J. People Plants Environ Search

CLOSE


J. People Plants Environ > Volume 27(4); 2024 > Article
Aliyar, Lee, Salimath, and Lee: Influence of Social Capital on the Poverty Reduction of Rangeland Communities in the Bamyan Province, Afghanistan

ABSTRACT

Background and objective: This study investigates the contribution of social capital on the poverty alleviation of rangeland agropastoral communities who are based on agriculture and the rearing of livestock in the Bamyan province of Afghanistan.
Methods: Data was collected through a field survey from the randomly selected 186 households in three rangeland villages in the Bamyan Province, Afghanistan. The relationship between social capital and household poverty was analyzed using a binary logistic regression and correlation analysis.
Results: Poor households (.728) were found to have lower social capital than non-poor households (.782). People who live in the Shah Foladi protected area (.687) have lower social capital than those of the Band-E-Amir national park area (0.800). Respondents with a government tenure (.801) were more likely to have higher social capital than those with a public tenure (.608).
Conclusion: In this study, social capital has a significant impact on alleviating the poverty of rangeland households in Afghanistan. To address the poverty issue of forest dependents, the local level strategy of community development programs should target rangeland communities to build up their social capital for supporting forest tenures and benefit sharing among marginalized people.

Introduction

Recognizing the role of the community in natural resource management, social capital gains a support in explaining collective action by lowering transaction costs and inhibiting free-riding in natural resource management (Ostrom, 1994). Recently, social capital is regarded as a determinant of successful community-centered natural resource management for the sustainability of natural ecosystems and society (Lee et al., 2017). Previous studies also show that social capital contributes to establishing sustainable natural resource management and eventually the poverty reduction of a society (Lee et al., 2017; Grootaert et al., 2002).
Although its definition varies among scholars, social capital is generally known as an intangible capital. It has the characteristics of public goods formed by relationships (networks), such as trust and cooperation, which promote cooperation among economic actors and reduce transaction costs to facilitate economic activities while creating positive externality within a community (Jeong and Kim, 2019). Zack and Knack (2001) suggested that rich social capital not only reduces social costs but also improves economic indicators, including GDP. Social capital has attracted attention as an important factor in achieving national competitiveness, social stability, and household welfare (Grootaert et al., 2002).
Previous studies found evidences on the effects of social capital for reducing the poverty of local community in developing countries (Morris, 1998; Narayan, 1999). These studies determine the importance of social capital in regional development by measuring it in developing countries such as Uganda, Indonesia, Bolivia, and Pakistan. (Narayan and Pritchett, 2000; Grootaert and Narayan, 2004; Ahmad et al., 2012; Lee et al., 2017). Despite the growing awareness on the subject, in the field of forest cooperation, few studies have systematically measured social capital. To improve the livelihood of local community in Afghanistan, policy makers take not only traditional forestry activities, but also social factors that are essential to community development into account (e.g., community engagement, social norms, and resident collaboration). Thus far, rangeland development programs considered social factors as secondary (USAID, 2011). Furthermore, there has been virtually no research on community development programs that quantifies the social capital of Afghanistan, although the region has a high rate of forest conversion and degradation as well as great potential to reduce carbon emissions.
The objective of this study is to develop a model that measures social capital, considering the mechanism of rangeland management activities in the Afghanistan’s community, and discuss social capital’s effects on rural poverty reduction and rangeland conservation. Specifically, it examines social capital’s influence on poverty among residents and measured social capital to clarify its importance. The study demonstrates the need to build social capital while suggesting strategies and plans for rangeland conservation programs and presents methods to estimate the effect of social capital on poverty alleviation.

