Population growth often increases poverty and causes migration in the search for new farmland. In a country where arable land is scarce, poor farmers are often associated with environmental degradation. It is estimated that about 85 percent of the rural poor reside in degraded areas. Continued population growth places further pressure on the existing capacity of the land, forcing farmers to cultivate their crops in higher and steeper areas. The challenge is to find sustainable agricultural production systems and nonagricultural strategies that would generate gainful employment and income for the rural poor.
It is widely recognized that poverty alleviation is imperative if sustainability is to be achieved. A number of policies and associated public expenditures have been directed towards poverty alleviation, with varying levels of success. Some poverty alleviation policies may have an impact on the environment or create an incentive system that works against the environment. A recent study showed that government spending on roads has had the biggest impact on rural poverty reduction, and that the impact of road construction is almost twice that of government spending on agricultural research and development, education, rural development and irrigation also have positive but lesser impact on rural poverty reduction. However, spending on fertilizers and other subsidies was not taken into account in the study. That roads are an important part of infrastructure and have the greatest impact on poverty reduction is not contested here. However, the environmental implications of expanding road networks should be noted. Poverty-stricken populations are sometimes located near biodiversity-rich areas and tend to depend on this common pool of resources for their livelihood. Lack of access is a common on characteristic of both poverty and biodiversity. As access improves, the poverty situation tends to lessen because of better access to education, health services and income-generating opportunity.
