How does governance mediate links between ecosystem services and poverty alleviation? Results from a systematic mapping and thematic synthesis of literature
How does governance mediate links between ecosystem services and poverty alleviation? Results from a systematic mapping and thematic synthesis of literature
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.worlddev.2021.105595
复制
发表时间：
2021-10
影响因子：
6.9
通讯作者：
F. Nunan;M. Menton;C. McDermott;M. Huxham;K. Schreckenberg
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
F. Nunan;M. Menton;C. McDermott;M. Huxham;K. Schreckenberg
低收入和中等收入国家改善可再生自然资源可持续管理的许多努力都旨在实现“双赢”成果——改善生态系统健康和改善生计。然而，实现这种双赢结果具有挑战性，因为许多变量都会影响协同效应的潜力。这些变量包括治理的质量和绩效。我们对文献进行了系统的梳理和主题综合，以确定治理如何调节生态系统服务与扶贫之间的关系。系统绘图的重点是确定研究治理的哪些组成部分以及每个地理区域和自然资源受到了多少关注。我们发现文献“成群结队”，其中一些治理成分、地理区域和部门研究得很好，而另一些则研究得很差。该专题综合参考了 191 篇论文，发现很少有文献详细研究治理、生态系统健康/服务和扶贫/生计这三个领域，也很少有跨学科调查的证据。相反，大部分研究要么关注治理本身，要么关注治理和生计，要么关注治理和生态系统健康/服务。针对研究问题，确定了三个关键的分析主题，即：地方自主和包容性治理增加了生态系统服务改善生计的潜力；往往存在多种治理结构和系统，使得因果关系难以追踪，尽管这种多样性为改善治理、生态系统健康和生计创造了机会，也带来了挑战；并且，治理需要适当和充分的激励措施，以调节生态系统服务和减贫之间的积极联系。
Many efforts to improve the sustainable management of renewable natural resources in low- and middle-income countries seek to achieve ‘win-win’ outcomes – improved ecosystem health and improved livelihoods. Yet achieving such win–win outcomes is challenging, since many variables affect the potential for synergies. These variables include the quality and performance of governance. We conducted a systematic mapping of the literature and a thematic synthesis to identify how governance mediates relationships between ecosystem services and poverty alleviation. The systematic mapping focused on identifying which components of governance are studied and how much attention each geographic region and natural resource has received. We found that the literature is ‘clumped’, with some governance components, geographic areas and sectors studied well, and others poorly. The thematic synthesis drew on 191 papers and found very little literature that looked at the three areas of governance, ecosystem health/services and poverty alleviation/livelihoods together in detail, with little evidence of interdisciplinary investigation. Much of the research instead focuses on either governance itself or governance and livelihoods or governance and ecosystem health/services. Three key analytical themes were identified in response to the research question, which are that: locally owned and inclusive governance increases the potential for ecosystem services to deliver on improved livelihoods; there are often multiple governance structures and systems in place making causality difficult to trace, though such multiplicity creates opportunities for improved governance, ecosystem health and livelihoods as well as challenges; and, appropriate and adequate incentives are needed for governance to mediate positive links between ecosystem services and poverty alleviation.