Household livelihood preferences are crucial determinants of homestead biodiversity. Therefore, we conducted a temporal analysis (harnessing data from three different time points (i.e., 1994, 2004, and 2014) with ten years of interval starting from 1994) on three Bangladeshi subdistricts to trace the effect of managed interventions on homestead biodiversity. Our findings unravel the transformation of a non-profitable untapped homestead agrobiodiversity from 1994 into an intervened and profitable biodiversity in 2014. The domestication of the introduced species in the homesteads increased the earnings by many folds. The observed stand structure of the introduced tree species was also financially profitable in 2014. We noted that tree diversity, richness, and evenness increased in the study areas while dominance decreased. Animal diversity and evenness decreased; however, richness and dominance increased. Management interventions only occurred when households grasped that homestead biodiversity could significantly supplement their family income. Management interventions occurred in the following ways: willingness to dedicate labor for both males and females increased over time, and willingness to pay labor costs significantly increased (i.e., on average, a male and female member in Haluaghat spent 336 labor hours/year and 288 labor hour/year, which is equivalent to an investment of BDT 23,100 (USD 330) and BDT 12,240 (USD 174.9), respectively in 2014), and average annual investment for agrobiodiversity management almost tripled. As the yearly investment soared, management interventions became better planned. Consequently, earnings from agrobiodiversity increased drastically. In 2014, households in Gouripur, Ishwarganj, and Haluaghat received 43.2, 34.5, and 39.3% of their total income from homestead biodiversity, which generated 157.8, 125.7, and 143.2 person-days employment/household. Thus, planned investment in homestead biodiversity management provides upgraded ecosystem services. Therefore, we claim that intervention is not always wrong, and planned interventions can lead to a progressing symbiotic relationship (a win–win situation) between households and homestead biodiversity.

家庭生计偏好是宅基地生物多样性的关键决定因素。因此，我们对孟加拉国的三个分区进行了时间分析（利用三个不同时间点（即 1994 年、2004 年和 2014 年）的数据，从 1994 年开始每隔十年），以追踪管理干预对宅基地生物多样性的影响。我们的研究结果揭示了从 1994 年开始的非营利性未开发宅基地农业生物多样性在 2014 年转变为经过干预且有利可图的生物多样性。在宅基地驯化引进物种使收入增加了许多倍。观察到的引进树种的林分结构在 2014 年也产生了经济效益。我们注意到研究区域的树木多样性、丰富度和均匀度增加，而优势度下降。动物多样性和均匀度下降；然而，财富和支配地位增加了。只有当家庭认识到宅基地生物多样性可以显着增加他们的家庭收入时，管理干预才会发生。管理干预以下列方式发生：为男性和女性奉献劳动的意愿随着时间的推移而增加，并且支付劳动力成本的意愿显着增加（即平均而言，Haluaghat 的男性和女性成员每年花费 336 个劳动小时和 288工时/年，相当于 2014 年投资 BDT 23,100（330 美元）和 BDT 12,240（174.9 美元），农业生物多样性管理的年平均投资几乎增加了两倍。随着年度投资的飙升，管理干预变得更好。最后，农业生物多样性的收入大幅增加。2014 年，Gouripur、Ishwarganj 和 Haluaghat 的家庭从宅基地生物多样性中获得了 43.2%、34.5% 和 39.3% 的总收入，创造了 157.8、125.7 和 143.2 人-天的就业/家庭。因此，对宅基地生物多样性管理的计划投资提供了升级的生态系统服务。因此，我们声称干预并不总是错误的，有计划的干预可以导致家庭与宅基地生物多样性之间的共生关系（双赢局面）。对宅基地生物多样性管理的计划投资提供升级的生态系统服务。因此，我们声称干预并不总是错误的，有计划的干预可以导致家庭与宅基地生物多样性之间的共生关系（双赢局面）。对宅基地生物多样性管理的计划投资提供升级的生态系统服务。因此，我们声称干预并不总是错误的，有计划的干预可以导致家庭与宅基地生物多样性之间的共生关系（双赢局面）。