Reserves in China

Empowering change for sustainable agriculture: the need for participation

Towards ecosystem accounts for Rwanda: Tracking 25 years of change in flows and potential supply of ecosystem services

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About