Journal of Environment and Earth Science [Link].

org
ISSN 2224-3216 (Paper) ISSN 2225-0948 (Online)
Vol.8, No.3, 2018

Assessing Existing Forest and on Farm Tree Management

Practices and Its Livelihood Contribution for Rural Small Holder
Communities Found at the Forest-Farm Interface Integrated
Landscape Mosaics in Ethiopia
Kefyalew kassa1 Yemiru tesfaye2 Menefese tadesse2
[Link], Southern Agricultural Research Institute, Bonga Agricultural Research Center, Bonga
[Link], Wondogenet Collage of Forestry and Natural Resource, Wondogenet School of Natural Resource
Management, Hawassa University
This research is financed by Centre for International forestry Research (CIFOR) and Southern Agricultural
Research Institute(SARI)
Abstract
In the Ethiopian context, forest-farm interface landscapes are areas created through encroachment, officially
unclassified as either forest or agricultural lands, found under intensive economic activities (crop farming,
grazing, and forest products exploitation) possibly un-sustainably by those without defined legal entitlement. As
far as viewed, there are no adequate site specific empirical studies on use and management of forest and trees in
an agricultural landscape in relation to local livelihoods and agricultural production in Ethiopia. Therefore, the
overall objective of this study was to assess and document existing forest and on farm tree management practices
and its livelihood contribution for rural small holder communities found at the forest-farm interface integrated
landscape mosaics in Guraferda and Arsi Negele district. Data was collected using household survey taking a
total of 218 randomly selected households from the two districts. The two study sites from each district were
selected on the extent of deforestation i.e high deforestation and low deforestation sites. The data were analyzed
using appropriate descriptive statistics and chi-square test. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used for
analyzing demographic and different socioeconomic characteristics of sample households. The comparisons of
different households’ characteristics between the two contrasting sites were done using inferential statistics with
χ2-test and [Link] results of the study revealed that there is high forest product extraction and minimum forest
management in high deforestation sites, while high crop and livestock production in low for low deforestation
[Link] result confirms that there is a negative impact of high forest extraction on forest management and cover.
this work has identified key drivers of deforestation like settelement programs, agricultural expansion and large
scale investments or commercial farming. The study also assesses communities’ forest cover maintenance
[Link] both districts there should be up dated policy intervention and better land use planning regarding
forest resource conservation.
Keywords: forest extraction, forest management, deforestation.

1. Introduction
1.1. Background
Forests are means of livelihood for many of the rural communities in Ethiopia (Wondie & Temesgen 2013).
Rural communities depend on forests and forest resources to meet the demand for energy and construction
materials, and to diversify their livelihoods. However, deforestation for the expansion of agricultural and pasture
lands, and for settlement areas, has been reducing forest resources and local communities benefts (Wondie &
Temesgen2013; lemenih & Kassa 2014; Reynolds et al. 2015). Deforestation and habitat fragmentation are
critically affecting forest size and the ecosystem services that they can provide as well as causing losses of
biodiversity (Wright & Muller-landau 2006; laurance et al. 2009; Aerts et al. 2011; Mekuria et al. 2011; Mekuria
& Veldkamp 2012). In the Ethiopian context, forest-farm interface landscapes are areas created through
encroachment, officially unclassified as either forest or agricultural lands, found under intensive economic
activities (crop farming, grazing, and forest products exploitation) possibly un-sustainably by those without
defined legal entitlement. Such landscapes varied in the causes of their creation, and temporal and spatial
extensions, and are often crammed with wildlife and human conflicts. Though such areas serve communities as
critical livelihood sources, they are also spaces with little understanding about their management by the research
community, and hence the extension service has little contribution on how to optimize gains from these
interactions and sustainably manage the resources. The forest products used by smallholders and communities
are often poorly understood or underappreciated even though they play crucial roles in supporting local
livelihoods. Farmers use tree resources as an important additional source of income, especially when crop prices
decrease (Idol et al., 2011). Previous studies of the southern Ethiopian highlands have improved understanding
about the condition, biodiversity, and economic importance of the area, as well as several management
challenges and drivers of deforestation (e.g. Chilalo, and Wier-sum, 2011; Takahashi, and Todo, 2012 and 2014;
Aerts et al., 2013 and 2015; Belay et al., 2013; Hylander et al., 2013).However, there was gap on documenting

