Does forest access reduce reliance on costly shock-coping strategies? Evidence from Malawi

Despite the potential for forest resources to act as a less costly shock-coping strategy for rural households, evidence of the nexus between access to forest resources and the nature of coping strategies employed by households remains scanty. Using panel data from Malawi, first, we explore how the type of shock (covariate or idiosyncratic) influences the choice of coping strategy adopted. Second, we determine whether access to forest resources reduces the likelihood and intensity of reliance on costly shock-coping strategies (consumption reduction, and sale of assets). The results show that households are more likely to adopt costly coping strategies when responding to covariate weather shocks. However, the reverse was found to be true in the wake of idiosyncratic shocks. Our findings show that the use of forest products helps poor households in cushioning against the effects of shocks. Forest products collection aids consumption smoothing while protecting asset depletion in the wake of covariate shocks. This makes the availability of forest resources a critical safety net. Within a sound access mechanism, sustainable use of forest resources can reduce the likelihood of vulnerable households falling into poverty traps.