Ecosystem service variation and its importance to the wellbeing of smallholder farmers in contrasting agro‐ecological zones of East African Rift

Abstract Smallholder farmers lead their lives using multiple ecosystem services (ESs). Understanding the contribution of these services to smallholder farmers' wellbeing is essential for addressing ecosystem‐related problems. While the economic valuation of ESs has received major emphasis, smal...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Haile Ketema, Wu Wei, Abiyot Legesse, Wolde Zinabu, Habtamu Temesgen, Eshetu Yirsaw
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Wiley 2021
Materias:	agro‐ecological zone ecosystem disservice ecosystem service smallholder farmers' wellbeing Agriculture S Agriculture (General) S1-972
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/92ef119a71754a0cbe9e0ab565284c40
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:92ef119a71754a0cbe9e0ab565284c40
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:92ef119a71754a0cbe9e0ab565284c402021-11-17T04:20:04ZEcosystem service variation and its importance to the wellbeing of smallholder farmers in contrasting agro‐ecological zones of East African Rift2048-369410.1002/fes3.310https://doaj.org/article/92ef119a71754a0cbe9e0ab565284c402021-11-01T00:00:00Zhttps://doi.org/10.1002/fes3.310https://doaj.org/toc/2048-3694Abstract Smallholder farmers lead their lives using multiple ecosystem services (ESs). Understanding the contribution of these services to smallholder farmers' wellbeing is essential for addressing ecosystem‐related problems. While the economic valuation of ESs has received major emphasis, smallholder farmer perceptions of ESs, ecosystem disservices (EDs), and the importance of their wellbeing are repeatedly overlooked. We analyzed variations in ES values (ESVs) in response to land use land cover (LULC) change, perceptions of ES/ED and the importance of these ecosystems to wellbeing in contrasting agro‐ecological zones (AEZs). To obtain datasets, we used geospatial technology, focus group discussion, and face‐to‐face cross‐sectional surveys in a highly populated area of the Southeastern escarpment of the Ethiopian Rift Valley. The research was carried out between October 1 and December 30, 2018. The results revealed the following. (1) Total area of 75,246.98 ha (34%) was changed to various LULC classes across AEZs. Woodland decreased at annual rates of 5.28% while agroforestry increased at annual rates of 1.03%, respectively. (2) ESV was estimated to be approximately $164 million and declined by approximately $24 million between 1988 and 2018, owing to the expansion of cultivated land. (3) More than 55% of smallholder farmers consistently identified benefits from food‐cereal and vegetables, food‐meat, and erosion control, problems associated with human disease vectors, as of very high importance for their wellbeing. ESs are the positive benefits while ecosystem functions that are perceived as negative for human wellbeing are termed as EDs. ESs were perceived as positively contributing to wellbeing, while EDs detracted from health and material wellbeing. The assigned values varied significantly with AEZs and socioeconomic groups, highlighting the need for careful consideration of site‐specific ecosystem management strategies that improve smallholder farmers' wellbeing and sustainable development. Moreover, the cost incurred due to ESV loss may not be covered by economic gains resulting from the expansion of cultivated land and thus, implementing appropriate land‐use policies at the local level would recuperate ES values.Haile KetemaWu WeiAbiyot LegesseWolde ZinabuHabtamu TemesgenEshetu YirsawWileyarticleagro‐ecological zoneecosystem disserviceecosystem servicesmallholder farmers' wellbeingAgricultureSAgriculture (General)S1-972ENFood and Energy Security, Vol 10, Iss 4, Pp n/a-n/a (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	agro‐ecological zone ecosystem disservice ecosystem service smallholder farmers' wellbeing Agriculture S Agriculture (General) S1-972
spellingShingle	agro‐ecological zone ecosystem disservice ecosystem service smallholder farmers' wellbeing Agriculture S Agriculture (General) S1-972 Haile Ketema Wu Wei Abiyot Legesse Wolde Zinabu Habtamu Temesgen Eshetu Yirsaw Ecosystem service variation and its importance to the wellbeing of smallholder farmers in contrasting agro‐ecological zones of East African Rift
