1

Journal Article

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT ON PARTICIPATORY FOREST MANAGEMENT IN ETHIOPIA;

THE CASE STUDY OF DODOTA DISTRICT IN THE OROMIA REGION

Tsegaye Engida, Development Program Specialist, Korea International Cooperation Agency

[Environment and climate change program]
October 2022

ABSTRACT

Participatory Forest Management (PFM) centers on local communities as a crucial counterpart for
conservation irrespective of unwise forest resource utilization for livelihood. A cross-sectional survey
design was employed to collect information from randomly selected three farmer associations in
Dodota district. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and inferential tests that
revealed economic benefit from the forest, the education status of the respondent, the role of local
community institutions, family size, and the age of the respondent’s household head have a positive
and significant association with the level of community participation, and distance of the respondent
household heads had a significant and negative relationship with the level of community participation.
Therefore, poor participation of the community in forest development and non-consistent through the
process of implementation, districts and the subordinate bodies have to promote strength to enhance the
level of community participation by implementing continuous and institutionally strong awareness
creation.

Keywords: Participatory Forest Management, Community, forest development, participation,

communal forest.

INTRODUCTION
Ethiopia’s forest resource shows a dramatic drop from 30 percent in the 19 th century to less than 4 percent
by today (WBISPP1, 2004). On average, the forest resource lost in Ethiopia reached 140,000 hectares
each year (FRA2, 2005).  The massive forest loss was prompted due to two major reasons; (i)
Deforestation by conversion of forested areas to agricultural land and (ii) Forest degradation caused by
fuel-wood consumption and logging more than the natural yield of the forests. The high rate of
deforestation and forest degradation escalated intensely in Ethiopia attributable to the high level of rural
communities.
Weinberg (2010) indicated, between 1955 and 1979, over 77 % of the country’s forest area disappeared
and has persisted to lose 8 % of its remaining forests annually. Her study clearly stated that natural forests
and woodlands covered in Ethiopia were around 15.1 million ha in 1990 however, due to different factors
the forest area coverage declined to 13.7 million hectares after ten years in 2000.
The CRGE3 (2010) indicated that, in addition to its direct impacts on the rural community livelihood,
predominantly to agricultural production, deforestation due to agricultural land expansion contributed to

1
WBISPP: Woody Biomass Inventory and Strategic Planning Project of world bank
2
FRA: The Global Forest Resources Assessment 
3
CRGE: Climate Resilient Green Economy (Ethiopia’s 10 years’ climate change strategy by 2030)

Community Engagement on Participatory Forest Management in Ethiopia

 2

25 Mt CO2e4, and forest degradation due to wood consumption and logging reached 25 Mt CO2e in 2010.
Respectively, the emission is projected to increase to 45 Mt by 2030 in a business-as-usual scenario. 

Ever since the mid-1970s, the management of forest resources in Ethiopia was primarily carried out as
state and community forestry programs. These non-participatory approaches failed to reduce forest
degradation, especially in Protected National Forest Priority Areas (FARM Africa, 2000). Further, the
problem was beyond the control of the state therefore, the ultimate solution for this severe problem will
be encouraging local people to manage and conserve their resources since they live in forests and they are
primary users of forest products (FAO 5, 2010). According to Yemiru (2011), in Ethiopia, there is a
growing understanding about deforestation and land degradation further exacerbate poverty, which brings
participatory natural resource conservation to the forefront of rural development initiatives.

Participatory Forest Management is a new paradigm scheme of forest management that is adopted and
implemented in to fullfill the interest, respecting of traditional users, and bottom-up approach which
encourages a sense of belongingness to the rural people in general and landless rural youth in particular
(Winberg, 2010). Even though the importance and socio-economic and environmental contribution of the
forest is very significant in the country the community participation in the sector is low and the challenge
to realize participatory forest management, is not consistent and is not achieve the goal of the sector
because of the aspects confines the participation of the community.

Awareness of the people of the economic, social, and ecological benefits of the communal forest and the
concept of community participation to achieve participatory forest management are assumed as key
problems. The majority of rural society relies on natural resources mainly in the forest since the extent of
poverty is in a bad condition. Moreover, there is a huge load of unemployment among the active age,
particularly in rural Ethiopia. The other factor that aggravates the situation is the modern source of energy
is found to be at a very low level (over 90% of the rural population relies on a biomass fuel source).

