Economic Transformation For Poverty Reduction In Africa: A Multidimensional Approach (Routledge Stud

In evaluating the association of financial crises to poverty indicators and the attainment of selected SDGs, we utilize generalized least square random effects panel data econometric modelling. Separate models are developed for each poverty indicator, where each indicator is specified as the dependent variable. The financial crisis influence is set as a categorical variable of interest, controlling for several economic indicators based on existing studies (see Table 2).

Economic Transformation For Poverty Reduction In Africa: A Multidimensional Approach (Routledge Stud

Download Zip: https://liosupytize.blogspot.com/?file=2vA4oe

Agriculture has been the mainstay of African economies for decades, and today the sector accounts for 61% of employment and represents 25% of African Gross Domestic Product (GDP)9. Improved agricultural productivity is a requirement that can support human capital development allowing investments for better nutrition, health, and education10 that can directly impact a rapid poverty reduction and stimulate economic incomes/growth11. Therefore, it is necessary to transform the agricultural sector in Africa, and a need for investments in the modernization of agriculture is evident. Innovative agriculture technologies can support and accelerate this transformation across the continent12 and fight against the current challenges of African agriculture13. In this sense, a new way of farming is being developed worldwide to tackle these mentioned trends and to improve future food production sustainably, exemplified as indoor vertical farming with artificial lighting14.

Our study aims to examine the evidence on forest-based activities and poverty outcomes more broadly, in order to identify gaps in potential pathways and mechanisms across scales, by which forests can help the poor. In particular, this broader scope provides the opportunity to clarify what is known around the application of different approaches across different contexts, facilitating better understanding how to scale up. This study therefore aims to collate existing evidence on forest-poverty linkages globally, identify gaps in the knowledge base, and communicate results to researchers and decision-makers. Clarifying and strengthening knowledge on the contribution of forests to poverty reduction is vital for informing forest-related policy, research and investment affecting forest ecosystems in countries around the world.

Given the scope of the systematic map, we did not attempt any critical appraisal of individual studies, nor did we try to quantify or validate direction of impact for poverty outcomes examined. Rather, this map is intended to provide insight on potential knowledge gaps and biases. Moreover, while many other syntheses on this topic area have aimed to examine the occurrence of trade-offs and synergies between poverty and other economic or environmental outcomes (e.g. [30]), the scope of this map does not explicitly examine these interactions as we are not examining direction of impact.

However, this evidence map shows that research focus appears to be on specific aspects of forest actions that act directly on people or forest resources (Fig. 10) and less on how changing infrastructure around these initiatives can have an impact despite considerable development literature that emphasizes the need for capacity building and improving social/economic/political atmospheres required for facilitating poverty reduction [68,69,70]. For example, there were comparatively fewer articles that examined market-based activities and investments (aimed at increased produced, human, and social capital), as well as natural capital (forest or land assets with access, use, sale, or exclusion rights) and health outcomes. In relation to the P.R.I.M.E. pathways, this raises concern that much of what we understand about forest-poverty linkages are limited to localized cases where forests are directly tied to changes in livelihoods (e.g. through Productivity), but we have far less clarity around effects to change the overarching systems within which forests and people operate (e.g. Investments and Ecosystem Services). 2ff7e9595c