Role of Rangelands and Forests in Afghanistan

Rangeland in the most part of the globe has economic (Knight, 2007), environmental, and cultural values (McLeod, 2011; Cameron et al., 2014). About 5-billion-hectare rangeland cover (Joshi et al., 2013) support 1 to 2 billion people (Sayre et al., 2013; Hoekstra et al., 2005). Variant product of rangeland is providing wildlife habitat (Christensen et al., 2008; Hobbs et al., 2008), water supply (Havstad et al., 2007), carbon sequestration (Derner and Schuman 2007; Henderson et al., 2015), forage and fodder, storage of precipitation, decrease water flow, declining drought impact, and goods and various ecosystem services (Joshi et al., 2013). Australia continent is prevailing by rangeland, both arid and semi-arid rangeland cover 70%, compose 25% of landscape of earth and have a backing of more than 20 million people’s subsistence (Chen and Gillieson, 2009). Climate variability, global warming, land degradation and carbon cycle can cause change vegetation cover, terrestrial ecosystem and environmental activity (Liu and Kafatos, 2005; Mansour et al., 2012). The native grazing land as Savanna and grassland has been decreased from 3,200 million ha to 1,700–2,700 million ha in 1990, globally (Lambin et al., 2003). The great economic value of rangeland and rainforest support millions of people’s livelihood and provide mankind’s good and services in developing countries. Both ecosystems encompass medicinal crops, timber, pasture crops, recreational opportunities and rangeland ecosystem is major source of rearing livestock and animal’s food product as food, milk and blood, manure product such as fuel and fertilizer, wool, hides (Williams and Allred, 1968; Mannetje, 2013). Rangeland is occupying 65% of total of land five Central Asian countries i.e. Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan (Gintzburger, 2005), grazed land is the main source of subsistence’s pastoral and agro-pastoral communities (Mirzabaev et al., 2016). Grazing supports feeding animal husbandry, that provide 25–40% meat production, 30% milk production of small ruminant, 22% beef production in Latin America and 55% in Oceania (Boone et al., 2018).
The rangeland cover of Hindu Kush Himalaya (HKH) of Afghanistan, Bhutan, India, China, Nepal and Pakistan contains 54% of 4.2 million km2 HKH region, and those lands are used as the main source of livelihood for mountain communities through agroforestry practices (Zakharenka and Rasuli, 2018). Rangelands have a usefulness for rearing animal husbandry during warm season, as fodder on cold season and fuel wood whole of year mostly in rural areas of Afghanistan (Ali and Shaoliang, 2013). Afghanistan’s land surface predominant by rangeland ecosystem (Bedunah et al., 2010), encompassing 60 to 75% of 63,000,000 ha land territory (Robinett et al., 2008; Ali and Shaoliang, 2013), and various services such as firewood, building material, medicinal crops, wildlife habitat and livestock products is supplying by grazing ecosystem (Stanfield et al., 2008; Miller, 2012). Rangeland regulates water resources, nourishes approximately 4 million ha irrigated land, and also nomadic and rural communities’ livelihood entirely or partially depending on rangeland (Ismail et al., 2009). Bamyan is a mountainous province that is hotbed of great ecological conditions with various vegetation types. Rangeland vegetation exhibiting rich biodiversity provides economic value to residents, ecological and culture services to native dwellers and tourists.
Rangelands and forests support Afghanistan’s rural economy by providing essential resources, including forage, water, fuel, timber, and non-timber forest products, whereas those rangelands in Afghanistan are not managed well and degraded (Zakharenka and Rasuli, 2018). Degraded rangelands can be rehabilitated either by grazing management or plantation of drought tolerant fodder species with suitable technologies and sites. A long-time conflict and turmoil in Afghanistan since the early 1970s have caused loss of life, insecurity, poverty, ethnic division, and damage to the environment and natural resources, which contributes to the livelihoods of most Afghanistan rural population. The rate of poverty have dramatically risen from 38 % (2011–2012) to 55 % (2016–2017) in Afghanistan. In particular, most people in rangeland areas are poor, and have the lowest per-capita consumption (Zakharenka and Rasuli, 2018).
Sustainable management of rangeland natural resources get a priority for the Government of Afghanistan and is an integral part of its poverty reduction and sustainable development. Because rangeland degradation is caused by socio-economic factors, rangeland management is deeply associated with national development programs, such as private sector development, justice sector reform, agriculture development, mineral and resource development, and human capital development (Roudgarmi, 2013). A well-designed rangeland policy and implementation strategies are necessary for conservation and utilization of the rangeland resources with a sustainable manner (Ahmad et al., 2012).

Research Methods

Study area

Bamyan province is located in the central of Afghanistan, with Hindu Kush throughout Afghanistan (Fig. 1), lies on 33.91° to 35.48° N latitude, 66.28° to 68.28°E longitude and covers 180,292 square kilometers. Eight provinces sieged Bamyan province; Samangan in the North, Baghlan in the northeast, Sari-Pul in the northwest, Parvan and Wardak in the east, Ghor in the West, Daykundi in the southwest and Ghazni in the southeast. The province is separated into 8 districts, and Bamyan town is the center of Bamyan province. Bamyan center and Yakawlang with ancient heritage and beauty landscapes attract tourists during warm seasons, and hotbeds of rich natural resources are the first priorities for researchers and scholars. Topographically, Bamyan with high mountains experienced harsh winter and warm and arid season in summer (Cook, 2011), and mountain covered 93.7% area (77.5% mountainous region and 16.1% area is semi mountainous) is used as rangeland, the 14% area suitable for cultivation with mild slopes (MRRD, 2013; Mohibbi, 2018).
Mostly, the annual income of residents is under 500 USD per capita, and approximately 90% of the population live in rural areas, where they are engaged in agriculture and agroforestry (e.g., agro-pastoralists). Dwellers are obtaining their revenues both agriculture and animal husbandry, and agriculture in Bamyan province is prevailing in traditionally with lowest productivity among other provinces of Afghanistan. Based on demand market values of animals’ production, the livestock rearing has been raising, resulting in the farmers alter cultivation farm into the pasture and rangeland is being degraded due to overgrazing and collected fuel wood in both study areas. The study was conducted in Band-E-Amir National Park (BANP) and Shah Foladi protected areas.
Band-E-Amir National Park (BANP) is located in Yakawlang district (Fig. 1), is sieged by beauty perspective were known first National Park by government of Afghanistan in 2009. Vegetation cover spread in the whole area of BANP, and most subsistence of residents was agro-pastoralists (Mohibbi and Cochard, 2014). BANP covers 61,330 ha, 55 km west of Bmayan town (BAPAC, 2011). The characterized flora of BANP rely on high altitude steppe plains and deserts (Shank and Larsson, 1977). The vegetation cover mainly is predominant by Acantholimon Spp., Artemisia Spp., Cousinia Spp (MAIL, 2008; Shank and Larsson, 1977)., Astragalus Spp. and Haloxylon Spp. (Bedunah et al., 2010).
Shah Foladi in central Bamyan province (Fig. 1), located in Hindu Kush with landscape outstanding natural beauty. Shah Foladi covers 700 square kilometer, form parts of Koh-i-Baba, in 2020 was known as a new protected area by the government of Afghanistan (UNEP, 2020). The North and South are separated by Koh-i-Baba mountain range with peak point 5050 m a.s.l. Shah Foladi is glaciated landscape area, glaciated lake, Pyramid peaks, and U-shaped valleys. The protected area is the most important watershed of Afghanistan that originates Amu Darya River catchment, Balkhab River catchment and Helmand River catchment (Ritchie and Fitzherbert, 2008). Mostly, there is extensive grazing land, desert, semi-desert and Steppe Mountain in the study area. The dominant vegetation cover type is a cushion bush-land with diversity of species of Acantholimon, Artemisia, Astragalus, Cousinia, Ephedra, and Onobrychi in Koh-i-Baba range (Breckle, 2007; Hassanyar, 1995). Rangeland plays a major role in the economic value of Afghanistan (Zakharenka and Rasuli, 2018). Particularly in the Bamyan province, rangeland ecosystem directly supports animal husbandry, wildlife and serves as major biodiversity conservation. The herders and farmers consume animals’ products as milk, yogurt, curt, wool, meat and mostly they sell livestock and provide food for their families. Animal waste is used as fertilizer in the agriculture system. Rural residents used charcoal as fuel wood and heating stove, also they collected the fodder for feeding animals during cold seasons, and collected bush and shrubs are utilized as fuel wood.

