Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Focal Areas for Measuring the Human Well-Being Impacts of a Conservation Initiative

Contents:

Author Info

  • Craig Leisher

    ()
    (Central Science, The Nature Conservatory, 4245 N. Fairfax Drive, Arlington, VA 22203, USA)

  • Leah H. Samberg

    ()
    (Consultant, 2312 Skyline Drive, Missoula, MT 59802, USA)

  • Pieter Van Buekering

    ()
    (Department of Environmental Economics, Institute for Environmental Studies, VU University, de Boelelann 1105, Amsterdam, The Netherlands)

  • M. Sanjayan

    ()
    (Central Science, The Nature Conservatory, 4245 N. Fairfax Drive, Arlington, VA 22203, USA)

Registered author(s):

    Abstract

    Within conservation, the need to measure the impacts on people from conservation initiatives such as projects and programs is growing, but understanding and measuring the multidimensional impacts on human well-being from conservation initiatives is complex. To understand the constituent components of human well-being and identify which components of well-being are most common, we analyzed 31 known indices for measuring human well-being. We found 11 focal areas shared by two or more indices for measuring human well-being, and the focal areas of living standards, health, education, social cohesion, security, environment, and governance were in at least 14 of the 31 human well-being indices. We examined each of the common focal areas and assessed its relevance to measuring the human well-being impacts of a conservation initiative. We then looked for existing indices that include the relevant focal areas and recommend the use of Stiglitz et al. (2009)—a framework designed to measure economic performance and social progress—as a starting place for understanding and selecting human well-being focal areas suitable for measuring the impacts on people from a conservation initiative.

    Download Info

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
    File URL: http://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/5/3/997/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: http://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/5/3/997/
    Download Restriction: no

    Bibliographic Info

    Article provided by MDPI, Open Access Journal in its journal Sustainability.

    Volume (Year): 5 (2013)
    Issue (Month): 3 (March)
    Pages: 997-1010

    as in new window
    Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:5:y:2013:i:3:p:997-1010:d:24046

    Contact details of provider:
    Web page: http://www.mdpi.com/

    Related research

    Keywords: socio-economic; poverty; measurement; biodiversity; subjective; objective;

    Find related papers by JEL classification:

    References

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
    as in new window
    1. Ben Groom & Pauline Grosjean & Andreas Kontoleon & Tim Swanson & Shiqiu Zhang, 2008. "Relaxing Rural Constraints: a ‘Win-Win’ Policy for Poverty and Environment in China?," Environmental Economy and Policy Research Working Papers 30.2008, University of Cambridge, Department of Land Economics, revised 2008.
    2. Jeremy G. Weber & Erin O. Sills & Simone Bauch & Subhrendu K. Pattanayak, 2011. "Do ICDPs Work? An Empirical Evaluation of Forest-Based Microenterprises in the Brazilian Amazon," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 87(4), pages 661-681.
    3. Charles Blessings Laurence Jumbe & Arild Angelsen, 2006. "Do the Poor Benefit from Devolution Policies? Evidence from Malawi’s Forest Co-Management Program," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 82(4), pages 562-581.
    4. Agarwal, Bina, 2009. "Gender and forest conservation: The impact of women's participation in community forest governance," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(11), pages 2785-2799, September.
    5. Jon Hall & Enrico Giovannini & Adolfo Morrone & Giulia Ranuzzi, 2010. "A Framework to Measure the Progress of Societies," OECD Statistics Working Papers 2010/5, OECD Publishing.
    6. John F. Helliwell, 2012. "Understanding and Improving the Social Context of Well-Being," NBER Working Papers 18486, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Bandyopadhyay, Sushenjit & Shyamsundar, Priya & Baccini, Alessandro, 2011. "Forests, biomass use and poverty in Malawi," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2461-2471.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Lists

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:5:y:2013:i:3:p:997-1010:d:24046. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (XML Conversion Team).

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.