Production per unit of land in agriculture is still poor and unreliable because of the impact of climate
change and low level of technology utilization, and the community is forced to seek another source of
income to maintain their livelihood which is basically natural resource exploitation as general and forest
and forest product harvesting specifically. All the above economic, social, and institutional problems
together directly or indirectly could affect the realization of Participatory Forest Management in the
country in general and specifically in the research area, Dodota Woreda, Oromia region, Ethiopia.

Ethiopia is an exceedingly committed country to Participatory Forest Management (PFM). Consequently,

strategy prepared to emerge knowledge of participatory forest management Ethiopia proclaimed
proclamation number 542/2007 and PFM guide in 2012. In addition to these fundamental legal frames,
there are a lot of practical experiences in the county in PFM, CBFM 6, and the like. Thus, the study is
relevant the all the PFM practitioners in Ethiopia in providing the level of communities’ awareness of the
practice and major challenges that hinder the community’s active engagement at the ground level.

4
Mt CO2e: Metric tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent
5
FAO: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nation
6
CBFM: Community-Based Forest Management

Community Engagement on Participatory Forest Management in Ethiopia

 3

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
Currently, throughout the world, there is a continuous change in the effectiveness and sustainability of
common resource management approaches. Focusing on direct community participation in forest
management has the advantage to observe individual behavior. The common resources management
concept mainly focuses on individual actions that consciously seek to minimize the negative impact of
human activities on forest resources (Kugonza, 2009). IGES 7 (2012) refers to those personal actions that
are directly related to environmental improvements. Many factors determine the management of common
resources some of which are considered as relevant to the study and are indicated beneath.  

Participatory Forest Management

Gender, Age Awareness and Economic,

Education level knowledge social and
Institutional

Family size Institutional ecological

Derived
factors

factors
Benefit
Personal
Physical

Distance from capacity benefits

factors

forest Governance and from the site

Distance from transparency
market

METHODS
Dodota is one of the Woredas in the Arsi zone. The Woreda extends over an area of 3010h 8a. As part of
the Arsi zone administration, it is situated in the north direction of Assela town and bordered by Hetosa in
the south Sire in the East and East Shewa Woreda in the West and North. The Woreda's town-Dhera is
located some 125km from Addis Ababa, 50km from Assela to tin north direction, and 25km from Adama
in the South direction.

Sampling Design and Data Collection

The PAs and villages were selected based on a purposive sampling method. The criteria for the selection
are the presence of communal forest sites, the number of households living around the selected communal
forest sites, and the involvement of households in selected communal forest sites in the past years. To get
a better picture of the topic of study PAs with higher communal forest areas and higher community
numbers around the sites have got priority. Based on these criteria three PAs namely Gerbi, Shekla and
Bedeno were selected, and from each PAs one communal forest sites totally of three sites (Laga Salawa
site from Gerbi PA9, Tumuga site from Shekla PA and Abba Hasan site from Bedeno PAs were selected).
 
7
IGAS: Institute of Global Environment strategies
8
Ha: Hectares

9
PA: Peasant Association

Community Engagement on Participatory Forest Management in Ethiopia

 4

In the third stage based on this multi-stage sampling process, the total sample households which cover
11.24% of the total population have been selected on a random sampling basis from three communal
forest site users. The purposive method was used to draw a sample to select an appropriate sample size
(Israel, 2000).
N
n=
1+ N ( e )2
Where = sample size
N = Size of population
e = level of precision
 n = 934/1+934(0.1)2
= 90
 = 90 + 15 = 105

No Name of Name of the study Total population of the study Number of Sample size
PA site sites (N) (n)

Male Female Total Male Female Total

1 Gerbi Laga Salawa 145 122 267 20 8 28
2 Shekla Tumuga 217 186 403 24 20 44
3 Bedeno Aba Hasan 143 121 264 21 12 33
4 TOTAL 3 505 429 934 65 40 105

Methods of Data Analysis

Descriptive Analysis
Descriptive statistics has been utilized to attain a clear picture of the characteristics of sample units.
Descriptive statistics are employed to explain the demographic and socioeconomic behavior of household
characteristics. To analyze the data, descriptive statistics like mean, standard deviation, percentage,
frequency distribution, and t-test and chi-square test were employed .

Statistical Analysis

Hosmer and Lemeshew (1989), Gujarand ati (1999) pointed out that the logistic distribution (logit ) has
got an advantage over the others in the analysis of dichotomous outcome variables in that, it is extremely
flexible and easily used model from a mathematical point of view and results in a meaningful
interpretation. Hence, the logistic model is selected for this study. The logit model is specified as:

( )
n
Pi=F ( Z ) =F α + ∑ βiXi =¿ ………. (1)
i=1

Pi is the probability that an individual will have active participation or not given Xi
e = represents the base of natural logarithms (2.718);
Xi = represents the explanatory variables;
n= represents the number of explanatory variables, i = 1, 2, 3 …, m, and

Community Engagement on Participatory Forest Management in Ethiopia

 5

α ∧βi = parameters to be estimated.

Hosmer and Lemeshew (1989) pointed out that the logit model could be written in terms of the odds and
log of odds, which enables one to understand the interpretation of the coefficients. The odds ratio implies
the ratio of the probability (Pi) that an individual would choose an alternative to the probability (1-Pi) that
he/she would not choose.

1
1− pi=
But 1 +e z -------------------------------------- (2)

Therefore, the odds ratio becomes,

Pi 1+e z z
= =e ……...………………………………… (3)
1−Pi 1+ e−z

[ ][ ]
z
Pi 1+ e (∑ α + BiXi)
= =e …………….......................................... (4)
1−Pi 1+e
−z

Therefore, to get linearity, we take the natural logarithms of the odds ratio equation (4), which results in
the logit model as indicated below:

Z=ln ( 1−Pi
Pi
)=α + β + β X +…+ β X
1 2 2 n n …………………………. .(5)

If the disturbance term (Ui) is taken into account, the logit model becomes,
n
Z=α + ∑ β i X i +ui ……………………………….…………………….(6)
i=1

Explanatory variables definition and hypothesis

A principal objective of this research is to assess the challenges of community participation in

participatory forest management. The independent variables were identified from previous studies and the
nature of the study area. Among the several factors, expected to influence farmers’ participation decision
behavior the following potential explanatory variables are considered in this study. To determine the
level of community participation in community forest development participation at each stage of the
PFM10 program (i.e. planning, implementation, and monitoring) and the cumulative participation index
calculated.

The overall participation index was created by adding values of participation at the three stages. For this
study, the participation level scored value dichotomized into binary. Active participation equals 1 if
respondents scored equal to or higher than the mean participation score and participation equals to 0 if the
respondents scored less than the mean participation score.  

10
PFM: Participatory Forest Management

Community Engagement on Participatory Forest Management in Ethiopia

 6

This study was intended to analyze which and how much the hypothesized representatives were related to
the household level of participation in the community forest. As already noted, the dependent variable
was dichotomized with a value of 1 if a household was active participation and 0 if otherwise (poor
participation). However, the independent variables were both continuous and discrete.

S.N. Variable code Variable Variable’s definition and measurements Expected

Type sign
1 LEVPARTI Dummy Level of participation (1 if participated, Dependent
0 otherwise)
2 LANDSIZE Continuous Cultivated land size, hectares per HH -
3 FAMSIZE Continuous Family size of HH in number +
4 EDUCATN Dummy Education status of household (1 if attend formal +
education, 0 otherwise)
5 SEX Dummy Gender of the household head (1 if male, +
0 otherwise)
6 AGE Continuous Age of a household head, years –
7 LOCADMIN Dummy The support of local administration (1 if good +
support,0 otherwise)
8 DISMARK Continuous Distance of HH residence from the nearest market –
center in Km
9 IMPRULES Dummy Implementation of rules & regulations (1 if good +
implementation,0 otherwise)
10 COMMROLE Dummy Role of community group (1 if has good, +
0 otherwise)
11 TLU Continuous Total livestock the household owned TLU/total +
livestock unit
12 ECOBENFT Dummy The economic benefit derived (1 if the good benefit, +
0 otherwise)
13 DISFORES Continuous Distance of HH home from a community forest in –
Km
14 GAWRSFM Dummy Awareness of participatory forest management (1 if +
the HH has good awareness, 0 otherwise)

FINDING
Results of Descriptive Statistics Analysis
Respondents’ profile

Active participants Poor participants Total sample T-value for mean

Variables (N=47) (N=58) (N=105)
Mean st.dev Mean st.dev Mean st.dev difference
AGE 37.19 9.63 42.81 11.36 40.29 10.94 -2.69***
FAMSIZE 7.21 1.58 4.89 1.49 5.93 1.91 7.67***
TLU 3.43 3.37 2.44 2.89 2.88 3.13 1.61
LANDSIZE 1.05 0.95 0.97 0.78 1 0.85 0.46

