Social Outcomes of the CARE-WWF Alliance in Mozambique

Report an error

Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

The evaluation of the CARE-WWF Alliance in Mozambique found that conservation interventions, such as no-take zones and mangrove management, initially increased dietary diversity by 25% between 2008 and 2014, though this correlation vanished by 2018 as investment declined. Farmer Field Schools were the most popular intervention, increasing the likelihood of year-round food security by 13%. While microcredit through Village Savings and Loan Associations led to a 31% increase in assets for female-headed households, the report notes that no-take zones primarily benefited male-headed households due to the cultural exclusion of single women from fishing. The document recommends better beneficiary targeting to avoid elite capture and stronger long-term governance to sustain community-based natural resource management.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • Conservation interventions, including no-take zones and the management of community forests and mangroves, were linked to a 25% increase in dietary diversity from 2008 to 2014, but this correlation disappeared by 2018 following a decline in investment.
  • Farmer Field Schools were the most widely favored Alliance intervention and were associated with a 13% increase in the likelihood of households experiencing food security throughout the entire year.
  • The impact of interventions varied by gender and household structure: microcredit via Village Savings and Loan Associations increased reported assets for female-headed households by 31% (with no significant increase for male-headed households), whereas no-take zones were perceived to benefit male-headed households more than single women.
  • Community-based natural resource management faces sustainability risks when external support is withdrawn; in one instance, the lack of equipment and the departure of WWF led to the collapse of forest monitoring and increased illegal invasions.

Cite the original document

APA
WWF International (2019). Social Outcomes of the CARE-WWF Alliance in Mozambique. https://www.worldwildlife.org/documents/2624/Social-Outcomes-for-Alliance-in-Mozambique-Impact-Brief-2019-FINAL1_2_1.pdf
Chicago
WWF International. Social Outcomes of the CARE-WWF Alliance in Mozambique. 2019. https://www.worldwildlife.org/documents/2624/Social-Outcomes-for-Alliance-in-Mozambique-Impact-Brief-2019-FINAL1_2_1.pdf.
Wikipedia
{{cite report |author=WWF International |title=Social Outcomes of the CARE-WWF Alliance in Mozambique |date=2019 |url=https://www.worldwildlife.org/documents/2624/Social-Outcomes-for-Alliance-in-Mozambique-Impact-Brief-2019-FINAL1_2_1.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@techreport{wwfinternational2019social, author = {{WWF International}}, title = {{Social Outcomes of the CARE-WWF Alliance in Mozambique}}, institution = {WWF International}, year = {2019}, url = {https://www.worldwildlife.org/documents/2624/Social-Outcomes-for-Alliance-in-Mozambique-Impact-Brief-2019-FINAL1_2_1.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated