Explore the vast range of titles available.

For policy purposes, it is important to understand the relative efficacy of various methods to target the poor. Recently, participatory methods have received particular attention. We examine the effectiveness of a hybrid two-step process that combines a participatory wealth ranking and a verification household survey, relative to two proxy means tests (the Progress out of Poverty Index and a housing index), in Honduras and Peru. The methods we examine perform similarly by various metrics. They all identify most accurately the poorest and the wealthiest households but perform with mixed results among households in the middle of the distribution. Ultimately, given similar performance, the analysis suggests that costs should be the driving consideration in choosing across methods.

In this paper I describe the influence of community-based forest management (CBFM) on the well-being of local stakeholders in eight Tanzanian villages. The justification for this focus is based on the broad, international support for CBFM, support for its expansion within Tanzania specifically, and foundational belief that CBFM has the potential to provide significant social benefits to the communities in which it is practiced. Using a participatory video process, I developed a questionnaire to help quantify and qualify changes in aspects of well-being over a 10-year period, 2005–2015. These changes were based on individual responses but reflected changes in larger household units. Individuals given the questionnaire were selected following a wealth ranking process in which households were assigned, by a subselection of their community, a wealth category. This process also helped to identify current leaders and female-headed households in each village, groups that have been demonstrated to disproportionately benefit or bear the cost of other interventions. Households’ wealth categories were found to be largely stable, with most remaining in the wealth category assigned in 2005 to 2015 with no significant difference between villages with or without CBFM. In contrast, current leaders were found to be more likely to increase in wealth and female-headed households, more likely to decrease. Two significant differences in CBFM and non-CBFM villages are reported: greater food insecurity and better water access in areas with CBFM. Focal group discussions of these results challenged the relevance of CBFM presence-absence in driving such findings, revealing a strong narrative of community-level support for CBFM by local stakeholders defined by greater control of their forest (and an ability to exclude outsiders), regular access to forest products, and pride in recognition for their conservation efforts (by other villages and the state).

The paper aimed to categorize individual farmers and households from wealthy to poor through the use of wealth ranking exercises and discussion with knowledgeable farmers, to know the impact of adopting new seeds varieties on productivity, incomes and livelihoods, at household level. It also aims at building up a picture of the innovative household and the effect of individual and combination of innovations he/she has had. This Study is based on qualitative research undertaken in the period from March to May 2014. Participatory research tools included wealth ranking, Participatory Farm Management (PFM) methods and participatory budget. Elgadaref State (rain fed area) and Khartoum State (irrigated area) were selected as the two lactations of the study and in each location one village was selected namely: Wadramli village in Khartoum State and Kassab village in Elgadaref State. Imported improved potato was selected to be the improved seed variety in Khartoum state and new variety of sesame was selected in Elgadaref state. There are many farmers shifting between the wealth categories because of using improved seeds varieties as planting material. The use of improved seeds varieties has the same positive impact on the productivity and income of the different farmers' wealth categories. The differences in benefits from improved seeds between different farmers' wealth categories and between male and female farmers come from variation in land size and assets ownership. Farmers with more land and resources are the winners.