Community Engagement on Participatory Forest Management in Ethiopia

 7

DISFORES 1.61 0.67 2.21 0.82 1.94 0.81 -3.97***

DISMARK 8.71 3.52 9.31 4.06 9.04 3.82 0.80

*** indicate statistically significant at the 1% level

Source: Own analysis

The age of the household head of sample respondents ranged from 20 to 65 years with a mean of 40.3
years. The average ages of active participants of community forest users and poorly participated
households were found to be 37.2 and 42.8years respectively. The survey result indicates that those
households that have active participation in community forest development are younger than the poorly
participated households. The mean age difference between the two groups was found to be statistically
significant at 1% suggesting age has an influence on the participation of households in PFM. In the
study area, the majority of the sampled population is illiterate and did not get the opportunity of any
education. 

The distribution of sample respondents in terms of literacy level has shown that 66.7% were illiterate at
least they cannot read and write, and 33.3% of them were exposed to formal education. The comparison
between active participant forest users and poorly participated forest users indicates that 34% of the
actively participating forest users and 93.1% of the poorly participated forest users are found to be
illiterate. Furthermore, 66% of the actively participating forest users and 6.9% of the poorly participating
forest users of PFM were exposed to formal education. As the study showed, results showed the status of
education of the household head influenced the participation in PFM.

Households that have formal education are more likely to participate in PFM illiterate household heads.
Moreover, the chi-square test (χ2= 40.75) is significant at a 1% significance level.  The education status
of household heads is higher for active participant households than for poor participation households. The
study indicated that farmers who had better education status showed a willingness to accept the practices
of PFM and try to improve their involvement in community forest development. 

The household family is the main source of labor for all economic activities. Family labor is the main
source of labor for communal activities needed for the PFM in the study area. The family size of the
respondents ranges from 1- 12 with an average family size of 5.9 which exceeds the average family size
of the country by 28% which is 4.6 (CSA 2016). Family size for actively participated forest users and
poorly participated forest users were 7.2 and 4.9 respectively. The mean difference between actively
participated and poorly participated was statistically significant.

Thus, actively partaken households have owned better family sizes than poorly participated households.
The result revealed that family size is an important factor influencing households’ participation level to
participate in community forest development. The t-test shows that there is a significant difference
between actively participated and poorly participated households at a 1 % level of significance.

The average farmland of the surveyed households’ equals to 1 hectare with a minimum of 0.125 hectare
and a maximum of 4 hectares. This figure is similar with the average of national and regional figures

Community Engagement on Participatory Forest Management in Ethiopia

 8

(CSA11, 2016). The mean cultivated land for actively participated households is 1.05 hectare and the
corresponding figure for the poorly participated household is 0.97 hectare. There is no significant
difference between the two groups regarding land holding. The t-test revealed that the mean difference
between the two groups is statistically insignificant.

From the total surveyed sample households 79% engaged in livestock production. The survey indicated
that 85.1% of the actively participating households and 74.1% of the poorly participated households of
the community forest development rear different types of livestock. The average livestock holding of
respondents was 2.88 TLU where the minimum was 0 and the maximum was 13.87. The mean livestock
holding of active participant’s households was 3.43 and that of the poor participants was 2.44 TLU;
indicated that the t-test value was insignificant and this implies that livestock holding not determine the
level of participation in the study area.

Summary of descriptive statistics for continuous variables by level of participation

Name of Active participants Poor participants Total sample T-value for

Variables (N=47) (N=58) (N=105) mean
Mean st.dev Mean st.dev Mean st.dev difference
AGE 37.19 9.63 42.81 11.36 40.29 10.94 -2.69***
FAMSIZE 7.21 1.58 4.89 1.49 5.93 1.91 7.67***
TLU 3.43 3.37 2.44 2.89 2.88 3.13 1.61
LANDSIZE 1.05 0.95 0.97 0.78 1 0.85 0.46
DISFORES 1.61 0.67 2.21 0.82 1.94 0.81 -3.97***
DISMARK 8.71 3.52 9.31 4.06 9.04 3.82 0.80

*** indicates statistically significant at the 1% level

Source: Own Analysis

Institutional Situation of the Study Area

Institutional situations at the local level such as local administration, implementation of rules and
regulations, and committee role are among the important aspects of community participation level in
community forest development. The support of local administration enhances the rate of community
participation positively. In the study area from the total respondents, 64.8% of the sample households
ranked the local administration support as good and 35.2% of them were considered as poor.
 