Data collection

Band-E-Amir National Park (BANP) in Yakawlang district and Shah Foladi in Bamyan Center were chosen as study areas, purposively due to high reliance on rangeland values (Mohibbi and Cochard, 2014), where steppe vegetation is degraded because of intensive grazing and collected firewood (Mohibbi, 2018). Based on objectives of economic values, rangeland species, pastoral and agro-pastoralist communities were selected as respondents in both study areas. To find out the assessment of rangeland-based economics, a cross-sectional study was conducted by a questionnaire at household level. This study was done in November and December of 2020. According to consultation the Council Development Association (CDA) and lists were prepared, the respondents were selected randomly. A total of respondents was 186 (93 interviewees from BANP and 93 interviewees from Shah Foladi protected area), after excluding missing data and outliers.
According to objectives of research, the semi-structured questionnaire provided reliance on indicators consisting direct values of dominant growing rangeland species, selling animals, selling animals’ products and non-use value of rangeland growing species. These indicators determine target herder-farmers who have attached to rangeland species and livestock rearing and relied on the cover of vegetation. A structured questionnaire was improved and reformed as driver of data collection. Pre-tested questionnaire survey has been done during modification and amendment and raised the validation and dependability. Text of the questionnaire consisted general information (gender, age, education, marital status, occupation, household size and annual income), value of rangeland species and social capital. The questionnaire panel was experts and professors from Seoul National University (SNU) and Yeungnam University of South Korea under Forest Restoration to Enhance Ecosystem Services in Afghanistan (FREESIA) project, fully funded by the government of South Korea. The final structured questionnaires have been used with suggestions and approval of the panel team.

Research variables

The explanatory variables used in this study consist of social capital socioeconomic characteristics, and forest conservation activities (Table 1). Social capital is a multi-dimensional and pluralistic complex entity (So, 2004). The World Bank has developed the Integrated Questionnaire for the Measurement of Social Capital (SC-IQ) to measure the multilateral aspects of social capital (Grootaert and Van Bastelar, 2002; Grootaert et al., 2004). The SC-IQ model is a useful survey tool for microscopic analysis of social capital, targeting individuals or households in the community; furthermore, it is theoretically robust with cases undertaken in various countries (Narayan and Pritchett, 1997; Grootaert, 1999; Diawara, 2013; Ahmad et al., 2012; Lee et al., 2017).
In this study, the four social capital variables comprised network, trust, cooperation, and social inclusion, based on the SC-IQ model (Grootaert et al., 2004). Network was measured by the number of organizations which the respondents belonged to, and the frequency of activities in these meetings and organizations. Trust was measured by the levels of trust on general people and among neighbors. Cooperation was measured by the experiences on collective activities and cooperative attitude of neighbors. Social inclusion was measured by the perceived feeling safe from crime in village and perceived feeling happiness in general days These four social capital indicators were synthesized to measure the total level of social capital. Socioeconomic characteristics were measured by a period of residence in the village, the number of members in a household (HH), education background of HH leader. Rangeland management activities were measured by income of rangeland species, income of livestock rearing, other income sources. The dependent variable was set by a household’s level of poverty represented by household consumption levels, considering the challenge of accurately measuring income levels by household (Grootaert, 1999; Ahmad et al., 2012). The average GDP per capita in Afghanistan was 513.11 USD (183th of the World) in 2019. In this study, households with a daily income below 1.08 USD were categorized as “poor” (World Bank, 2019).

