IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v4y2015i1p22-44d44716.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Soil and Water Conservation Strategies in Cape Verde (Cabo Verde in Portuguese) and Their Impacts on Livelihoods: An Overview from the Ribeira Seca Watershed

Author

Listed:
  • Isaurinda Baptista

    (Instituto Nacional de Investigação e Desenvolvimento Agrário (INIDA), CP 84, 7600 Praia, Cape Verde
    Soil Physics and Land Management group, Wageningen University (WUR), 6700 AA Wageningen, The Netherlands)

  • Luuk Fleskens

    (Soil Physics and Land Management group, Wageningen University (WUR), 6700 AA Wageningen, The Netherlands
    Sustainability Research Institute, School of Earth and Environment, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK)

  • Coen Ritsema

    (Soil Physics and Land Management group, Wageningen University (WUR), 6700 AA Wageningen, The Netherlands)

  • António Querido

    (Environment, Energy & Natural Disaster Prevention Unit, Office of United Nations, PO Box 62, 7600 Praia, Cape Verde)

  • Jacques Tavares

    (Instituto Nacional de Investigação e Desenvolvimento Agrário (INIDA), CP 84, 7600 Praia, Cape Verde)

  • António D. Ferreira

    (CERNAS, Escola Superior Agrária de Coimbra, Bencanta, P-3040-316 Coimbra, Portugal)

  • Eduardo A. Reis

    (Instituto Nacional de Investigação e Desenvolvimento Agrário (INIDA), CP 84, 7600 Praia, Cape Verde)

  • Samuel Gomes

    (Instituto Nacional de Investigação e Desenvolvimento Agrário (INIDA), CP 84, 7600 Praia, Cape Verde)

  • Anabela Varela

    (Direcção geral de Agricultura e Desenvolvimento Rural (DGADR/DSER), CP 115, 7600 Praia, Cape Verde)

Abstract

Severe land degradation has strongly affected both people’s livelihood and the environment in Cape Verde (Cabo Verde in Portuguese), a natural resource poor country. Despite the enormous investment in soil and water conservation measures (SWC or SLM), which are visible throughout the landscape, and the recognition of their benefits, their biophysical and socioeconomic impacts have been poorly assessed and scientifically documented. This paper contributes to filling this gap, by bringing together insights from literature and policy review, field survey and participatory assessment in the Ribeira Seca Watershed through a concerted approach devised by the DESIRE project (the “Desire approach”). Specifically, we analyze government strategies towards building resilience against the harsh conditions, analyze the state of land degradation and its drivers, survey and map the existing SWC measures, and assess their effectiveness against land degradation, on crop yield and people’s livelihood. We infer that the relative success of Cape Verde in tackling desertification and rural poverty owes to an integrated governance strategy that comprises raising awareness, institutional framework development, financial resource allocation, capacity building, and active participation of rural communities. We recommend that specific, scientific-based monitoring and assessment studies be carried out on the biophysical and socioeconomic impact of SLM and that the “Desire approach” be scaled-up to other watersheds in the country.