The comparison by the level of community participation disclosed that 97.9% of the active participants
and 37.9% of the non-active participants have responded to the local administration support as good,
while only 2.1% of the active participants and 62.1% of the poorly participated households considered the
support as poor. The chi-square test of the level of local administration support between the two groups
was also run and the difference was found significant at a 1% level of significance.    
 

11
CSA: Central Statistical Agency

Community Engagement on Participatory Forest Management in Ethiopia

 9

The study revealed that the variable, adequate level of local administration support had a significant
influence on community participation. It shows that higher support of local administration enhances the
level of community participation in forest development. Adequate local administration support
encourages and mobilizes households’ to actively engage in community forest development.

Community groups (committees) have a good role in an important institutional service towards the
development of participatory forest management. In the study area, 54.3% of the respondents considered
the committee role as good and 45.7% of the surveyed households evaluated the committee role as having
poor status.  
 
The comparison by the level of participation to community forest disclosed that 80.9% of the actively
participated households’ and 32.8% of the poorly participated households evaluated the role of the
community group (committee) in good status, while 19.1% of the active participants and 67.2% of the
poorly participated households considered the committee role as poor. The chi-square test result revealed
that the relationship between the role of the committee and participation in community forest is
statistically significant at a 1% level of significance.
 
It is widely accepted that proper implementation of the practice of government rules and regulations
towards community forest development plays an essential role in the motivation of farmers towards the
adoption of enhanced participation in the development of community forests. The survey result revealed
that 56.2% of the sample households measured the implementation of rules and regulations as good status
and the rest 43.8% of the sample respondents ranked the implementation practices of rules and
regulations as poor.
 
Comparison between responses of the two groups of the study on implementation practices of rules and
regulations indicated that 80.9% of the actively participating and 36.2% of the poorly participated
households ranked the implementation practices in good status. This implies that community forest sites
with proper implementation of rules and regulations have better community participation rates as
compared to poor implementation sites. The statistical test conducted for this variable and the chi-square
test for the two groups were found significant at a 1% level of significance.

Summary of descriptive statistics for discrete variables by level of participation

Poor Active Total 2
χ
Variable Values participants participants
N % N % N %
SEX 0 25 43.1 15 31.91 40 38.1 1.37
1 33 56.9 32 68.09 65 61.9
EDUCATN 0 54 93.1 16 34.04 70 66.67 40.75***
1 4 6.90 31 65.96 35 33.33
GAWRSFM 0 37 63.79 34 72.34 71 67.62 0.86
1 21 36.21 13 27.66 34 32.38
ECOBENFT 0 27 46.55 4 8.51 31 29.52 18.05***
1 31 53.45 43 91.49 74 70.48
COMMROLE 0 39 67.24 9 19.15 48 45.71 24.19***
1 19 32.76 38 80.85 57 54.29

Community Engagement on Participatory Forest Management in Ethiopia

 10

IMPRULES 0 37 63.79 9 19.15 46 43.81 21.02***

1 21 36.21 38 80.85 59 56.19
LOCADMIN 0 36 62.07 1 2.13 37 35.24 40.87***
1 22 37.93 46 97.87 68 64.76
*** indicate statistically significant at 1% level
Source: Own analysis

Factors Affecting the Participation of the Forest Users in the Study Area

In the study, 17 variables were used to identify the determinant factors of community participation in
participatory forest management and analyzed using the binary logistic regression model. According to
the result of the model 6 factors namely the presence of economic benefit from the forest, the education
level of the respondent household heads, the role of community institutions in the study area, the distance
of the house of the respondent household heads from the forest area, family size of the respondent
household and age of the respondent household hold head have a significance at less than 5% probability
level of participation of the community on participatory forest management. The result of the model (X 2 =
114.50) showed the explanatory power of the model is strong. The Nagelkerke R square value shows that
88.9% of the variation in the level of participation is explained by the variables used during the study.
Table 8 illustrated the detail of the result obtained from the model used.  

Economic Benefit Obtained from the Forest Area (ECOBENFT) 

Economic gain is one of the decisive factors that determine the attitude of the human being toward any
resource. The value human beings give to the resource depends on the benefit they had to human beings,
indicating that economic benefit plays an important role to enhance the participation level of the
community.    

