Assessing the poverty-environment nexus in three rural South African villages: environmental degradation, vulnerability and perceptions
Date
2018
Authors
Ramatshimbila, Tshifhiwa Violet
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Abstract
Poverty and environmental degradation are two serious challenges facing developing
countries. The poor are often blamed for causing degradation, and degradation is assumed
to worsen poverty. This relationship between the two has been referred to as the Poverty
Environment Nexus (PEN). The PEN is known to be complex and multidimensional, and is
surrounded by a number of theories and controversies. Although the co-occurrence of
poverty and degradation has been well explored across the developing world, it has
received modest attention in the literature especially on how wealth differentiation within
these communities shapes the way in which local people conceptualise, experience, and
cope with degradation. The intersection between the PEN and local environmental
governance is also under-studied.
This study addresses these knowledge gaps by investigating how household wealth status
influences 1) local perceptions about woodland degradation, 2) household vulnerability to
degradation, and 3) awareness and attitudes about local environmental governance, in
three rural villages in Limpopo Province, South Africa. A mixed-methods approach was
used, combining focus groups, a household survey (n=213), an individual survey (n=213) and
key informant interviews. The influence of household wealth status score (derived from
assets and income sources using Principal Component Analysis (PCA)) on individual
perceptions, awareness, and attitudes, and household vulnerability to degradation, after
controlling for confounding factors, was analysed statistically using multivariate logistic
regression models. Focus groups and key informant interviews were useful for identifying
themes and adding qualitative insights to the quantitative results.
Perceptions: Woodland degradation was perceived both in terms of physical aspects, such as
reduction in large trees, and experiential aspects, namely having to travel further to collect
resources. The latter perception was influenced by wealth status. Perceived causes of
degradation included environmental, socio-economic, and governance factors, and these
perceptions were mostly associated with increasing wealth status. However, poorer
respondents were more aware of their own household’s contribution to local degradation.
For potential solutions, wealthier respondents focussed on using alternatives to harvested
resources (such as other energy sources), while the poorer respondents focussed on
reducing daily resource consumption.
Vulnerability: Poorer households were more likely to use most of 13 woodland resources.
Poorer households were thus more likely to report being impacted by degradation,
especially by having to travel further to collect resources. Coping responses of the poor
were typically inward-looking, focusing on modifying their natural resource use, such as by
reducing quantities used or harvesting around other villages. By contrast, the wealthy were
more outward-looking and focused on external coping mechanisms such as seeking
employment and buying commercial alternatives from shops. The use of social capital to
cope with degradation emerged as an important response strategy cross wealth status.
Governance: Traditional authorities were widely recognised as important institutional
structures for local woodland management. Awareness of relevant government agencies
was relatively low. Poorer respondents were more aware of customary environmental laws
and penalties, while wealthier respondents were more aware of those of government
agencies. Wealth status also influenced attitudes about the benefits of the various
institutions for managing local communal woodlands. It was widely agreed that local
woodland governance could be improved by delegating more power to traditional
authorities and communities, and improving monitoring by government agencies. These
views were not influenced by wealth status
Key insights from this study include: Even within poor communities, there is wealth differentiation in environmental
perceptions that has consequences for addressing the poverty-environment nexus. The poor are hit by a “double whammy” when it comes to vulnerability to degradation –
first, they are more at risk to impacts because they are more dependent on natural
resources, and secondly, they are less able to adapt in ways which do not undermine
human wellbeing or environmental sustainability.
Despite their weaknesses, traditional governance structures and institutions have an
important role to play in managing the poverty-environment nexus in common property
systems, but they need support from government.
Description
A thesis submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy to the Faculty of Science, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, Johannesburg
March 2018
Keywords
Citation
Ramatshimbila, Tshifhiwa Violet, (2018) Assessing the poverty-environment nexus in three rural South African villages: environmental degradation, vulnerability and perceptions, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, https://hdl.handle.net/10539/27139