Nosso grupo organiza mais de 3.000 Séries de conferências Eventos todos os anos nos EUA, Europa e outros países. Ásia com o apoio de mais 1.000 Sociedades e publica mais de 700 Acesso aberto Periódicos que contém mais de 50.000 personalidades eminentes, cientistas de renome como membros do conselho editorial.

Periódicos de acesso aberto ganhando mais leitores e citações
700 periódicos e 15 milhões de leitores Cada periódico está obtendo mais de 25.000 leitores

Indexado em
  • Índice de Fonte CAS (CASSI)
  • Índice Copérnico
  • Google Scholar
  • Sherpa Romeu
  • Acesso Online à Pesquisa no Meio Ambiente (OARE)
  • Abra o portão J
  • Genâmica JournalSeek
  • Diretório de Periódicos de Ulrich
  • Acesso à Pesquisa Online Global em Agricultura (AGORA)
  • Biblioteca de Periódicos Eletrônicos
  • RefSeek
  • Universidade Hamdard
  • EBSCO AZ
  • OCLC – WorldCat
  • Catálogo online SWB
  • Biblioteca Virtual de Biologia (vifabio)
  • Publons
  • Fundação de Genebra para Educação e Pesquisa Médica
  • Euro Pub
Compartilhe esta página

Abstrato

Mitigating Impacts of Projects on Biodiversity Conservation in Uganda

 Fred R Muwanika, Mwaura F, Ogwal F, Masiga M, Akullo M and Okurut TO

Introduction: This study provides light on the impact of implemented projects on biodiversity in Uganda in terms of harmful and enhancing projects. Biodiversity harmful projects are defined as the types of projects that destroy or led to biodiversity loss during their implementation. While biodiversity enhancing are projects that lead to biological diversity during their implementation.

Objective: The objective of the study was to assess the impact of implemented projects in the communities on biodiversity conservation and management in Uganda.

Methods: The data used in this analysis was obtained from Uganda Bureau of statistics (UBOS) previously collected during the National Service Delivery Survey. Multiple correspondence analysis (MCA) was used to derive the different impact dimensions of projects on biodiversity among the communities in Uganda.

Results: Implemented projects in the communities impact on biodiversity both positively and negatively. Findings revealed that livestock improvement/restocking/breeding contribute about 30% on the biodiversity positive impacts while introduction of improved crop variety at about 20% and agricultural technology at about 11.4%. Furthermore, construction of new road/bridges are the leading projects in destroying biodiversity accounting for about 13.5% of the variation in negative impacts while construction of toilet/latrines and health units accounts for 11.8% and 9.4%, respectively of the variation in biodiversity loss.

Conclusions and recommendations: Construction related projects impact negatively on biodiversity in their implementation while agricultural related projects are the leading agro-biodiversity enhancing projects in Uganda. This implies that works sector must play an important role in biodiversity conservation in Uganda. Secondly, construction and agriculture related projects should endeavour to allocate a percentage of the project budget equivalent to expected impact on biodiversity towards its management and restoration.