Unpacking Natural Resource Reliance and Poverty in Northern Botswana

• Published in: Society & natural resources Vol. 38; no. 3; pp. 209 - 234
• Main Authors: Cassidy, Lin, Gaughan, Andrea, Stevens, Forrest R., Pricope, Narcisa, Salerno, Jonathan, Murray-Hudson, Mike, Parry, David, Hartter, Joel
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Philadelphia Routledge 04.03.2025; Taylor & Francis Ltd
• Subjects: Botswana; Climate change vulnerability; Correlation; Environmental risk; Environmental stress; Harvest; Households; Livelihood; livelihood sustainability; Low income groups; market access; Natural resources; Poverty; Reliance; risk; rural livelihoods; rural poverty; semi-arid drylands; Southern Africa; Vulnerability; Wealth; Botswana
• ISSN: 0894-1920; 1521-0723; 1521-0723
• DOI: 10.1080/08941920.2024.2440922

Natural resources use exposes households to environmental stressors. But high usage is different than high proportional contribution to livelihood; the degree of reliance is critical for identifying vulnerable households. We contrasted differences between number of resource types harvested and their proportional contribution against wealth and vulnerability indices using 1995 and 2017 household data. In 1995, poorer households collected fewer NR types but had higher proportional contribution, and proportional contribution was positively correlated with vulnerability. In 2017, poorer households collected more NRs, but proportional contribution remained higher but its correlation with vulnerability was unexpectedly negative. By 2017, poorer households sold more NRs. Sale of NRs switched from negative correlation with proportional contribution (1995), to positive (2017). Households are vulnerable through NRs' proportional contribution to livelihood, not through range of NR types harvested. Proportional contribution highlights households at risk from environmental shocks. Market access for sustainably harvested NRs could buffer poor households.