Survival- versus opportunity-driven environmental reliance: Evidence from Uganda

We investigate whether environmental reliance can be better understood if household categories are identified based on their level of reliance rather than the prevalent approaches based on what they earn (total household income) or own (assets). We conduct quantile regressions of environmental income and reliance (measured as the share of total household income from the environment) on different household and contextual variables, using a sample of 268 households from Hoima and Kibale districts in Uganda. We hypothesize that environmental reliance for the most reliant is a ‘survival-led’ coping mechanism resulting from low asset levels, while environmental reliance for the least reliant is ‘opportunity-led’, induced by the ease of access to environmental products and markets. The analysis shows that the most environmentally reliant households are driven by necessity, particularly low levels of agricultural farmland and other household assets, supporting the first hypothesis. We do not find strong evidence, however, for the second hypothesis, namely that market proximity induces the least reliant (and generally more asset-rich) households to increase their environmental income. We suggest that environmental policy interventions should be differentiated. In areas where environmental income is a major source of livelihood, law enforcement programs that regulate environmental extraction need to be complemented with alternative income sources. Small farm size is a major push factor into environmental reliance, hence enhancing land productivity and farm income is a potential policy towards the most reliant households. Farm size had no significant effect on environmental reliance among the least reliant households, while higher off-farm income is associated with less environmental reliance.