 According to the result of the model used in the study, the economic benefit obtained from the forest area
(ECOBENFT) and the level of community participation in participatory forest management has a
significant and positive relationship with the statistical value of β=6.434 and sig.= 0.021. This result
shows that as the economic benefit obtained from the forest site by the community enhanced the
willingness of the community to participate in participatory forest management, of the participants who
obtained economic benefits 58.1% has active participation whereas of those who have not obtained
economic benefits from the forest only 11.8% has active participation.  

A similar study done by Alemtsehay Jima at Goba and Dollo Districts of Ethiopia in 2010 showed that as
the income obtained from the forest increased the level of participation also increased at a significance of
5%, which is in line with the result obtained in this study. In the same way, studies done by Tadesse et .al,
in Alamata 2013, Ethiopia, Solomon et.al, 2017 in the southwest, Ethiopia and J.P. Lepetu et.al 2015 in
Botswana showed that benefit/ income obtained from forests associated directly with the level of
participation of the community, which goes in line with the study. 

Education Status of the Respondents and of Households (EDUCATN)

Community Engagement on Participatory Forest Management in Ethiopia

 11

Education has a wider range of job options hence making fuel wood collection unprofitable due to greater
opportunity costs of collection (Dolisca et al,2006).  Education is a base for any knowledge and
technological advancement. The result obtained from this study confirmed this reality, there is a positive
and significant relation between the education status of the household head in the study area (EDUCATN)
and their level of participation with values (β= 5.227 and sig. = 0.020). From the total household covered
by the sample survey, 33.3% of those who had a formal education had better participation than those who
did not any kind of education. Of those who had active participation, 66% participants had an educational
background. Of participants who had no education only 22.9% were active in participation. This result
showed that the relationship between education and the practical participation of the community in
participatory forest management has direct and strong relation. 

The Role of Local Institutions like Forest User Committee (COMMROLE)

Local community institutions established voluntarily and democratically by the local community
themselves are mostly indicators of the willingness of the community to participate in a specific project
and/or program. The result from the study revealed that the role of local community institutions
established to manage the forest resource (COMMROLE) has a positive and significant association with
the level of participation of the community having a beta value of β= 3.740 and a significance value of
(1.7%).

Of the total respondents who had active participation, 80.9% responded that the role of local institutions
had a more valuable role to enhance their participation in participatory forest management rather than
those who were poor in participation only 32.8% of respondents recognized the role of local committees
to enhance the level of community participation. On the other hand, from the total respondents who
responded as the role of the local committee had no role for participation 81.25% were poor in
participation. The result from the study indicated that if the local community institutions such as forest
management committees among the forest users strengthen, they can play a significant role in improving
the level of participation by enhancing the sense of ownership of the forest users’ community. 

The Distance of Home of the Respondent Households’ Head from the Forest Area (DISFORES)

According to Thoai and Ranola 2010, a distance of the house of the farmer from the forest area is
achieved and the likelihood of participation has a reverse linkage. The distance of the home of the
respondent households from the forest area (DISFORES) has a negative and significant relationship with
the level of participation (β= -2,386 and a significance level of 2.2%. The result from the binary logistic
regression model revealed that as the distance of the forest users increased the level of participation of the
community decreased and vice versa.  As the result from the study showed from the household head
respondent that their house was far more than the average distance only 29.4% were active participants
and on the other way round from those living nearer than the average distance of the sample population
73% were active participants.  

Family Size of the Respondents’ Household Head (FAMSIZE)

As illustrated in this study the family size of the respondents’ household head has also a positive and
significant association with the level of participation to realize participatory forest management with the

Community Engagement on Participatory Forest Management in Ethiopia

 12

statistical value of β= 1,653 and a significance of 1.9%. As the family size of the household increased the
level of participation of the community increased simultaneously because the proportion of active labor in
the family proportionally increased with the family size of the household respondent. The result of the
study showed that of the total respondents having greater or equal household heads and an average family
size 69.6% had active participation.
 
On the other hand, of the respondents' household heads with family sizes less than average, only 16.3%
were active participants. Another empirical study was done in Ethiopia by Alemtsehay, 2010; Tadesse
et.al; Solomon et.al, 2017 revealed that the family size of the respondent and the level of participation in
participatory forest management had a positive and significant relationship. On the other hand, the study
done in the same area by J.P. Lepetu 2013, in Botswana and another study done in Kenya by June M.
Mutue et.al in 2015 confirmed the same reality. 