1
Journal of Environment and Earth Science [Link]
ISSN 2224-3216 (Paper) ISSN 2225-0948 (Online)
Vol.8, No.3, 2018

existing smallholders forest farm interface landscape management practice as well as viable management of
forests and trees on such mosaic landscape in Ethiopia in general and in the two study sites in particular. The
present study is, therefore, aimed at filling the information gap by assessing interaction between forests and
agriculture land management practices in Guraferda and Arsi Negele district. There are various ways by which
local people may be involved in the management of forests, such as ethnoforestry, forest co-management, and
community-based forest management (Wassie 2002; FRA 2010). The Ethiopian Forest Policy of 2007 (FRA
2010) emphasizes the need for people’s participation in natural forest management. The policy document asserts
that local communities should be motivated to identify themselves with the development and protection of the
forests from which they derive benefits. Thus, the policy envisages a process of co-management of forests by all
relevant stakeholders.
Forest co-management approach enables the local actors participate in the decision-making of the strategy
and the selection of priorities. The benefit of rural households poor from these forest roles determined by forest
tenure and management themes .These natural forests are owned and managed in a variety of ways, including
open access; communal with enforced access rules; private unmanaged; private managed. The tragedy-of-the-
commons arise consequences’ such as risks on the sustainable use of the forest, sustainable forest management
biodiversity loss, deforestation and others like ecosystem services, carbon sequestration and the role take part in
climate change mitigation by the forest.

1.2. Statement of the Problem

Preventing environmental degradation and alleviating poverty are the majorchallenges of sustainable
development. Forest resources in Ethiopia are under complex challenges including continuous expansion of
agricultural activities and settlements on forestlands due to high rate of population growth around forest
resources ; increasing demand for forest products (energy and construction); the impacts of large livestock
population in forests; that are also exacerbated by unregulated access to forest resources (lack of clear
ownership); and frequent changes in the institutional and organizational context of forest resources management
in the country(Badege ,B.,2009). However, there was gap on documenting existing smallholders forest farm
interface landscape management practice and there was no study carried out regarding sustainable as well as
viable management of forests and trees on such mosaic landscape in Ethiopia in general and in the two study
sites in particular. The present study is, therefore, aimed at filling the information gap by assessing interaction
between forests and agriculture land management practices and implications on the livelihood of the people in
Guraferda and Arsi Negele district.

1.3. Objective of the study

The objective was assessing and documenting existing forest and on farm tree management practices in the
integrated forest-farm interface landscape mosaics of Guraferda and Arsi-Negele districts and assessing the
distribution of dominant woody species on such mosaic land scape and institutional support regarding such land
scape management

2. Literature review
2.1. Forest cover change in the Southern Ethiopia
As in past millennia, natural forests will continue to be converted to agriculture in developing countries to enable
livelihood support. Forests have (indirectly) had an important role in increased levels of consumption over time.
In 2005 it was estimated that 11.9% of the Ethiopian territory was covered by forest (0.13 million km2) and that
these forest areas had been declining at a rate of 1.1% annually between 2000 and 2005 (FAO, 2005 as cited by
Garedew, 2010).

2.2. Overview of forest farm interface

Forest –Farm interface is the zone within or near forests occupied by smallholder farmers that is historically
remote from markets and typically difficult to access (Fisher and Hirsch, 2008). It often includes both ambiguous
lands, or lands cultivated by people who do not have official use rights (Sato, 2000)

2.3. Forest-Farm Interface Landscape Management in general

Forest management is the process of planning and implementing practices for the stewardship and use of forests
and other wooded land aimed at achieving specific environmental, economic, social and/or cultural objectives.
(FAO, 2005).A recent Forest Resources Assessment (FAO, 2010) estimated the global forest cover at just over 4
billion hectares, which is 31% of total land area of the world.

2.4. Role of forest-farm interface landscapes in sustainable forest management

Many tropical agricultural landscapes consist of forest patches and other land uses including home gardens and

