|کد مقاله||کد نشریه||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||نسخه تمام متن|
|93110||160112||2013||9 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||دانلود رایگان|
این مقاله ISI می تواند منبع ارزشمندی برای تولید محتوا باشد.
- تولید محتوا برای سایت و وبلاگ
- تولید محتوا برای کتاب
- تولید محتوا برای نشریات و روزنامه ها
پایگاه «دانشیاری» آمادگی دارد با همکاری مجموعه «شهر محتوا» با استفاده از این مقاله علمی، برای شما به زبان فارسی، تولید محتوا نماید.
This paper examines the livelihood outcomes and adaptation strategies of households who have been involuntarily resettled from the project area of the Son La Hydropower Project in Vietnam to a remote mountain location with an intense scarcity of resources. We collected household data using a double recall, referring to the situation before and after resettlement, and for both the resettled and host households. The results show that resettled households lost income mainly because of a loss in crop output. In response, they tried to intensify crop production by using more fertilizers. The distribution of their farm output and income became less equal after resettlement although land had been distributed equally to all households. The host households had a greater number of opportunities to adapt and increased the cropping frequency of rice, intensified mineral fertilizer use and intensified livestock production, and as a result, their farm output and incomes increased. The livelihood adaptation of both the host and resettled households was strongly conditioned by a lack of available livelihood assets in this remote mountain location; it is therefore questionable whether households will be able to maintain their livelihood outcomes in the long run.
► We explore the process of livelihood adaptation in a resettlement community.
► Crop intensification is the main strategy to rehabilitate farm output and income.
► Host households have more opportunities to adapt than resettled households.
► Resettlement has an unequalizing effect on farm output and income of resettlers.
► Livelihood adaptation is conditioned by a lack of available livelihood assets.
Journal: Land Use Policy - Volume 31, March 2013, Pages 536–544