LiveDiverse protects livelihoods and biodiversity

There is no question that protecting biological diversity is essential to maintaining ecosystems around the world. But what about the human populations that live in these protected environments?

Countries
Countries
  Algeria
  Argentina
  Australia
  Austria
  Bangladesh
  Belarus
  Belgium
  Benin
  Bolivia
  Brazil
  Bulgaria
  Burkina Faso
  Cambodia
  Cameroon
  Canada
  Cape Verde
  Chile
  China
  Colombia
  Costa Rica
  Croatia
  Cyprus
  Czech Republic
  Denmark
  Ecuador
  Egypt
  Estonia
  Ethiopia
  Faroe Islands
  Finland
  France
  French Polynesia
  Georgia

Countries
Countries
  Algeria
  Argentina
  Australia
  Austria
  Bangladesh
  Belarus
  Belgium
  Benin
  Bolivia
  Brazil
  Bulgaria
  Burkina Faso
  Cambodia
  Cameroon
  Canada
  Cape Verde
  Chile
  China
  Colombia
  Costa Rica
  Croatia
  Cyprus
  Czech Republic
  Denmark
  Ecuador
  Egypt
  Estonia
  Ethiopia
  Faroe Islands
  Finland
  France
  French Polynesia
  Georgia


 

Published: 20 April 2016  
Related theme(s) and subtheme(s)
EnvironmentBiodiversity
Innovation
Research policySeventh Framework Programme
Countries involved in the project described in the article
Belgium  |  Costa Rica  |  India  |  Netherlands  |  South Africa  |  Sweden  |  United Kingdom  |  Vietnam
Add to PDF "basket"

LiveDiverse protects livelihoods and biodiversity

Picture of the village in Vietnam

© pigprox - fotolia.com

In answering this question, the EU-funded LiveDiverse project worked with rural people in and around protected areas in Costa Rica, India, South Africa, and Vietnam to balance the need to preserve their livelihoods with maintaining the rich biodiversity of the areas in which they live.

From 2009 to 2012, LiveDiverse studied how the livelihoods of rural people in and around protected areas can be improved while biodiversity is conserved. “We realised that in many areas, biodiversity was being prioritised and protected, but there was a question of how the people living in these areas were benefiting from our efforts,” says Alistair Rieu-Clarke, a principal investigator for the University of Dundee, who took on a role as coordinator for stakeholder engagement. “For example, is the revenue from national parks going to the government or to the people living there, and how is it enhancing their livelihoods?”

In the Ba Be National Park of Vietnam, for example, the livelihoods of rural populations living in and around protected areas are often based on a combination of agriculture, fishing, hunting and the collection of edible and medicinal plants, fruits and herbs. Illegal hunting and fishing, along with the excessive collection of natural products, all have a negative impact on biodiversity.

“In order to protect biodiversity and increase livelihoods, people need alternatives to the overuse of products from the protected areas,” adds project coordinator Geoffrey Gooch. “More productive agricultural methods can increase crops and provide more food, but it is also necessary to develop new sources of income.”

Gooch says these income sources might include the managed and sustainable collection and sale of plants, fruits and herbs, the development of ecotourism, sale of traditional handicrafts and the development of small-scale tourist accommodation, as well as paid involvement in the protection of biodiversity.

A New approach to an old problem

The ecological needs and threats to biodiversity are well-known and documented. Much less known, however, are the other aspects of sustainability, such as socioeconomic sustainability, which includes the livelihoods of rural populations. LiveDiverse increased knowledge in this area through an integrated study of the ecological, socio-economic and cultural or spiritual vulnerability of aquatic and riparian biodiversity in four case studies taking place in the Ba Be/Na Hang Conservation Complex in northern Vietnam; the Western Ghats in India; the Terraba River basin in Costa Rica; and the Greater Kruger Area in South Africa.

Inclusion is important

Based on its work across a wide geographic area, the project came to the general conclusion that if the livelihoods of local people are to be increased while biodiversity is simultaneously protected, local populations must be included in discussions on the management of the protected areas. In addition, concrete, short-term benefits for them must also be included in management plans – and funded. More so, local authorities must provide active and genuine support for both small-scale developments and larger infrastructure improvements.

“An important, policy-relevant conclusion is that while research projects such as LiveDiverse can help identify potential sources of sustainable development and provide the scientific expertise to motivate such developments, they need to be tied into potential funding schemes from the very beginning,” concludes Gooch.

Project details

  • Project acronym: LiveDiverse
  • Participants: Sweden (Coordinator), Vietnam, India, South Africa, Costa Rica, Netherlands, UK, Belgium
  • FP7 Proj. N° 211392
  • Total costs: € 3 178 960
  • EU contribution: € 2 418 160
  • Duration: February 2009 - January 2012

See also

 

Convert article(s) to PDF

No article selected


loading


Search articles

Notes:
To restrict search results to articles in the Information Centre, i.e. this site, use this search box rather than the one at the top of the page.

After searching, you can expand the results to include the whole Research and Innovation web site, or another section of it, or all Europa, afterwards without searching again.

Please note that new content may take a few days to be indexed by the search engine and therefore to appear in the results.

Print Version
Share this article
See also
Project website
Project details