An Ounce of Prevention Worth a Pound of Cure? Not for Poverty and Conservation

School children enjoy working in their school's vegetable garden in Ecuador's Tungurahua Province.  Photo: © Erika Nortemann/TNC

School children enjoy working in their school’s vegetable garden in Ecuador’s Tungurahua Province. Photo: © Erika Nortemann/TNC

By Craig Leisher, Senior Social Scientist

Grant me the indulgence of assuming that conservation should be concerned about poverty.

While not everyone will agree with poverty’s importance to conservation, most are aware that many of the people where nature is richest are poor, and if conservation activities fail to provide benefits to local people, the activities are unlikely to be sustained by the local people once a conservation project ends.

When a conservation project focuses on “poverty,” should it focus on poverty reduction, poverty prevention, or both?

I argue that we should focus on poverty reduction wherever the natural resources are heavily degraded…and poverty prevention wherever they are not.

Why? Because poverty reduction and poverty prevention are a continuum that looks something like this:

Income –>——————————————–I——————————————————–>

Poverty Reduction                                             Poverty Line                                  Poverty Prevention

Poverty is reduced until a person is above the poverty line; the emphasis then shifts to poverty prevention.

Reduction generates new economic activity and wealth and moves the country forward. Prevention guards against drops in economic activity, provides insurance against losing existing wealth, and keeps a country from falling back economically.

Giving poor people the opportunities to move themselves out of poverty has greater medium- and long-term benefits to a country’s economic well-being than does preventing people from falling back into poverty.

The poor also need the help more than the non-poor. Poverty tends to be intergenerational, making it much harder to move someone out of poverty for the first time than move them out of poverty after a relapse.

For conservation, it’s not about deciding whether to focus on reduction or prevention, but about how the conservation opportunities in a particular site might benefit those in poverty.

Whether a conservation project reduces or prevents poverty depends largely on the state of the natural resources at the project site. If a fishery or grassland is degraded, for example, restoring its productivity may help reduce local poverty. If a forest or watershed is largely intact, there is little scope for poverty reduction, but much scope for poverty prevention.

The more degraded the natural resource and the higher the dependence of local people on this resources, the greater the benefits are from restoration.

Conservation challenges are often poverty reduction opportunities! It’s the rare case where the proverbial ounce of prevention is not worth a pound of cure.

Opinions expressed on Cool Green Science and in any corresponding comments are the personal opinions of the original authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Nature Conservancy.

Posted In: Human Well-Being

Craig Leisher is Senior Advisor on Conservation and Poverty Issues. He works to build a better understanding of how conservation initiatives generate tangible benefits to people and nature.



Comments: An Ounce of Prevention Worth a Pound of Cure? Not for Poverty and Conservation

  •  Comment from Jeannie Patton

    A few years ago, I assisted editor Kathryn Mutz in the final stages of publishing the book _Justice and Natural Resources: Concepts, Strategies, and Applications. It’s a fine reference book as the dialoge concerning environment and poverty continues. http://islandpress.org/ip/books/book/islandpress/J/bo3558895.html

 Make a comment




Comment

Featured Content

Osprey Cam: Watch Our Wild Neighbors
Watch the ospreys live 24/7 as they nest and raise their young -- and learn more about these fascinating birds from our scientist.

What is Cool Green Science?

noun 1. Blog where Nature Conservancy scientists, science writers and external experts discuss and debate how conservation can meet the challenges of a 9 billion + planet.

2. Blog with astonishing photos, videos and dispatches of Nature Conservancy science in the field.

3. Home of Weird Nature, The Cooler, Quick Study, Traveling Naturalist and other amazing features.

Cool Green Science is managed by Matt Miller, the Conservancy's deputy director for science communications at the Conservancy, and edited by Bob Lalasz, its director of science communications. Email us your feedback.

Editors’ Choice

Where Have The Monarchs Gone?
Monarch butterflies are disappearing. What's going on? Is there anything we can do about it?

North America's Greatest Bird Spectacle?
The Platte River is alive with 500,000 sandhill cranes. Learn how you can catch the action--even from your computer.

The Strangest Wildlife Rescue?
Meet the animal that was saved from extinction because someone broke a wildlife law.

Latest Tweets from @nature_brains

Categories