2
Journal of Environment and Earth Science [Link]
ISSN 2224-3216 (Paper) ISSN 2225-0948 (Online)
Vol.8, No.3, 2018

various types of agroforestry practices such as grazing land with trees, tree crops with shade (e.g. coffee or cocoa
with shade tree), and trees above annual crops (i.e., alley cropping). Trees in these types of agricultural
landscapes are clearly managed; that is they are planted and/or retained from previous natural forest and
coppices to provide various benefits including wood fuels and wood products, shade for other crop production
(e.g. coffee), and fencing (Dewees, 1995; León and Harvey, 2006; Tolera et al., 2008; Pulido,S., and Renjifo,
2011; Borkhataria et al., 2012). The forest patches and trees on agricultural land may connect existing forest
fragments and thus enhance migration of wild animals between the forest patches (Bhagwat et al., 2008; Perfecto
and Vander, M., 2010; Pulido-Santa Cruz and Renjifo, 2011). In addition to trees and tree-dwelling biodiversity
(e.g. birds), the mosaic less intensively used tropical agricultural landscapes (DeFries,et al., 2004) shelter several
other types of associated biodiversity that may indirectly support the agricultural ecosystem and production (e.g.
pollinators, predators of agricultural pests) as well as various micro-organisms that use the agricultural habitats
for food or shelter and that may cause disease or damage to crops (CBD, 2001:107).
Farmers‘ management practices and work processes in relation to trees and forest mainly involve planting
and/or retaining of trees inside fields (e.g. shaded coffee and grazing land) and/or along field boundaries on
different land uses (e.g. annual cropland), establishing woodlots, and removing trees and clearing forest land to
expand agriculture.
Overall, the biodiversity of forest patches and tree-rich agricultural mosaic landscapes is often essential for
the health and function of not only the local agricultural ecosystem, but also the ecosystem processes at a
regional scale. It is possible to generalize this kind of landscape management has greater contribution for
sustainable forest resource management. This landscape can play vital role as wildlife corridors and as buffer
zone. This has implications in reducing deforestation pressures on adjacent forest resources.

3. MATERIALS AND METHODS

3.1. Study area
This study was conducted in two different districts which are located in Southern part of Ethiopia; namely
Guraferda and Arsi- Negele districts. Guraferda is found in the southwest part of Ethiopia, in Bench Maji Zone
about 630 km southwest of Addis Ababa. It is located between 6o 45´ to 7o00´ N latitude and 35o00´ to 35o15´ E
longitude. The total population of Bench Maji Zone in July 2014 is estimated at 786,421 of which 83% are rural
population CSA., 2014. Guraferda district is one of the districts in the Zone and has a total population of
43,[Link] 2001, people from around North Shoa, Gondar and Wollo migrate in to the area in search of
farmlands. As a result, it became home for a multitude and diverse population.

Fig
1: Location map of the study area / Guraferda
Whereas the second district where The other area of study was Arsi Negele, which is found in the south central
part of Ethiopia, in West Arsi Zone. The West Arsi Zone has an area of 2,410 km2 and is located some 250 km

3
Journal of Environment and Earth Science [Link]
ISSN 2224-3216 (Paper) ISSN 2225-0948 (Online)
Vol.8, No.3, 2018

south of Addis Ababa. It is located at 7° 27’ N and 38° 53’ E and in the Oromia Regional State, Arsi Zone. The
district has a population of 320,384 with much of the population living in forest-farm landscapes. The four
largest ethnic groups reported in Arsi Negele were the Oromo (85 %), the Amara (7%), the Kambaata (3%), and
the Soddo Gurage(1%); all other ethnic groups made up 4% of the population. Oromiffa was spoken as a first
language by 83%, 12% spoke Amharic, and 3% spoke Kambaata; the remaining 2% spoke all other primary
languages reported. The majority of the in habitants were Muslims, with 75% of the population reporting they
practiced that belief, while 20% of the population said they were Ethiopian Orthodox Christianity, and 5% were
Protestant. The area has been inhabited by Muslim Oromo agro-pastoralists for over one hundred years,(Source
OFWE report)

Figure 2. Location of the study area/ Arsi-Negele

3.2. Data collection and sampling

Based on the degree of deforestation; two contrasting kebeles (PAs) (areas with extreme high and extreme low
deforestation) have been selected purposively from each district. In addition to this, each study site or PA was
categorized or stratified into two different zones; namely, site nearer to forest as zone 1 and site far from forest
as zone 2. As above description, Guraferda destrict from SNNPRs and Arsi-Negele from Oromia region have
been selected. In similar manner Berji and Pelya from Guraferda purposively selected as low deforestation and
high deforestation PA’s respectively. Similarly from Arsi-Negele Destrict Beseku and Merarohawulo PA’s were
purposively selected as low and high deforestation PA’s respectively. Then for both destricts, each PA’s were
further stratified in to two zones, as zone 1-site nearer to forest and zone-2, site far from forest.
3.2.1. Sample Size and technique
Random sampling technique was used to select sample respondents from each zone. Sample units for formal
survey have been selected randomly using the probability proportional to sample size technique based on the
number of farm households in each PA as well as in each zone. This study covered total of 218 households, 103
and 115 household from Guraferda and ArsiNegele district as well 86 from Zone 1 and 132 from zone-2
respectively. Total households included in this study were 218, of which 81% (41.2% from Guraferda and
39.8% from ArsiNegelle woreda) and 19% (6% from Guraferda and 13% from ArsiNegelle woreda) were male
and female headed households, respectively.