Suggested Citation

  • Isaurinda Baptista & Luuk Fleskens & Coen Ritsema & António Querido & Jacques Tavares & António D. Ferreira & Eduardo A. Reis & Samuel Gomes & Anabela Varela, 2015. "Soil and Water Conservation Strategies in Cape Verde (Cabo Verde in Portuguese) and Their Impacts on Livelihoods: An Overview from the Ribeira Seca Watershed," Land, MDPI, vol. 4(1), pages 1-23, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:4:y:2015:i:1:p:22-44:d:44716
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/4/1/22/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/4/1/22/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pretty, Jules N., 1995. "Participatory learning for sustainable agriculture," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 23(8), pages 1247-1263, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kazadi, Kande & Lievens, Annouk & Mahr, Dominik, 2016. "Stakeholder co-creation during the innovation process: Identifying capabilities for knowledge creation among multiple stakeholders," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 525-540.
    2. Phélinas, Pascale & Choumert, Johanna, 2017. "Is GM Soybean Cultivation in Argentina Sustainable?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 452-462.
    3. Silvia Scaramuzzi & Sara Gabellini & Giovanni Belletti & Andrea Marescotti, 2021. "Agrobiodiversity-Oriented Food Systems between Public Policies and Private Action: A Socio-Ecological Model for Sustainable Territorial Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-32, November.
    4. Yuichiro Amekawa & Surat Hongsibsong & Nootchakarn Sawarng & Sumeth Yadoung & Girma Gezimu Gebre, 2021. "Producers’ Perceptions of Public Good Agricultural Practices Standard and Their Pesticide Use: The Case of Q-GAP for Cabbage Farming in Chiang Mai Province, Thailand," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-25, June.
    5. Barbara Quimby & Arielle Levine, 2018. "Participation, Power, and Equity: Examining Three Key Social Dimensions of Fisheries Comanagement," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-20, September.
    6. Saifi, Basim & Drake, Lars, 2008. "A coevolutionary model for promoting agricultural sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 24-34, March.
    7. Kabiri, Ngeta, 2016. "Public participation, land use and climate change governance in Thailand," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 511-517.
    8. Vatn, Arild & Kajembe, George & Mosi, Elvis & Nantongo, Maria & Silayo, Dos Santos, 2017. "What does it take to institute REDD+? An analysis of the Kilosa REDD+ pilot, Tanzania," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 1-9.
    9. repec:cep:sticas:/184 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Krystyna Kurowska & Renata Marks-Bielska & Stanisław Bielski & Audrius Aleknavičius & Cezary Kowalczyk, 2020. "Geographic Information Systems and the Sustainable Development of Rural Areas," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-18, December.
    11. Sarah White & Jethro Pettit, 2004. "Participatory Approaches and the Measurement of Human Well-being," WIDER Working Paper Series RP2004-57, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    12. So Pyay Thar & Thiagarajah Ramilan & Robert J. Farquharson & Deli Chen, 2021. "Identifying Potential for Decision Support Tools through Farm Systems Typology Analysis Coupled with Participatory Research: A Case for Smallholder Farmers in Myanmar," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-20, June.
    13. Hugh Ward & Aletta Norval & Todd Landman & Jules Pretty, 2003. "Open Citizens’ Juries and the Politics of Sustainability," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 51(2), pages 282-299, June.
    14. Wheeler, Sarah Ann, 2008. "What influences agricultural professionals' views towards organic agriculture?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 145-154, March.
    15. Hubeau, Marianne & Marchand, Fleur & Coteur, Ine & Mondelaers, Koen & Debruyne, Lies & Van Huylenbroeck, Guido, 2017. "A new agri-food systems sustainability approach to identify shared transformation pathways towards sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 52-63.
    16. Cécile Barnaud & Annemarie van Paassen, 2013. "Equity, power games, and legitimacy: dilemmas of participatory natural resource management," Post-Print hal-01386409, HAL.
    17. Tacconi, Luca, 1997. "An ecological economic approach to forest and biodiversity conservation: The case of vanuatu," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 25(12), pages 1995-2008, December.
    18. Patrizia Isabelle Duda & Ilan Kelman & Navonel Glick, 2020. "Informal Disaster Governance," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(4), pages 375-385.
    19. Johnson, A.F. & Kleiber, D. & Gomese, C. & Sukulu, M. & Saeni-Oeta, J. & Giron-Nava, A. & Cohen, P.J. & McDougall, C., 2021. "Assessing inclusion in community-based resource management: A framework and methodology," Monographs, The WorldFish Center, number 40982, April.
    20. Tanzi Smith, 2011. "Using critical systems thinking to foster an integrated approach to sustainability: a proposal for development practitioners," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 1-17, February.
    21. Sébastien MARCHAND & Huanxiu GUO, 2013. "Is participatory social learning a performance driver for Chinese smallholder farmers?," Working Papers 201318, CERDI.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:4:y:2015:i:1:p:22-44:d:44716. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.