Data Analysis and Measurement

When it comes to measuring a composite index, variables, which are measured in different units, need to be normalized (Jeong and Kim, 2019). Prior to measurement, we normalized those variables to resolve the inconsistency in terms of the unit of measurement and set a value between 0 and 1. An exploratory factor analysis was conducted to verify our model. We used principal component analysis to extract constituent factors, and a Varimax to simplify factor loading. The eigenvalue was over 1.0, and the factor loading was over 0.60. Some measured variables were eliminated through the scale purification process.
Table 2 shows the result of factor analysis of social capital. The total variance explained was 71.14%, and social capital was extracted from four factors: network, trust, cooperation, and social inclusion. We conducted a reliability analysis through sub-factors to examine the precision of the measurement tool, and Cronbach’s alpha (α) to measure reliability. Generally Cronbach’s alpha score 0.4–0.6 is fair, 0.6–0.75 is acceptable, 0.75–1.00 is excellent (Rosner, 2006). The results show that the reliability of exploratory factors such as trust and social inclusion are excellent, and other exploratory factors are also reliable fairly.
For regression analyses, we built a logit regression model to investigate the impact of social capital, socioeconomic characteristics, and rangeland production activities on the poverty of local communities. The logit model links the cause or stimuli of action with the result or response and quantitatively measures the effect of the cause or stimulus in the process of measuring the extent or result of a reaction. This logit model is easy to statistically process and can produce statistically significant results with very few samples. When the reaction has binary results, the binary logit model can be applied (Yu and Lym, 1992). Using the binary logit model, we estimated the parameters of an empirical model (Equation 1), where the dependent variable, poverty, is determined by independent variables such as social capital, education, household size, land tenure, and income from rangelands (Fig. 2) (Grootaert, 1999; Ahmad et al., 2012).
(Equation 1)
P(Y)=a+bSCi+cXi+dZi+u
where:
P(Y) = poverty of household, SCi = social capital, Xi = socioeconomic characteristics by household, Zi= rangeland production activities, μ = error term.

Results and Discussion

Social capital based on general social characteristics

The amount of social capital in the study area was estimated according to socioeconomic characteristics that include residence area, educational background, rangeland income activities, and poverty status (Table 3). Poor households (.728) were found to have lower social capital than non-poor households (.782). This result is in line with the existing theory that the higher the social capital level, the higher the living standard and social stability, confirming a significantly positive relationship between social capital and household income levels (Zack and Knack, 2001).
Also, depending on residential areas, respondents have a significant difference in terms of the level of social capital. People who live in the Shah Foladi protected area (.687) have lower social capital than those of the Band-E-Amir national park area (.800). Regional features and residential places affect the potential transition of communities’ social capital, because social ties or norms formed by organizational activities in the region establish network and trust within the group and enhance social capital levels (Pretty, 2003; Lee et al., 2017).
The type of rangeland tenure has a significant effect on the difference in social capital. Respondents with a government tenure (.801) were more likely to have higher social capital than those with a public tenure (.608), which implies that people with a government tenure may have a strong social capital because they manage their rangeland collectively with a stable and consistent system. On the other hand, people with a public tenure system may not cooperate with each other for managing rangelands due to instable tenure system. The results provide a consistent perspective with Hardin (1974) who suggest that public lands can be devastated with a public ownership, so privatization and government coercion are required to protect and manage those public lands. To maintain the rangeland systems sustainable, government tenure system may work better than public tenure system in the study area.

Social capital and poverty

Social capital contributes to the overall productivity of the economy by reducing transaction costs (Knack and Keefer, 1997; Zak and Knack, 2001; Putnam, 2000; Jeong and Kim, 2019). Higher levels of social capital may lead to lower transaction costs and a more competitive society. Furthermore, with more social capital, countries can achieve higher standards of living and social stability. Based on these hypotheses, we examined the relationships among social capital, household characteristics, rangeland production activities, and poverty, where poverty represent the livelihood of households with the minimum level of income per capita in Afghanistan (i.e., 1$(USD)/day), to identify social capital’s influence on economic activities.
To estimate the impact of social capital on the poverty level of local communities, we conducted a regression analysis using a logit model. Results in Table 4 show that social capital has a negative and statistically significant impact on the poverty of rangeland households, which is consistent with previous studies that suggest that social capital affect the poverty reduction of local communities (Ahmad et al., 2012). The analysis on marginal effects of social capital revealed that a unit increase in the social capital of local households reduce the likelihood of poverty by 6%. This indicates that those who participate more in community activities and have more neighbors to rely on are less likely to be poor.
The number of household members showed a positive relationship with poverty at a statistically significant level. The number of household members is highly associated with poverty in most developing countries, as noted in previous studies (Grootaert, 1999). Because Afghanistan has a limited social infrastructure such as education and public health, a policy for population control may help to enhance the social cohesion by moving from a family-centered community to a society-centered community. As a result, the society works efficiently for managing rangelands and generating incomes, which helps to eliminate the severe poverty of communities.
Rangeland income sources have a statistically significant impact on poverty, and marginal effects analysis reveals that an increase of rangeland income affects more likely to be under poverty. These results indicate socially marginalized poor people, with no means of income, such as from agriculture, or without any agricultural land in the Afghanistan more likely to visit rangelands to collect non-timber forest products or utilize them. However, relative to livestock income, rangeland income has limited effects in generating income and contributes on keeping people’s livelihood just above subsistence level. Agroforestry practices may provide an alternative way to enhance the increase capacity of rangeland dwellers, while rangelands and their species are managed sustainably, because agroforestry provides a system whereby a deliberate attempt is made to integrate and manage both rangelands and livestock resources on the same landscape (Kiyani et al., 2017).
When it comes to the effects of poverty alleviation, the income contribution of rangeland species income, livestock management and livestock products on poverty showed a small impact relative to socio-economic factors such as social capital, education, and household size. The result implies that the effect of direct income-generation activities may be limited, and the contribution of improving rangeland management and developing new income sources is not enough in achieving poverty reduction. Community development programs should pay more attention on improving social connection, education program, birth control programs, while the program provides other income generating opportunities through its community driven rangeland management policies in Afghanistan.

