Can forest-protection carbon projects improve rural livelihoods? Analysis of the Noel Kempff Mercado Climate Action Project, Bolivia

被引：55

作者：

Asquith N.M. ^{[1
]}

Vargas Ríos M.T. ^{[2
]}

Smith J. ^{[1
]}

机构：

[1] Ctr. for Intl. Forestry Research, JKPWB, Jakarta 10065

[2] Fundación Natura Bolivia, Santa Cruz

来源：

Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change | 2002年 / 7卷 / 4期

关键词：

Carbon and development links; Clean development mechanism; Forest carbon conservation; Integrated conservation and development projects; Rapid rural appraisal; Stakeholder participation; Sustainable rural development;

D O I：

10.1023/A:1024712424319

中图分类号：

学科分类号：

摘要：

We studied the Noel Kempff Mercado Climate Action Project (NKMCAP), Bolivia, to assess whether forest protection carbon (C) projects can significantly benefit local people. We hypothesized that forest protection can only securely deliver C if significant stakeholders are meaningfully and transparently involved, traditional or customary rights are recognized and their loss compensated for, and there are direct linkages between conservation and development objective. Our research focused on 53 members of the communities of Florida, Porvenir and Piso Firme and 36 secondary stakeholders. In each of the villages we held half-day meetings with community leaders, complemented by semi-structured one-hour interviews with 5, 10, and 7 families, representing 20%, 10% and 8% of each community. The long-term impact of the NKMCAP on the local communities may well be positive. However, in the short run, certain sections of the local communities are financially poorer. Forest protection projects clearly have the potential to sequester C, protect biodiversity and simultaneously contribute to sustainable rural development, but if they really are to improve rural livelihoods, they must be designed and implemented carefully and participatively.

引用

页码：323 / 337

页数：14

共 27 条

[1] Bass S., Dubois O., Moura Costa P., Wilson C., Pinard M., Tipper R., Rural Livelihoods and Carbon Management, (2000)
[2] Stories from the Field and Lessons Learned. Evaluating an Enterprise-Based Approach to Community Conservation in the Asia/Pacific Region, (1996)
[3] Brandon K., Redford K.H., Sanderson S.E., Parks in Peril. People, Politics, and Protected Areas, (1998)
[4] Brown S., Burnham M., Delaney M., Powell M., Vaca R., Moreno A., Issues and challenges for forest-based carbon-offset projects: A case study of the Noel Kempff climate action project in Bolivia, Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 5, 1, pp. 25-37, (2000)
[5] Catari M., Armijo E., Ibisch C., Torrico A., Vargas I., Ibisch P., Bases para un Plan de Manejo de los Recursos Naturales de la Franja del Bajo Paragua, (1996)
[6] Chambers R., Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA): Analysis of experience, World Development, 22, pp. 1253-1268, (1994)
[7] Child G., Wildlife and People: The Zimbabwean Success, (1995)
[8] Modalities and Procedures for a Clean Development Mechanism as Defined in Article 12 of the Kyoto Protocol, (2001)
[9] Cornwall A., Gujit I., Welbourn A., Extending the horizons of agricultural research and extension: Methodological challenges, Agric. Human Values, 11, pp. 38-57, (1994)
[10] Economic Evaluation of Tropical Forest Land Use Options. A Review of Methodology and Applications, (1994)

← 1 2 3 →