description	Abstract Smallholder farmers lead their lives using multiple ecosystem services (ESs). Understanding the contribution of these services to smallholder farmers' wellbeing is essential for addressing ecosystem‐related problems. While the economic valuation of ESs has received major emphasis, smallholder farmer perceptions of ESs, ecosystem disservices (EDs), and the importance of their wellbeing are repeatedly overlooked. We analyzed variations in ES values (ESVs) in response to land use land cover (LULC) change, perceptions of ES/ED and the importance of these ecosystems to wellbeing in contrasting agro‐ecological zones (AEZs). To obtain datasets, we used geospatial technology, focus group discussion, and face‐to‐face cross‐sectional surveys in a highly populated area of the Southeastern escarpment of the Ethiopian Rift Valley. The research was carried out between October 1 and December 30, 2018. The results revealed the following. (1) Total area of 75,246.98 ha (34%) was changed to various LULC classes across AEZs. Woodland decreased at annual rates of 5.28% while agroforestry increased at annual rates of 1.03%, respectively. (2) ESV was estimated to be approximately $164 million and declined by approximately $24 million between 1988 and 2018, owing to the expansion of cultivated land. (3) More than 55% of smallholder farmers consistently identified benefits from food‐cereal and vegetables, food‐meat, and erosion control, problems associated with human disease vectors, as of very high importance for their wellbeing. ESs are the positive benefits while ecosystem functions that are perceived as negative for human wellbeing are termed as EDs. ESs were perceived as positively contributing to wellbeing, while EDs detracted from health and material wellbeing. The assigned values varied significantly with AEZs and socioeconomic groups, highlighting the need for careful consideration of site‐specific ecosystem management strategies that improve smallholder farmers' wellbeing and sustainable development. Moreover, the cost incurred due to ESV loss may not be covered by economic gains resulting from the expansion of cultivated land and thus, implementing appropriate land‐use policies at the local level would recuperate ES values.
format	article
author	Haile Ketema Wu Wei Abiyot Legesse Wolde Zinabu Habtamu Temesgen Eshetu Yirsaw
author_facet	Haile Ketema Wu Wei Abiyot Legesse Wolde Zinabu Habtamu Temesgen Eshetu Yirsaw
author_sort	Haile Ketema
title	Ecosystem service variation and its importance to the wellbeing of smallholder farmers in contrasting agro‐ecological zones of East African Rift
title_short	Ecosystem service variation and its importance to the wellbeing of smallholder farmers in contrasting agro‐ecological zones of East African Rift
title_full	Ecosystem service variation and its importance to the wellbeing of smallholder farmers in contrasting agro‐ecological zones of East African Rift
title_fullStr	Ecosystem service variation and its importance to the wellbeing of smallholder farmers in contrasting agro‐ecological zones of East African Rift
title_full_unstemmed	Ecosystem service variation and its importance to the wellbeing of smallholder farmers in contrasting agro‐ecological zones of East African Rift
title_sort	ecosystem service variation and its importance to the wellbeing of smallholder farmers in contrasting agro‐ecological zones of east african rift
publisher	Wiley
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/92ef119a71754a0cbe9e0ab565284c40
work_keys_str_mv	AT haileketema ecosystemservicevariationanditsimportancetothewellbeingofsmallholderfarmersincontrastingagroecologicalzonesofeastafricanrift AT wuwei ecosystemservicevariationanditsimportancetothewellbeingofsmallholderfarmersincontrastingagroecologicalzonesofeastafricanrift AT abiyotlegesse ecosystemservicevariationanditsimportancetothewellbeingofsmallholderfarmersincontrastingagroecologicalzonesofeastafricanrift AT woldezinabu ecosystemservicevariationanditsimportancetothewellbeingofsmallholderfarmersincontrastingagroecologicalzonesofeastafricanrift AT habtamutemesgen ecosystemservicevariationanditsimportancetothewellbeingofsmallholderfarmersincontrastingagroecologicalzonesofeastafricanrift AT eshetuyirsaw ecosystemservicevariationanditsimportancetothewellbeingofsmallholderfarmersincontrastingagroecologicalzonesofeastafricanrift
_version_	1718426001724145664

Ecosystem service variation and its importance to the wellbeing of smallholder farmers in contrasting agro‐ecological zones of East African Rift

Ejemplares similares