Focal Areas for Measuring the Human Well-Being Impacts of a Conservation Initiative
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.
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.:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- Bandyopadhyay, Sushenjit & Shyamsundar, Priya & Baccini, Alessandro, 2011. "Forests, biomass use and poverty in Malawi," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2461-2471.
- 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.
- 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.
- John F. Helliwell, 2012. "Understanding and Improving the Social Context of Well-Being," NBER Working Papers 18486, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.