4
Journal of Environment and Earth Science [Link]
ISSN 2224-3216 (Paper) ISSN 2225-0948 (Online)
Vol.8, No.3, 2018

Table-1 Sample of respondents versus Zone

Sample Woreda's
Guraferda Woreda Arsi-Negele Woreda
Berji Pelya Beseku Merarohawulo
Zones Total Sample Total Sample Total Sample Total Sample
Zone-1 143 23(39%) 112 18(41%) 479 28(40%) 288 17(37%)
Zone-2 223 36(61%) 163 26(59%) 702 41(60%) 492 29(63%)
Total 366 59(100%) 275 44(100%) 1181 69(100%) 780 46(100%)
N.B: Zone 1 and 2 are the nearest and furthest site from forest.
3.2.2. Data Sources and Types of Data Collected
This study used both primary data and secondary information sources. The primary data were collected using
questionnaire surveys and Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA)/ Rapid Rural Appraisal (RRA) techniques.
Primary data was obtained through key informant interview, focus group discussions, and household survey to
collect socio-economic data related to livelihood activities and forest use. Several secondary data sources in the
form of published and unpublished research reports and administrative records were also consulted.

3.3. Data Analysis

The statistical data was coded, rearranged summarized, entered and analyzed using SPSS version 20 and
Microsoft excel 2010. Demographic characteristics and socio economic condition of respondent households in
site were analyzed using descriptive statistics such as percentage, frequencies, means and standard deviation.
The comparisons of different households’ characteristics were done using inferential statistics like χ2-test and t-
test.

4. Results and discussion

Table.2 Characteristics of communities

Guraferda Arsi-Negele
Zone-1(%) Zone-2(%) Zone-1(%) Zone-2(%)
Education Illiterate 28 23 27 26
Grade 1-4 11 17 8 20
Grade 5-10 2 15 3 10
> Grade 10 0 4 1 5
Sex Female 0 10 9 16
Male 39 51 30 45
Marital status Married 27 46 40 43
Other-Wise 13 14 12 18
Small holder communities who found at zone-1 were mostly less educated, male headed as well as mostly
divorced than communities at zone 2, this might be due to lack of access to market, infrastructure and related
issues
Table3. Asset difference across sites

Guraferda Arsi-Negele
Zone-1 Zone-2 Zone-1 Zone-2
Age Mean 33 42 39 45
SD 7.65 11.37 10.32 7.16
TLU Mean 5 3 12 7
SD 3.43 1.85 8.43 4.31
physical asset Mean 268 612 395 715
SD 118.71 265.63 105.31 127.42
Crop land Mean 2 3 1.53 2.27
SD 1.32 2.36 0.48 0.35

From the above table the result shows that respondents around zone-1 were mostly youths, have high
number of live stocks , have lower value of physical asset and they do have less crop land coverage .regarding
livestock population, communities in Arsi-Negele’s do have higher TLU than Guraferda , while in terms of total
land the reverse is true.

5
Journal of Environment and Earth Science [Link]
ISSN 2224-3216 (Paper) ISSN 2225-0948 (Online)
Vol.8, No.3, 2018

Table.4. Tree planting trends and Reason of plantation via zones

Guraferda Arsi-Negele
Zone-1 Zone-2 Zone-1 Zone-2
Tree planting No 24 21 13 7
Yes 19 36 26 54
Reason of planting Fuel-Wood 12 17 18 25
Coffee 18 28 4 14
Timber 3 4 7 9
Pepper 2 1 - ---
House 6 9 10 13
Regarding tree planting trend across zones, most of tree planting and managing communities were found in
zone -2 than [Link] might be due to various forest resource in zone-1. In addition the primary reason of plantation
was for coffee shade purpose in Guraferda where as in Arsi-Negele, the reason was for fuel wood consumption.
Tree management involves a series of mechanisms, put into practice by rural people who in many cases are
coordinating their actions with others, at the command of some (ideally) local authority they regard as legitimate.
In both districts, when tree management trend of households is compared between those kebele’s, there was
significant difference (x2=259.2, p=0.000 for Guraferda and x2 = 245.9, p=0.000 for Arsi- Negele, 2-sided) (table
1).This indicate the tree management trend and objectives vary between kebele’s in each district.
Table 5. Tree Management profiles of Study Sites
Guraferda Woreda Arsi-Negele Woreda
Tree management Types Pelya % Berji % Tot% χ2 P-value Meraro% Beseku% Tot% χ2 P-value
Not managing 32 22 26 24 16 19
Thining 27 20 23 17 13 15
Lopping and Pruning 23 14 17 11 19 15
Pollarding 6 10 10 7 10 9
Coppicing 11 34 24 41 42 42
Total % 100 100 100 259 0 100 100 100 246 0
Source: Field Survey 2017

4.2. Dominant Woody Species Distribution.

As it has been observed from the field during reconnaissance survey and information incorporated from key
informant interview as well as from various focus group discussions, many woody species were found in both
districts depending on their agro-ecology. In Guraferda District, the four most dominant indigenous tree species
that were found in the adjacent forest nearby study sites were Olea welwitschia, Aningeria adolfi-frierichi, Ficus
vasta and Allophylus abysinicus whereas tree species like Celtis africana andCroton macrostachyus were found
in farm landand the others likeAlbizia gummifera, Cordia africana and Millettia ferruginea were found nearby
home garden for coffee shade purpose. In addition to this Eucalyptus camaldulensis was dominantly found
around boundaries and roads for construction poles, fuel wood and sale purpose. In Arsi-Negele District, the four
most dominant indigenous tree species that found in the adjacent forest nearby study sites were Hagenia
abyssinica, Podocarpus falcatus and Juniperus procera. Tree species like Cordia africana, Albizia gummifera
and Millettia ferruginea dominantly found around farm land. The others like Coffea arabica and Persea
americana were found around homegarden. E. camandulensis dominantly found around road and boundary.

4.3. Institutional support Regarding on-farm tree and forest Management

From Governmental institutions the institution responsible for all administrative affairs is the woreda offices and
PA’s administration offices. In addition Forest and Environment Coordination offices in Guraferda play vital role
in landscape management aspect. OFWE/ Oromiya Forest and Wild life Enterprise/ is responsible for the forest
plantations and indirectly for Meraro and Beseku PA’s of Arsi-Negele.
From Religious institutions, In Arsi-Negele most of residents are Islamic. Whereas diversified religion in
Guraferda, Therefore, the mosques and churches are of great importance in the community. They provide
spiritual guidance, but also promote union between the community members. In Guraferda Mekaneyesus Project
plays influential role in sustainable management trends of forest resource, awareness creation for communities
and related issues. From Local institutions, Village leaders’, religious leaders within village etc A youth group
(at kebele level) tries to create activities to reunite all young members as well as to find opportunities for them. A
women’s group (at kebele level) controls a credit scheme and provide loans to its members.
There are some NGO’s who support PA’s regarding sustainable resource utilization and management issues.
WCC (wild coffee conservation) projects attain the above issue in Guraferda and in Arsi-Negele, Ethiopian
Sustainable Tourism Association promoted the creation of the Ecotourism Cooperative by raising funds from

6
Journal of Environment and Earth Science [Link]
ISSN 2224-3216 (Paper) ISSN 2225-0948 (Online)
Vol.8, No.3, 2018

USAID and building the capacity of the cooperative.

4.4. Drivers of Forest cover change

According to the survey result and field observation a multiple drivers contributed to forest cover change in the
study area. Survey results shown that forest cover, grass land, and shrub/bush land were decreased. Findings of
this study showed, the main drivers of forest cover changes in the study area were settlement, annual and
perennial crop investment, wildfire, and fuel wood. House construction and farm implementing material
collection, poor governances, and land tenure system of the farming community also had a great impact on the
land cover change according to key informants and group discussions result.
Table 6. Drivers of Forest cover change
Guraferda Woreda Arsi-Negele Woreda
Drivers Pelya % Berji % Tot. % χ2 P-value Meraro Beseku Tot. % χ2 P-value
Settlement 45 37 41 17 14 16
Agricultural Investment 32 42 38 59 64 62
Wild fire 23 21 21 24 22 22
Total 100 100 100 242.8 0.000 100 100 100 240.7 0.000
Source Field Survey 2017
From the above result, it is obvious that the main driver of forest cover change in Guraferda were settlement
and large scale commercial farming/ or investments where as rapid agricultural expansion was the main driving
factor of forest cover change in Arsi-Negele.

5. Conclusions
In both districts better on farm tree management practice has been seen in low deforestation site than higher one.
Forest management trend is weaker in high deforestation site, particularly, in nearer sites than lower one
particularly, farther site due to challenging drivers of forest cover changes like: settlement, agricultural
investment or expansion and land certification problems in high deforestation sites.
Dominant woody species in both site of Guraferda were four indigenous such as, Olea welwitschia,
Aningeria adolfi-frierichi, Ficus vasta and Allophylus abysinicus and Exotic one, Eucalyptus camandulensis.
Where as in Arsi-Negele the dominant indigenous species were Hagenia abyssinica, Podocarpus falcatus and
Juniperus procera and Cordia africana, while exotic one was Eucalyptus [Link] agricultural
productivity and forest product availability is declining due to seasonal anthropogenic [Link] of market
access has been seen as a problem for unbalanced utilization and harvest of forest and agricultural products.

6. Recommendations
Forest products contribute share of local community livelihoods. Therefore conservation and better
management of forests is thus very essential to sustain local people livelihoods.
Land certification program should be revisited for the district in order to ensure sustainable natural
resource management system as well as to increase social stability on such mosaic landscape.
There should be well-organized, strong and effective policy intervention to safeguard the natural forest
patch that exist within interface from further destruction. These policy interventions should attempt the
active involvements of local communities at the same time governmental and nongovernmental
organizations for effective natural resources conservation within the district.
Further researches should be done especially on loss of biodiversity related to natural forest conversion
within such mosaic landscape.

References
Abate, A., Tamrat, B., and Sebsebe, D., 2006. UN differentiated afromontane forest of Denkoro in the central
highland of Ethiopia: A florist and structural [Link]: Ethiop. J. Sci. 29: 45-56.
Abeje,M., 2011. Differential livelihood and adaptive strategies of spontaneous and organized resettlers in
GuraferdaWoreda of Southwestern ETHIOPIA (SNNPR).MSc thesis in partial fulfillments of the
requirements for the degree of masters of Arts in Social Anthropology. Addis Ababa University.
Alemayehu, M., 2010. Contribution of Forest Products Extraction to Livelihood Support and Forest
Conservation in Masha and Andracha Woredas, Southwestern Ethiopia. MSc thesis, Addis Ababa
University, Ethiopia.
Amogne, A., 2014. A review on Forest resource management systems in Ethiopia: Historical Perspective.
International Journal of Biodiversity and Conservation, 6(2), 121-131.
Agribusiness, T., 2004. Forest Rehabilitation and Natural Coffee Production Enhancement and Trade, 1-14.
Addis Ababa: FARM Africa and SOS Sahel International/ UK Participatory Forest Management
Programme (PFMP).
Angelsen, A., 2001. Playing Games in the Forest: State-Local Conflicts of Land Appropriation. Land Economics

7
Journal of Environment and Earth Science [Link]
ISSN 2224-3216 (Paper) ISSN 2225-0948 (Online)
Vol.8, No.3, 2018

77 (2):285-299.
Badege, B., [Link] of large livestock population in forests; that are also exacerbated by unregulated
access to forest resources (lack of clear ownership); and frequent changes in the institutional and
organizational context of forest resources management in the country.
Banerjee, A., and Chowdhury, M., 2013. Forest degradation and livelihood of local communities in India:
Journal of Horticulture and Forestry. 5(8), pp. 122-129.
Babulo, B., B. Muys, et al., 2008. "Household livelihood strategies and forest dependence in Bled, Slovenia:
[Link]. ZEF Policy Brief No. 7.
Bonn, Germany, Center for Development Research, Dendi district, Ethiopia." Forest Policy and Economics 9(8):
[Link] & Change 31(1): 155.
Belay, H., Urgessa, K., Lemenih, M., & Kebebew, Z., 2013. Forest dependency among forest user communities
in and around Belete-Gera forest, southwest Ethiopia. International Journal of Ecology & Development™,
26(3), 50-60.
Kinati, C., Tolemariam,T., Debele,K., and Tolosa, T.,2012.“Opportunities and challenges of honey production in
Gomma district of Jimma zone, South-West Ethiopia,” Journal of AgriculturalExtension and Rural
Development, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 85–91, 2012
Dawit, A., 2014. Wild Mushrooms and Mushroom Cultivation Efforts in Ethiopia. Addis Ababa University,
Ethiopia.
Debonne, N., [Link] impact of migration on tropical deforestation. An agent-based modelingapproach for
Guraferda, Southwest Ethiopia. MSc thesis, in Geography, Faculty of science and bio-engineering sciences,
virile universities Brussels.
Dejenie, A., 2011. Impact of resettlement on woody plant species and local livelihood: The case of Guraferda
Woreda in Bench Maji Zone, South Western, and Ethiopia. MSc thesis, Addis Ababa University, Ethiopia.
Demel, T.,2005. Deforestation, Wood Famine, and Environmental Degradation in
Ethiopia's Highland Ecosystems: Urgent Need for Action
Demel, T., Mulugeta, L., Tesfaye, B., Yonas, Y., Sisay,F., Wubalem,T., Yitebetu, M., Tesfaye H., and Demeke,
N., 2010. Forest Resources and Challenges of Sustainable Forest Management and Conservation in Ethiopia.
Didha, D. A., 2008 Silvicultural Analysis of Natural Forest as a Basis for Silvicultural Planning in Munessa at
Arsi Forest Enterprise Oromiya, Ethiopia. Unpublished Thesis. Hawassa University Wondo Genet College
of Forestry and Natural Resources: 1-90.
Ehui and Pender,[Link] and most sub-Saharan African farmers often experience low productivity due to
low access and use of agricultural inputs, lack of market access, and various institutional failures.
Enterprise, A. F., 2010. New Established Forest Enterprises, Arsi Negele, Ethiopia.
Ewers, R. M., 2006. Interaction effects between economic development and forest cover determine deforestation
rates. Global Environmental Change 16 (2):161-169.
FAO., 2014. State of the world‘s forests: enhancing the socioeconomic benefits from forests.
[Link]
Fisher, R., and P., Hirsch, 2008. "Poverty and Agrarian-Forest Interactions in Thailand.
Gardei, S., [Link] valuation of forests in South West Ethiopia. Non timber Forest Products Research and
Development Project in SW Ethiopia, Wageningen, and Student research Series No. 6. Netherlands.
Gardon et al., [Link] tropical agricultural landscapes, especially those managed by resource-poor
farmers, are typically composed of a mosaic of several land use types and the relationships between these
land uses are a necessary consideration when the potential of such landscapes to contribute to conservation
of biodiversity is evaluated.
Garrity, [Link] can be part of poverty reduction strategies by increase of on-farm food production
and provision of cash income, when accompanied by marketing strategies and enterprise development.
Gatzweiler, F. W., 2007. Deforestation of Ethiopia's Afromontane rainforests
Gebremedhin, H., 2000. A study on the ecology and management of the Dessa forest in the northeastern
escarpment of Ethiopia. [Link]. Thesis A.A.U.
Geist, H.J., and E.F. Lambin, 2002. Proximate causes and underlying driving forces of tropical deforestation.
Bioscience 52(2)
Gessesse, D., and Christiansson C., 2008. Forest decline and its causes in the south-central rift valley of
Ethiopia: Human impact over a one hundred year perspective. Ambio 37(4): 263-271.
Getachew, M., Sjaastad, E., Vedeld, P., 2007. Economic dependence of forest resources: A case from Dendi
District, Ethiopia. Forest Policy andEconomics, 9: 916 – 927.
Guillozet, K., and J. Bliss, 2010. A Political Ecology Approach to Understanding Competing Gessesse Dessie
and Kleman J. [Link] and magnitude of deforestation in the south central rift valley region of
Ethiopia. Mountain Research and Development 27(2): 162-168.
Getachew, M., Sjaastad, E., Vedeld, P., 2007. Economic dependence of forest resources: A case from Dendi

8
Journal of Environment and Earth Science [Link]
ISSN 2224-3216 (Paper) ISSN 2225-0948 (Online)
Vol.8, No.3, 2018

District, Ethiopia. Forest Policy and Economics, 9: 916 – 927.