The Age (AGE) of the Respondent Household

The result obtained from my study clearly showed that the age (AGE) of the respondent household head
has a significant effect and negative relation with the level of participation of the community (β= -0.179
and significance = 8%) as demonstrated by the binary regression model used during the study.

The level of participation of the household decreased as the age of the participant increased because as the
age increased the ability to contribute inputs like labor is getting decreased. From the total respondent
household head who had greater age than the mean age of the total samples (≥ 40 years) only 4% were
active participants in the participatory forest management. The study result was obtained by J.P. Lepetu
the in Sururu and Eburu forests of Kenya. 

Summary of the results of the logistic regression model

Description of the variables B S.E. Wald Sig.
AGE Age of the respondent’s household -.179 0.080 5.030 0.025
EDUCATN Education status of the respondents’ 5.277 2.262 5.441 0.020
household
FAMSIZE Family size of the respondents’ household 1.653 0.706 5.481 0.019
DISFORES Distance of home of the respondent from -2.386 1.041 5.252 0.022
forest
ECOBENFT Economic benefit of the respondent from 6.434 2.786 5.333 0.021
forest
COMMROLE The role of local institutions in participatory 3.740 1.572 5.664 0.017
forest development

Source: Own analysis

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

Community Engagement on Participatory Forest Management in Ethiopia

 13

The study examined the perception of the community towards community participation in participatory
forest management and identified pulling and pushing factors that influence community participation in
realizing participatory forest management in the study area that enabled it to recommend policy issues.
 
The finding of the research revealed that economic benefit from the forest, the education status of the
respondent, the role of local community institutions, family size, and the age of the respondent's
household head has a positive and significant association with the level of community participation, and
distance of the respondent household fulfill heads had a significant and negative relationship with the
level of community participation. The result of the inferential statistics indicates that to realize
participatory forest management in the study area the above six factors should get an emphasis.
 
On the other hand, they strongly argued that even though the institutional capacity of the Agricultural
structure in the study area, the logistics, and infrastructure of the area is improving from time to time, the
result expected from the extension service in building the awareness and knowledge of the community is
not satisfactory. In the same way, the structure of local administration organized to realize good
governance and participatory development in the community is also having a problem with capacity and
knowledge. Because of the factors mentioned above and explained in detail, the result for the level of
participation in the study area is 44.8% which is less than the average and needs the attention of all
stakeholders in the study area and as a whole in the country.
 
District governments and subordinate bodies have to promote strength to enhance the level of community
participation by implementing continuous and institutionally strong awareness creation.  In this regard,
the current effort of the government to promote community participation needs further expansion and
strengthening to enhance community participation and realize real community involvement in
participatory forest management. 

The benefit obtained from the forest development program should be critical because the benefit from the
program directly influenced the participation level of the community in the area. The kind of forest and
forest products developed within the site ought to be planned with the full participation of the community
in a way that they decide at a planning stage what kind of benefit they want to obtain from the
development program. The same approach should be followed in participatory forest development to
realize the sustainability of the program and enhance the benefit of the surrounding community.

Otherwise, if the experts and the leaders determine what should be developed the interest of the
community to participate is stunted at the beginning and participatory forest management will not
contribute to enhancing the benefit of the community. In this regard, the benefit-sharing policy should be
clear among all members and free from abuse.   

In the study area and the country as a whole, there is a strong institutional arrangement emplaced to
enhance the awareness and knowledge of the community to realize fast and participatory rural
development based on community participation. On the other hand, as the result from the study area
revealed, these institutions should realize transparency and accountability to realize real community
participation (community involvement) to achieve participatory development. Therefore, strengthening
capacity building, continuous support and follow up and a clear recognition system is recommended to

Community Engagement on Participatory Forest Management in Ethiopia

 14

realize the vision of the government to achieve participatory development in rural Ethiopia as a whole and
forest development specifically. 
 
Education is an irreplaceable tool for development and is the main factor to improve the human capital of
society. Rural farm households’ education level determines the willingness to accept new ideas and
improved practices. The study revealed that the education status of the household head has a positive
influence on the probability of households’ participation. Education helps rural farm households in
understanding participatory forest management practices with their benefits. The result of the analysis
suggests that for the proper implementation and utilization of community forest development educational
attainment of the household plays a critical role.
 
Then improving the education level of the rural farm households must get due attention to enhance the
implementation of PFM.  Therefore, the responsible government bodies in collaboration with the local
leaders and other stakeholders should invest in the expansion of both formal and informal education to
enhance the education status of rural farmers. 