Conclusion

This study quantitatively estimated the impact of social capital on poverty levels of local dwellers who rely on rangelands and their products. In particular, this study clarifies the importance of social capital in achieving the poverty alleviation of local agropastoral communities in the Bamyan province, Afghanistan, and demonstrates the need to account for social capital when establishing strategies and plans for a community development program in the rangeland area of Afghanistan. Through this study, we also developed a tool to measure social capital, considering rangeland conservation activities, built on the World Bank’s SC-IQ model and quantitatively analyzed the impact of social capital on poverty levels in Afghanistan. We found that social capital has a significant and positive effect on poverty reduction, which implies that investment in social capital from the government or international organization may help alleviate poverty, and eventually mitigate the degradation of rangelands and contribute to managing them sustainably.
In Afghanistan prolonged conflict and internal wars have increased the severity of poverty and damage to the environment and natural resources, contributing to rural Afghanistan livelihoods, in particular, for the communities of rangelands. Poor people have higher unemployment and under-employment levels and are more likely to work in agriculture or agroforestry in the rangelands. The poorest of the poor have very limited access to the monetary economy and are greatly dependent on available natural resources. Because social capital helps escaping from poverty, it is suggested for the poor to invest time in social relationships and memberships in associations to build network, trust, cooperation, and social inclusion. The finding of this study is consistent with previous studies that indicate that memberships in local associations contribute to higher household welfare levels and to reducing the probability to be poor (reference). Also, returns to social capital are higher for households in the lower class of the distribution (Grootaert et al., 2002). However, in the study area, opportunities for memberships and social relationships can be limited by the given situation of rangeland areas where people live with a certain distance from other households. Promoting membership opportunities and local association is thus a valuable ingredient of poverty alleviation policy in Afghanistan.
This study shows that social capital has a strong correlation with the poverty alleviation of rangeland agropastoral communities, and households in a community with a high level of social capital are less likely to stay under the poverty line. Social capital is differentiated with the level of individual human capital because social capital can be built upon a local community. In rural communities, people can overcome a desperate situation in case of shocks when they actively exchange their knowledge, experience, and fund, which thus build a resilient society (Beekman et al., 2009) Also, people in resilient communities, are likely to escape from poverty relative to communities with a low level of social capital because community can provide multiple opportunities to utilize the established social capital for improving individual’s economic potential such as employment and business.
In this study, we only focus on the effect of social capital on the poverty alleviation of rural communities in the rangeland area of Afghanistan. However, the resilience of a community relies on the all kinds of capital in the community, including environmental capital (ecological resilience), structural capital and commercial capital (economical resilience) and human capital, social capital, and cultural capital (social resilience), because resilient communities can be defined as those who are able to absorb or adapt quickly to change and crisis (Callaghan and Colton, 2008; Beekman et al., 2009). Thus, the sustainable development of rural communities depends not just on social resilience, but also ecological resilience and economical resilience. Although the social capital has a critical importance in rural communities, other types of capitals need to be taken into account in order to achieve the sustainable development of rangeland communities in Afghanistan. These issues remain unexplored for future studies.
Afghanistan has been a traditionally agrarian country. Agriculture accounts for about 25 % of the GDP, but its contribution has been steadily declining from over 40 % of the GDP, but its contribution has been steadily declining from over 40 % in the early 2000s with increasing share of services and reconstruction in the economy. Agriculture also employs about 40 % of the national taskforce and offers additional potential for job creation, prospects for raising labor productivity, opportunities for benefitting women, the poor, the landless, and nomads, along with contributing to reducing poverty and food insecurity in rural areas. However, food insecurity affects 45 % of the population, an increase from 30 % in 2011–12. Factors affecting food production include climate change and related droughts and floods, expanding desertification, population growth and migration of displaced people, in addition to poverty and poor management of rangelands and forests.
Rangelands with various types of ecosystems allow to conduct agroforestry practices that combine forestry, agriculture, and livestock management. These kinds of economic activities on rangelands may help to achieve UN sustainable development goals (SDGs), including SDG1 (no poverty), SDG2 (zero hunger), SDG3 (good health and well-being), SDG5 (gender equality), SDG6 (clean water and sanitation), SDG7 (affordable and clean energy), SDG12 (responsible consumption and production), SDG13 (climate change), and SDG15 (life on land) (Buttoud, 2013; Amadu et al., 2020). While communities utilize their resources and capital efficiently to achieve those SDGs, unfortunately, the amount of available resources are limited in the rangeland of Afghanistan. Thus, social capital has a critical importance in the rural societies of Afghanistan. Our study suggests that policy-makers may focus on the establishment of social capital when they develop a new community development program that pursues the enhancement of capacity-building and livelihood of local people in rangeland areas.