Hartmann, I.,2004. “No Tree, No Bee – No Honey, No Money”: The Management of Resources and
Marginalization in Beekeeping Societies of South West Ethiopia: Paper submitted to the Conference.
Hoekstra, D.A., [Link], and Badege ,B., 1990. Agro forestry: potentials and Research Needs for the
Ethiopian Highlands. Agroforestry Research Network, ICRAF. Nairobi, Kenya. 21:115
Kitessa, H., 2013. Effects of coffee forest management and fragmentation on plant communities and
regeneration patterns in Afromontane moist evergreen forests in South West Ethiopia. Doctoral
Dissertation, Wageningen University, NL. ISBN: 978-90-8826-3170.
Houghton, J. T., 1995. Climatic Change 1994: Radioactive Forcing of Climatic Change and Evaluation of IPCC
IS92 Emission Scenarios. Intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University press,
Cambridge, UK.
Hurni, H.,1990. Degradation and conservation of the soil resources in the Ethiopian highlands. In: African
Mountains and Highlands: Problems and Perspective. Marceline, Missouri (USA).
Idol et al., [Link] use tree resources as an important additional source of income, especially when crop
prices decrease.
IFMP., 2002. Integrated forest management project, Synopsis. Adaba-Dodola Integrated Forest Management
Project.
Lemessa, D., Hylander, K., and Hambäck, P., 2013. Composition of crops and land-use types in relation to crop
raiding pattern at different distances from forests, Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 167, 71-78.
Mamo, G., E. Sjaastad, et al., 2007. "Economic dependence on forest resources: A case from millennium
ecosystem assessment. Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis.
Mekonnen, et al., 2013. In rural Ethiopia, a majority of the households make use of non-timber forest products
(NTFPs) for different purposes, ranging from food, feed, energy, and medicine to income generation and
cultural practices.
Messay, [Link] is one of the country characterized by fast environmental conversions and modifications
attributed to various adverse human actions, like expansion of farm plots at the expense of vegetated land,
massive fuel wood and charcoal production, overgrazing and encroachment of farmsteads into vegetated
lands
Michael, A., and Ian, T., [Link] the potential of Forest product activities to contribute to rural incomes
in Africa.
MoARD., 2009. Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development; Agricultural Investment potentials of Ethiopia,
Addis Ababa.
Mirutse, G., Zemede, A., and Zerihun ,W., 2010. Ethno medicinal study of plants used by Sheko ethnic group of
Ethiopia. Journal of Ethno pharmacology 132:75–85.
MoA ,1990. Munessa Shashemene State Forest Project Management Plan. F. M. P. D.
Mohammed, W., 2014. Traditional uses of non-timber forest products in southwest Ethiopia: Opportunities and
challenges for sustainable forest management.
Mohammed, N., Ronju, and K., 2010 .Village Common Forests in Chittagong Hill Tracts, Bangladesh: Balance
between Conservation and Exploitation.
Mulugeta, L., and Tadesse ,W., [Link], the rate of deforestation and forest degradation in Ethiopia
fueled by resettlement programs, migration, biofuel development initiatives and ever-present poverty
Neima, A., 2008. An analysis of socio- economic importance of Non-Timber Forest Products for rural
households: Case study from Bale Mountains National Park, Ethiopia. MSC Thesis. Department of Forest
and Landscape Faculty of life science, Denmark.
Neumann and Eric ,H., 2000 Commercialization of Non-Timber Forest Products: Review and Analysis of
Research Center for International Forestry Research.
NTFP., R., and D., Project, 2009. Non-Timber Forest Products Research and Development Project South-West
Ethiopia; Forest landscape sustainability and improved livelihoods through non-timber forest - product
development and payment for environmental services Grant ENV/2006/114-229
Pender, J., Place, F., and Ehui, S., 2006. Strategies for sustainable land management in the East African
highlands. Washington DC: International Food Policy Research [Link].
Sato, J., 2000. "People in Between: Conversion and Conservation of Forest Lands in Thailand."
Sebsebe, D., Mengistu,W., and Yilma ,D., 1996. Ethiopia’s Natural Resource Management
Tsegaye,F., [Link] main drivers of deforestation in Ethiopia in general include conversion of forest land for
settlement and agriculture (for both large- and small-scale farming), livestock grazing, timber cutting, fuel
wood extraction and charcoal burning for household consumption and sales .
Turner, B.L., Moss,R.H.,and Skole,D.L.,1993. Relating land use and global land cover change: A proposal for an
IGBP-HDP core project. Report from the IGBP-HDP working group on land use /land cover change. Joint
Publication of the IGBP No. 24 and HDP No, 5. Swedish Academy of Sciences, Stockholm.