Community Engagement on Participatory Forest Management in Ethiopia

 15

REFERENCE

ACES (1993). Activities for the Changing Earth System; funded by a grant from the national science
Foundation and with the support of the Ohio state university.

Agrawal, A. and Angelson, A (2009). Why are we seeing „REDD‟? An analysis of the international
debate on reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation in developing countries. Analyses.
Institute du development durable et des relations international, Paris. 28p.

Alemtsehay Jima, 2010; determining factors for a successful establishment of Participatory Forest
management a comparative study of Goba and Dello district, Ethiopia
Bedru. B. (2007). Economic valuation and management of common-pool resources: the case of
Enclosures in the highlands of Tigray, Northern Ethiopia. Doctoral dissertation.
Cantiani MG. 2012. Forest planning and public participation: the possible methodological approach.

Dasgupta, N. (2004). Implicit in group favoritism, out group favoritism, and their behavioral
manifestations. Social Justice Research, 17, 143-169.

FAO (2008). Forests are much more than timber and much more than carbon “A narrow focus on the role
of forests as carbon sinks at the expense of the other forest values would be Unsustainable. “Strategic
framework for forests and climate change. Working with countries to tackle climate change through
participatory forest management Collaborative Partnership on Forests.
FAO (2011). Tropical Deforestation: Causes, Consequences and Some Land Use

FAO/UN (2010). Progress towards Participatory Forest Management; Global Forest Resources
assessment main report FAO-forestry paper -163.

FAO (2015), global forest resource assessment second edition

Community Engagement on Participatory Forest Management in Ethiopia

 16

Geist, H. and Lambin, E. (2001) What Drives Tropical Deforestation? A Meta-Analysis of Proximate and
Underlying Causes of Deforestation based on Sub national case study evidence LUCC Report Series No.
4 CIACO Louvain-la-Neuve © LUCC International Project Office

Jane M. Mutune et .al, 2015: local participation in community forest association, A case study of Sururu
and Eburu forest, Kenya.

Jehan, S. and Umana, A (2003). The Environment-poverty Nexus Development Policy Journal in India’s
Joint Forest Management program. Paper prepared for presentation at the Annual Meetings of the
International Society for New Institutional Economics (ISNIE), Barcelona.
J.P. Lepetu et.al 2015; Attitude of local communities towards forest management practice in Botswana;
the case study of Kasane forest reserve
Kuhlman, T. and Farrington, J. (2010). What is Sustainability? Agricultural Economics Research
Institute, Wageningen University the

MoFED (2013). Growth and Transformation Plan, 2010/11-2014/15, Volume I: Main Text. Ministry of
Finance and Economic Development, FDRE, Addis Ababa. Nexus Revisited: Linkages and Policy
Options Putz, F.

Tadesse Getacher et .al, 2013: explaining the determinants of community base forest management,
evidence from Alamata, Ethiopia.

Terefe, D. (2003). Factors Affecting People’s Participation in Participatory Forest Management: The Case
of IFMP Adaba-Dodola in Bale zone of Oromia Region; MA Thesis Addis Ababa University School of
Graduate Studies Regional and Local Development Studies (RLDS)

Tesfaye, 2017: Assessment of local community perception of an attitude towards participatory forest
management system and its implication for sustainability of forest condition and livelihood. The case of
Chilimo – Gaji forest in Dendi district, West Shewa Zone, Ethiopia.

Tola, G (2005). Prospects of Participatory Natural Resource Management and Livelihood development in
Wondo genet area, southern Ethiopia. MA Thesis Addis Ababa university school of graduate studies
regional and local development studies.

UNDP (2012). Ethiopia, United Nations Conference on Participatory Development (Rio+20) National
Report of Ethiopia Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia Environmental Protection Authority.
Weinberg, E. (2010). Participatory Forest Management in Ethiopia, practices and Experiences Forestry
Volunteer Food and Agriculture Organization Sub Regional Office for Eastern 2010

Yemiru, T. (2011). Participatory Forest Management for Participatory Livelihoods in the Bale Mountains,
Southern Ethiopia Faculty of Forestry Department of Forest Products Uppsala Doctoral Thesis Swedish
University of Agricultural Sciences.

Community Engagement on Participatory Forest Management in Ethiopia

 17

Community Engagement on Participatory Forest Management in Ethiopia