Fig. 1
Study area.
ksppe-2024-27-4-329f1.jpg
Fig. 2
Research framework.
ksppe-2024-27-4-329f2.jpg
Table 1
Research variables
Variable Measurement indicators Category Mean S.D.
Poverty (Y) Daily income lower than 1.08$ Poor: 132HH
Non-poor: 54HH
Social capital (X1) Average score of Network, Trust, Cooperation, Social inclusion Normalized score (0–1) 0.74 0.15
Network (X1.1) a. Number of participating groups
b. Participation in groups
Normalized score (0–1) 0.50 0.22
Trust (X1.2) a. Help each other in a village
b. Trust on government officials
Normalized score (0–1) 0.75 0.21
Cooperation (X1.3) a. Participation in communal activities
b. Cooperation on rangeland problem
Normalized score (0–1) 0.81 0.26
Social inclusion (X1.4) a. Perceived safety in a village
b. Perceived happiness
Normalized score (0–1) 0.90 0.22
Range land Income source (X2) Total income from Range land USD ($) 1,687 1,592
Range land species income (X2.1) Direct Income from range species USD ($) 25 62
Livestock income (X2.2) Income from rearing livestock USD ($) 767 722
Livestock product income (X2.3) Income from livestock Products USD ($) 38 87
Other income (X2.4) Other indirect income USD ($) 17 80
Education (X3.1) Level of education received Likert 1–5 1.66 1.0
Household size (X3.2) Number of household members Persons 7.11 2.27
Table 2
Results of exploratory factor analysis
‘Factor Component Reliability analysis

1 2 3 4 Communal Cronbach’s α
Network 1 .855 .787 .53
Network 2 .764 .718

Trust 1 .891 .832 .80
Trust 2 .875 .822

Cooperation 1 .923 .890 .60
Cooperation 2 .568 .654

Social inclusion 1 .861 .826 .83
Social inclusion 2 .831 .781

Eigen-value 1.943 1.713 1.394 1.261
Table 3
Level of social capital by household characteristics
Household characteristics Response N Average SD Coefficient
Poverty Poor 132 .728 .162 .030**
Non-poor 54 .782 .129

Gender Male 173 .752 .143 .007***
Female 13 .632 .242

Residential areas SFPA 93 .687 .184 .000***
BANP 93 .800 .087

Working on agriculture Yes 162 .741 .158 .537
No 24 .762 .131

Rearing livestock Yes 146 .730 .163 .024**
No 40 .792 .107

Types of rangeland tenure Public 100 .695 .184 .000***
Gov. 85 .801 .080

Main occupation Farming 172 .739 .157 .180
Off-farming 14 .797 .102

Total 186 .743 .154
Table 4
Effects of social capital and socio-economic characteristics on poverty
Variable Model 1 Model 2 Model 3



Coef. Z Coef. Z Coef. Z
Social capital −2.754 −2.15** −2.932 −2.21** −2.862 −1.70*
Range land species income −.005 −1.88** −.002 −.62
Livestock income −.002 −5.11***
Livestock products income −.003 −.94
Other income .001 .41
Education −.447 −2.21**
Household size .597 4.77***
Constant 2.979 3.248 1.723

 No. of observations 186 186 186
 Log Likelihood −109.34 −107.59 −73.92
 Pseudo R2 0.0242 0.0398 0.3403

*,**,*** Significance at p ≤ .1, .05, or .01.

References

Ahmad, S., M. Islam, S. N. Mirza. 2012. Rangeland degradation and management approaches in Balochistan, Pakistan. Pakistan Journal of Botany. 44:127-136.

Ali, A., Y. Shaoliang. 2013. Highland rangelands of Afghanistan: Significance, management issues, and strategies. High-altitude rangelands and their interfaces in the Hindu Kush Himalayas (pp. 15Kathmandu, Nepal: ICIMOD.

Amadu, F. O., D. C. Miller, P. E. McNamara. 2020. Agroforestry as a pathway to agricultural yield impacts in climate-smart agriculture investments: Evidence from southern Malawi. Ecological Economics. 167:106443. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.106443
crossref
BAPAC. 2011. Band-e-Amir National Park Management Plan: 1390–1394 Band-e Amir Protected Area Committee (BAPAC), Ministry of Agriculture, Irrigation, and Livestock (MAIL), National Environmental Protection Agency (NEPA). Kabul, Afghanistan:

Bedunah, D. J., C. C. Shank, M. A. Alavi. 2010. Rangelands of Band-e-Amir National Park and Ajar Provisional Wildlife Reserve, Afghanistan. Rangelands. 32(5):41-52. https://doi.org/10.2111/RANGELANDS-D-10-00044.1
crossref
Beekman, G., M. van der Heide, W. J. Heijman, M. A. Schouten. 2009. Social capital and resilience in rural areas: responses to change Wageningen, the Netherlands: Mansholt Graduate School.

Boone, R. B., R. T. Conant, J. Sircely, P. K. Thornton, M. Herrero. 2018. Climate change impacts on selected global rangeland ecosystem services. Global Change Biology. 24(3):1382-1393. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13995
crossref pmid
Breckle, S. W. 2007. Flora and vegetation of Afghanistan. Basic and Applied Dryland Research. 1(2):155-194.
crossref
Buttoud, G. 2013. Advancing agroforestry on the policy agenda: a guide for decision-makers FAO. Roma, Italia:

Callaghan, E. G., J. Colton. 2008. Building sustainable & resilient communities: a balancing of community capital. Environment, Development and Sustainability. 10(931):942. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-007-9093-4
crossref
Cameron, D. R., J. Marty, R. F. Holland. 2014. Whither the rangeland?: Protection and conversion in California’s rangeland ecosystems. PLoS One. 9(8):e103468. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0103468
crossref pmid pmc
Chen, Y., D. Gillieson. 2009. Evaluation of Landsat TM vegetation indices for estimating vegetation cover on semi-arid rangelands: a case study from Australia. Canadian Journal of Remote Sensing. 35(5):435-446. https://doi.org/10.5589/m09-037
crossref
Christensen, G. A., S. J. Campbell, J. S. Fried, D. L. Azuma. 2008. California’s forest resources, 2001–2005: Five-year forest inventory and analysis report 763:US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station.

