Search

In this paper we address the often sterile and circular debates over relationships between poverty and deforestation. These debates revolve around questions of whether forest loss causes poverty or poverty contributes to forest encroachment, and questions of whether it is loss of access to forests or dependence on forest-based livelihoods that cause poverty. We suggest that a way beyond the impasse is to set such debates within the context of agrarian change. Livelihoods of those who live in or near forests depend considerably on a rapidly changing agriculture, yet agrarian contexts receive only background attention in popular, political and academic discourse over poverty and forests. Moreover, to the extent that agriculture is considered, little heed is paid to social, technical and economic change. We therefore address agriculture's changing relationships with the wider economy, otherwise referred to as the agrarian transition, and with the natural resource base on which it depends. The paper draws on the experience of Thailand to illustrate our key argument, and more specifically addresses the situation on the resource periphery through a look at the agriculture-forest interface. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Using panel data for provinces compiled from household expenditure microdata, the present paper empirically investigates the relationships among growth, poverty and inequality in Thailand and the Philippines. The empirical model avoids the potential bias due to the fact that the entire distribution of individual-level consumption changes over time and empirical variables for growth, poverty and inequality are often compiled from the consumption distribution. The system generalized method of moments estimation results strongly suggest that inequality reduced the growth rate of per-capita consumption, and that differences in inequality explain a substantial portion of the Philippine-Thai difference in growth and poverty reduction since the late 1980s. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper contrasts the achievements of Indonesia and Thailand in reducing poverty through the 1980s. It is argued that estimates produced by the World Bank suggesting that the headcount incidence of poverty in Thailand in 1990 was higher than Indonesia were flawed because the poverty line used was not truly comparible. But there can be little doubt that the reduction in the headcount incidence of poverty was greater in Indonesia than in Thailand over the 1980s, as was the decline in the absolute numbers of poor people, even though rates of GDP growth were faster in Thailand. Three possible reasons for the superior performance of Indonesia are suggested: regional disparities in economic growth have been more pronounced in Thailand, the expansion of post-primary education has been very slow, and Indonesia was starting from a much higher incidence of poverty in 1980 than was Thailand. © 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aquaculture is equated with the reduction of poverty by intergovernmental agencies such as the FAO, which advocate the promotion of small-scale aquaculture through project-based interventions. There is a lack of convincing empirical evidence to support the efficacy of this type of intervention, however. Meanwhile, commercial cultured freshwater fish production has increased hugely throughout Asia, despite limited direct donor or government support. Its impact with respect to poverty also remains ambiguous, however. This article critically evaluates the developmental impacts of both immanent and interventionist forms of aquaculture and advances finely nuanced interpretations of both. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]