Â鶹ӰԺ

By: Adriana Molina-Garzón, Lakshmi Iyer, Phani Devarakonda, Valena McEwen, Braden Roosevelt, Nicolas Tsypin, Aemro Worku, Poulomi Ghosh, Ellis A Adams, Krister P Andersson, Daniel C Miller, Notre Dame Halls

´¡²ú²õ³Ù°ù²¹³¦³Ù:Ìý

Efforts to achieve poverty reduction alongside environmental conservation are hampered by the lack of credible causal evidence. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are an established method for producing such evidence. Yet existing knowledge remains fragmented: most studies focus on poverty or conservation in isolation, with few examining both outcomes. To address this gap, we conducted a systematic review of RCTs of interventions in rural areas of low-and middleincome countries (LMICs) that measured poverty alleviation and/or environmental conservation outcomes. We identified 112 studies published since 1990, only five of which measured both poverty and environmental outcomes. Studies assessed a wide range of interventions, with monetary and mixed livelihood programs (eg cash transfers or price support) most prevalent in poverty-related studies, and training, monitoring, and compliance programs most common among conservation-related studies. Impacts were heterogeneous across the evidence base. Multi-component interventions combining monetary and non-monetary support more