Prevalence of use (mean + SE) of wild resources from South African savannas (n = 14 villages; 30 – 60 hh per village) Resource % Wild spinaches 95.6 + 1.3 Bushmeat (*) 51.6 + 8.4 Fuelwood 95.5 + 1.9 Wild honey 50.5 + 10.6 Wooden utensils 95.1 + 1.9 Medicinal plants (*) 49.4 + 7.5 Grass brushes 90.7 + 4.6 Wood for housing poles 49.0 + 8.1 Wild fruits 88.2 + 4.0 Thatch grass 48.8 + 9.0 Twig brushes 87.1 + 5.1 Wild mushrooms 25.2 + 9.2 Wood for fencing 62.0 + 5.5 Reeds for construction 14.6 + 6.5 Weaving materials 55.4 + 9.6 Wood for furniture 6.7 + 1.7 Edible insects 53.5 + 9.5 Seeds for decorations 3.2 + 1.8 (*) known to be under-reported (Shackleton & Shackleton 2004)

Use of wild protein by children over a two week period in households of high and low vulnerability to HIV/AIDS Group Measure Vulnerability class Stats Low High Mammals Frequency in diet 39 133 Sig % hh using 33 60 Birds 89 195 25 64 Reptiles 8 13 n.s 4 12 Insects 3 24 (McGarry & Shackleton 2009)

Relative % contribution of wild natural resources to total household incomes (cash and non-cash) Country Site Rel. contribution to hh income (%) Source South Africa Makua 28.2 Crookes (2003) Manganeng 22.0 Thorndale 19.3 Dovie (2001) Makhushane/Mashishimale 48.0 Ward (2012) Macubini 7.2 Kalahari – Mier 9.0 Thondhlana et al. (2012) Kalahari - San 32.0 Ethiopia Tigray 27.1 Babulo et al. (2009) Oromiya 38.2 Tesfaye et al. (2011) Dendi 39.0 Mamo et al. (2007) Ghana   38.0 Appiah et al. (2009) Malawi Chiradzulu 15.0 Kamanga et al. (2009) Uganda Rwenzori 18.7 Tumusiime et al. (2011) Zimbabwe 17.2 Cavendish (2002) Mutangi & Romwe 15.2 Campbell et al. (2002) Shindi 22 – 23 # Cavendish (2000) Cameroon Mount Cameroon 4 – 20 % Ambrose-Oji (2003)

Relative contribution to total hh income (%) Wild resources contribution is often as high as arable agriculture or livestock husbandry (or both combined) Country Site Relative contribution to total hh income (%) Source Natural resources Arable cropping Animal husbandry South Africa Thorndale 19 16 23 Dovie (2001) Makhushane/ Mashishimale 48 14 1 Ward (2012) Machubini 7 2 18 Kalahari - Mier 9 Thondhlana et al. (2012) Kalahari - San 32 Uganda Bigodi (*) 57 30 13 Gosling (2011) Ethiopia Tigray 27 43 Babulo et al. (2009) Oromiya 38 17 Tesfaye et al. (2011) Zambia Maeve 20 Mutamba (unpubl.) Nkhulwashi 49 14 Miles 44 Sosal

If exclude wild resources from urban residents incomes the proportion of households falling below the poverty lines increases by:

100 % of households had experienced some shock in the last two years No selling 70 % had turned to natural resource as a coping mechanism WEALTHY 5th most common coping mechanism POOR Approx 20 % sold natural resources Several then adopted trading as a permanent strategy 2nd most common coping mechanism (Paumgarten & Shackleton 2011)

Returns per hour worked for small-scale trade in natural resources Product Income per hour worked Local wage rate at same period Ratio Source Reed mats R2.50 R1.50 1.7 Shackleton & Shackleton (‘97) Thatch grass R7.50 5.0 Marula beer R4.00 2.7 Mander et al. (2002) Palm brooms R3 – R26 R3.50 0.9 – 7.4 Gyan & Shackleton (2005) Imifino (in town) R17.50 R7.00 2.5 Mavimbela (2004) Reed craft R6.00 Pereira et al. (2006) Grass brooms R3.00 R2.00 1.5 Shackleton (2006) 2.0