Cook, D. E. 2011. Bamiyan Province climatology and temperature extremes in Afghanistan Defence Technology Agency.

Derner, J. D., G. E. Schuman. 2007. Carbon sequestration and rangelands: a synthesis of land management and precipitation effects. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation. 62(2):77-85.

Diawara, B., S. Chikayoshi, K. Hanson. 2013. Social capital and poverty reduction: Empirical evidence from Senegal. Review Of Applied Socio-Economic Research. 6(2):41-74.

Gintzburger, G. 2005. Agriculture and rangelands in Middle Asian countries. In: Ryan J., Vlek P., Paroda R., (Eds), Agriculture in Central Asia: Research for Development Syria: International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA). (pp. 154-175).

Grootaert, C. 1999. Social capital, household welfare and poverty in Indonesia The World Bank:

Grootaert, C., D. Narayan. 2001. Local institutions, poverty, and household welfare in Bolivia The World Bank.

Grootaert, C., G. Oh, A. Swamy. 2002. Social capital, household welfare and poverty in Burkina Faso. Journal of African Economies. 11(1):4-38. https://doi.org/10.1093/jae/11.1.4
crossref
Grootaert, C., T. Van Bastelar. 2002. Understanding and measuring social capital: A multi-disciplinary tool for practitioners The World Bank.

Grootaert, G., D. Narayan, V. Nyhan Jones, M. Woolcock. 2004. Measuring Social Capital: An Integrated Questionnaire The World Bank.

Hassanyar, A. 1995. Biodiversity Conservation and Management in Afghanistan: A State-of-the-Art Review Paper. Banking on Biodiversity.

Havstad, K. M., D. P. Peters, R. Skaggs, J. Brown, B. Bestelmeyer, E. Fredrickson, J. Herrick, J. Wright. 2007. Ecological services to and from rangelands of the United States. Ecological Economics. 64(2):261-268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.08.005
crossref
Henderson, B. B., P. J. Gerber, T. E. Hilinski, A. Falcucci, D. S. Ojima, M. Salvatore, R. T. Conant. 2015. Greenhouse gas mitigation potential of the world’s grazing lands: Modeling soil carbon and nitrogen fluxes of mitigation practices. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment. 207:91-100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2015.03.029
crossref
Hobbs, N. T., K. A. Galvin, C. J. Stokes, J. M. Lackett, A. J. Ash, R. B. Boone, R. S. Reid, P. K. Thornton. 2008. Fragmentation of rangelands: Implications for humans, animals, and landscapes. Global Environmental Change. 18(4):776-785. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2008.07.011
crossref
Hoekstra, J. M., T. M. Boucher, T. H. Ricketts, C. Roberts. 2005. Confronting a biome crisis: global disparities of habitat loss and protection. Ecology Letters. 8(1):23-29. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2004.00686.x
crossref
Ismail, M., R. Yaqini, Y. Zhaoli, A. Billingsley. 2009. Rangeland resources management. Mountain Development Resource Book for Afghanistan. 49.

Jeong, K., D. Kim. 2019. A measurement of social capital index. The Korean Economic forum. 12(1):1-26.

Joshi, L., R. M. Shrestha, A. W. Jasra, S. Joshi, H. Gilani, M. Ismail. 2013. Rangeland ecosystem services in the Hindu Kush Himalayan region. High-altitude rangelands and their interfaces in the Hindu Kush Himalayas. 157.

Kiyani, P., J. Andoh, Y. Lee, D. K. Lee. 2017. Benefits and challenges of agroforestry adoption: a case of Musebeya sector, Nyamagabe District in southern province of Rwanda. Forest Science and Technology. 13(4):174-180. https://doi.org/10.1080/21580103.2017.1392367
crossref
Knight, R. L. 2007. Ranchers as a keystone species in a West that works. Rangelands. 29(5):4-9. https://doi.org/10.2111/1551-501X(2007)29[4:RAAKSI]2.0.CO;2
crossref
Knack, S., P. Keefer. 1997. Does social capital have an economic payoff? A cross-country investigation. The Quarterly Journal of Economics. 112(4):1251-1288. https://doi.org/10.1162/003355300555475
crossref
Lambin, E. F., H. J. Geist, E. Lepers. 2003. Dynamics of land-use and land-cover change in tropical regions. Annual Review of Environment and Resources. 28(1):205-241. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.energy.28.050302.105459
crossref
Lee, Y., I. P. Rianti, M. S. Park. 2017. Measuring social capital in Indonesian community forest management. Forest Science and Technology. 13(3):133-141. https://doi.org/10.1080/21580103.2017.1355335
crossref
Liu, X., M. Kafatos. 2005. Land-cover mixing and spectral vegetation indices. International Journal of Remote Sensing. 26(15):3321-3327. https://doi.org/10.1080/01431160500056907
crossref
MAIL. 2008. Band-i-Amir Provisional National Park: A Preliminary Management Plan. Government report Ministry of Agriculture, Irrigation and Livestock (MAIL). Kabul, Afghanistan:

Mannetje, L. 2013. Global issues of rangeland management Department of plant sciences, Wageningen University. Netherlands:

Mansour, K., O. Mutanga, T. Everson. 2012. Remote sensing based indicators of vegetation species for assessing rangeland degradation: Opportunities and challenges. African Journal of Agricultural Research. 7(22):261-3270. https://doi.org/10.5897/AJARX11.2316
crossref
McLeod, A. 2011. World livestock 2011-livestock in food security Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO).

