ArticleHeliyon2025
Perceptions of cultural and provisioning ecosystem services and human wellbeing indicators amongst indigenous communities neighbouring the greater limpopo transfrontier conservation area.
Article in Heliyon, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Nature plays a crucial role in providing ecosystem services (ESs) essential for human wellbeing and biodiversity conservation in rural areas. However, existing paradigms often lack an integrative approach towards rural livelihoods and wellbeing, highlighting the need for a comprehensive understanding of the relationship between human wellbeing (HWB) and ESs. The area around the Greater Limpopo Transfrontier Conservation Area (GLTFCA) offers such ESs to indigenous people who rely heavily on these natural resources. Thus, this study aimed to quantify indigenous people's perceptions of cultural and provisioning ESs and their link to human wellbeing in villages adjacent to the GLTFCA. Key informant interviews were initially conducted to identify ESs as perceived by the participants. Subsequently, face-to-face surveys were carried out in 9 wards across South Africa and Zimbabwe, involving 350 participants. Respondents were asked about the availability of ESs, their levels of degradation, drivers of change, and the impact on their wellbeing. Responses were captured using Likert scales, and multiple regression models analysed the relationships between socio-demographic characteristics and ESs. Results indicated that indigenous people perceived both cultural and provisioning ESs to be available but degrading, with provisioning services degrading more rapidly. Climate change, legislation/policies, and poverty were identified as key drivers of this change. Socio-demographic factors such as gender, nativeness, and employment level influenced perceptions of both ESs. Overall, participants reported that both ESs contribute to their human wellbeing and livelihoods through life satisfaction, happiness, living standards, safety, security, and good health. Finally, this study's findings uniquely offer a baseline for these ESs accounting, demonstrating their direct and indirect benefits to indigenous communities' livelihoods and well-being.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.