Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 3 Crosswalk of included systematic evidence syntheses and their characteristics

From: A systematic map of evidence on the contribution of forests to poverty alleviation

TypeAuthorsPopulationStated interventionRelated intervention categoryStated outcomesRelated outcome categoryStudy typeTop Geo.Inc.Ov.
SRBowler et al. [25]Less developed countriesCommunity forest managementForest management, governance, individual rights/empowermentGlobal environmental and local welfare benefitsForest income and consumption, social capital, human capital, physical capitalQual, Quant, CombIndia, Nepal428
SRBrooks et al. [75]Lower and middle-income countriesCommunity-based conservationGovernance, individual rights/empowermentAt least two of the four outcomes of interest—attitudinal, behavioral, ecological, and economicForest income and consumptionQual, Quant, CombTanzania, Madagascar1234
SRLawrence et al. [76]United KingdomCommunity woodlandsForest management, governanceBiophysical impacts, social impacts, economic and financial impacts, participationMonetary forest income—wage labor, social capitalQual, Quant, CombN/A (only UK)780
SRLeisher et al. [27]Non-OECDCommunity-based natural resource management with different gender compositions of natural resource management groupsForest management, governance, individual rights/empowermentChanges in governance (incl. rule-making and compliance), conflict resolution, and accountability and transparency. All outcomes related to conservation efficacy, incl. improvements in forest cover and greater forest protectionSocial capital, access to forestQual, Quant, CombIndia, Nepal174
SRPullin et al. [26]GlobalProtected areasManaging and enhancing ecosystem servicesLivelihood strategies, social capital, empowerment, human rights, access to ecosystem goods and services and natural resources essential to well-beingForest income and consumption, access to forests, access to land, health, social capitalQual, Quant, CombUganda, India485
SRSamii et al. [33]Lower and middle-income countriesPayments for environmental servicesManaging and enhancing ecosystem services, strengthening institutions and marketsPoverty conditions of forest dwelling communities—impacts on consumption, income, or income potentialForest income and consumptionQual, Quant, CombCosta Rica, Mexico207
SRSamii et al. [34]Lower and middle-income countriesDecentralized forest managementForest management, governancePoverty conditions of forest dwelling communities—impacts on consumption, income, or income potentialForest income and consumptionQual, Quant, CombUganda127
EGMPuri et al. [29]Low- and middle-income countriesForest conservation interventionsAllKnowledge and behavior change, transparency and accountability outcomes, environmental, social, and cost-effectiveness impactsHuman capital, forest income, social capital, physical capitalQuantCosta Rica, Brazil11833
EGMSnilsveit et al. [30]GlobalLand-use change and forest programmesHabitat management, identifying and strengthening market forces, social capital, strengthening institutions and markets, human capital, produced capitalUptake of agricultural practices, land-use or forest management; environmental outcomes related to greenhouse gas emissions; human welfare outcomesForest income and consumption, health, physical capital, social capital, human capitalQuantCosta Rica, Brazil25232
  1. Includes information on study type, population, stated intervention and outcome categories, correspondence with intervention and outcome categories included in the scope of this systematic map, data type, nations with highest frequency of articles (top geo), number of included articles (Inc.), and number of overlapping articles with this systematic map (Ov.). Total overlapping articles = 55