Miller, D. 2012. Obituary for Don Bedunah (1952–2012). Nomadic Peoples. 1-5.
crossref
Mirzabaev, A., M. Ahmed, J. Werner, J. Pender, M. Louhaichi. 2016. Rangelands of Central Asia: challenges and opportunities. Journal of arid land. 8:93-108. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40333-015-0057-5
crossref
Mohibbi, A. A. 2018. Land cover change and prediction in Bamyan, Afghanistan. Doctoral dissertation. Tokyo University of Agriculture and Technology, Tokyo, Japan.

Mohibbi, A. A., R. Cochard. 2014. Residents’ resource uses and nature conservation in Band-e-Amir National Park, Afghanistan. Environmental Development. 11(141):161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envdev.2014.04.003
crossref
Morris, M. 1998. Social capital and poverty in India IDS Working Paper 61Brighton: IDS.

MRRD. 2013 project for socio-economic activation of rural Afghanistan Ministry of Rural Rehabilitation and Development (MRRD). Afghanistan:

Narayan, D. 1999. Bonds and bridges: Social capital and poverty 2167. Washington DC: World Bank, Poverty Reduction and Economic Management Network, Poverty Division.

Narayan, D., L. Pritchett. 1997. Cents and Sociability: Household Income and Social Capital in Rural Tanzania Washington, D.C: The World Bank.

Narayan, D., L. Pritchett. 2000. Social capital: Evidence and implications. Social capital: A multifaceted perspective (pp. 269-295). The World Bank.

Pretty, J. 2003. Social capital and the collective management of resources. Science. 302(5652):1912-1914. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1090847
crossref pmid
Putnam, R. D. 2000. Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital. Culture and politics: A reader. 223-234. Springer; https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-62397-6_12
crossref
Ritchie, H., A. Fitzherbert. 2008. The white gold of Bamyan. A comprehensive examination of the Bamyan potato value chain from production to consumption, 20008.

Robinett, D., D. Miller, D. Bedunah. 2008. Central Afghanistan Rangelands. Rangelands. 30(4):2-12. https://doi.org/10.2111/1551-501X(2008)30[2:CAR]2.0.CO;2
crossref
Roudgarmi, P. 2013. Determining effective socio-economic factors in rangeland degradation: A case study of Tehran province, Iran. Range Management and Agroforestry. 34(1):12-18.

Sayre, N. F., R. R. McAllister, B. T. Bestelmeyer, M. Moritz, M. D. Turner. 2013. Earth stewardship of rangelands: coping with ecological, economic, and political marginality. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment. 11(7):348-354. https://doi.org/10.1890/120333
crossref
So, J. K. 2004. Toward developing social capital indicators. Journal of the Korean Regional Development Association. 16(1):89-118.

Shank, C. C., J. Y. Larsson. 1977. National Parks and Utilization of Wildlife Resources in Afghanistan: A Strategy for the Establishment and Development of Band-e-Amir National Park United Nations Development Program (UNDP) and United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO). Kabul, Afghanistan:

Stanfield, J. D., M. Y. Safar, A. Salam. 2008;Community rangeland administration: Focus on Afghanistan. In: biennial congress of the International Association for the Study of the Commons; Cheltenham, UK. July; pp 14-18.

UNEP. 2020 Shah Foladi Declared Afghanistan’s newest protected area United Nation Environmental Program; Retrieved from https://www.unenvironment.org/news-and-stories/story/shah-foladi-declared-afghanistans-newest-protected-area. Accessed 7 January 2021

USAID. 2011. Social dimensions of REDD+: Seeing the people for the trees.

Williams, R. E., H. Allred. 1968. Conservation, Development, and Use of the World’s Rangelands. Rangeland Ecology and Management/Journal of Range Management Archives. 21(6):355-360.
crossref
Yu, W., S. Lym. 1992. A Logit Analysis of Multiple Housing Deterioration.

Zak, P., S. Knack. 2001. Trust and Growth. Economic Journal. 111(295):321. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0297.00609
crossref
Zakharenka, A., M. A. Rasuli. 2018. Afghanistan Capacity Development for Natural Resource Management Rangelands and Forests in Afghanistan: The Foundation of Sustainable Rural Development (No. AUS0000259). 1-32. The World Bank;

TOOLS
Share :
Facebook Twitter Linked In Google+ Line it
METRICS Graph View
  • 0 Crossref
  •    
  • 301 View
  • 16 Download
Related articles in J. People Plants Environ.


ABOUT
BROWSE ARTICLES
EDITORIAL POLICY
AUTHOR INFORMATION
Editorial Office
100, Nongsaengmyeong-ro, Iseo-myeon, Wanju_Gun, Jeollabuk-do 55365, Republic of Korea
Tel: +82-63-238-6951    E-mail: jppe@ppe.or.kr                

Copyright © 2024 by The Society of People, Plants, and Environment.

Developed in M2PI

Close layer
prev next