Factors Influencing Community Participation

in Forestry Management

Abstract
Community participation in forestry management is a good approach to pro-tecting forests and
woodlands. This study was carried out to assess factors af-fecting community participation in
forestry management in Chiradzulu Dis-trict. The study employed a mixed-method approach
where qualitative and quantitative data were collected. Results showed that there is an almost
equal percentage of female and male respondents who participated in forestry man-agement. The
Logit model analysis shows that education variables are positive and statistically significant
proving that education influences participation in forestry management and hence education is an
important variable in deter-mining households’ participation in forestry. Only the age group of
45 - 59 years was significant but had a negative coefficient with a moderate marginal effect at
59% (r = 0.59) implying that many people in this age group participated in forestry activities
than other age groups. When the size of household land own-ership was used as a proxy to
indicate household wealth and then correlated with participation in forestry activities, a positive
and significant correlation between households that owned 1 - 2 acres and 3 - 5 acres of land and
their participa-tion in forestry activities was observed. It can be concluded that the size of land
owned is one of the key factors that determine households’ participation in fo-restry
management. Furthermore, a connection between land size distribution and effects on
environmental resources was evident.
1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. Background of the Study

Ethiopia is endowed with immense wealth of biological resources due to its diverse topography,
soil and climate, which have resulted in ecosystem diversity (Zerihun W et al., 2002).Vegetation
types in Ethiopia are highly diverse, varying from Afro alpine to desert vegetation. However, the
vegetation resources, including forests, are being destroyed at an alarming rate because of a
numbers of factors. The major factors for the destruction of natural forests in Ethiopia are
agricultural expansion and overexploitation for various purposes such as fuelwood, charcoal,
construction material and timber, all spurred by rapid human population growth. Deforestation is
one of the biggest challenges for the country. Deforestation and land degradation led to
ecological and socio-economic crises in Ethiopia (Tegegne, S., 2016).

Forests are crucial for the sustenance of life on earth, particularly for rural communities in and
adjacent to forested areas (Belcher, 2005; Powell et al.2013; Slee et al. 2004; Vedeld et al. 2007).
Forest resources can be governed through centralized or participatory approaches. Centralized
approaches exclude local communities from forest management as well as benefit-sharing
arrangements. This approach tends to be incompatible with community expectations of access
rights to forest resources and their demands for forest ownership (Gobeze et al., 2009; Lawry &
McLain, 2012). Centralized approaches also undermine the role of local communities in forest
management and consider local communities as destroyers and encroachers rather than partners
who can play a significant role in forest resource conservation and sustainable management.
Heltberg (2002) stated that many of the tropical forests were state land; however, due to a lack of
property rights being properly enforced, they were open to access and vulnerable to degradation.
Without a clearly defined right to use forest products, local people have no incentive to protect
forest resources. Such systems force local communities to irresponsibly exploit and devastate forest
resources. In contrast to centralized forest management approaches, PFM was introduced to serve as a
vehicle for the sustainable management of forests. This approach ensures sustainable management of
forest resources while enhancing the well-being of forest-dependent communities. In these approaches,
forests are conserved by transferring power to local communities that play an active role in forest
management. The active participation of local communities is crucial to addressing environmental,
cultural, and social goals in rural areas as local communities are more or less comparatively beneficial to
government in terms of conservation costs, monitoring, implementation, and familiarity with local
circumstances (Agrawal & Chhatre, 2006; Dash & Behera, 2015; Rahut et al., 2015). PFM is considered
an excellent option for sustainable forest management by actively engaging communities (Gobeze et al.,
2009; Wily, 2002). PFM was introduced to Ethiopia in the 1990s and nearly three decades of experience
now exist in the country (Gobeze et al., 2009). The introduction of PFM in Ethiopia was considered as a
change from the bureaucratic and technocratic model of forest management to a more egalitarian
system (Ayana et al., 2017). In the Ethiopian context, a key issue that requires attention is the legal
status of the forest management communities. In PFM approaches, legal recognition shall be given at
community level organizations such as cooperatives. These community level organizations shall have
committees that regulate and monitor forest utilization and management activities. The members of
community level organizations have the right to use forest products. At the same time, the community
has the responsibility to conserve the forest from damage and encroachments (Farm Africa and SOS
Sahel-Ethiopia, 2007). PFM has been found to encourage forest conservation and livelihood
improvement. Thus, PFM has expanded significantly and is currently being implemented across the
country with nearly 40% of forest resources in Ethiopia are under some sort of PFM approach. PFM
plays an active role in forest conservation and enhances the livelihoods of rural communities (Tesfaye,
2017; Siraj et al., 2018; Zewdu & Beyene, 2018). Communities can receive income from forest products
such as wild coffee, honey, and spices (Ayana et al., 2017; Winberg, 2011). PFM has also been shown to
be essential for reducing deforestation and increasing forest regeneration (Gobeze et al., 2009). Income
levels of PFM members may be higher than those of nonmember households residing in the same
village (Dambala & Koch, 2012; Gobeze et al., 2009; Tesfaye, 2011), and benefits derived from forests
encourage household engagement in forest management activities (Dolisca et al., 2006). Studies suggest
that community involvement is key to sustainable forest management (Teshoma, 2010; Wuletaw, 2008;
Degeti, 2003). Thus, to expand the adoption of PFM and ensure its effective implementation, it is
important to identify and understand barriers to household heads’ participation in PFM (Engida &
Mengistu, 2013). Participation is the act of local communities actively engaging in forest management
activities, providing space for decision-making, and equitable benefit sharing. Further, active
participation of the community is essential for the successful implementation of natural resource
management related projects (Bagdi & Kurothe, 2014; Obadire et al., 2014; Sharma et al., 2011).
However, despite the advantages, participation may also have key drawbacks in specific contexts and
may be restricted by administrative, political, and financial constraints. For instance, Singh (1992)
identified that gender, illiteracy, and lack of awareness, wealth, and social status of communities may
influence household head participation in forest resource management. Farmland size, household size,
total income, and economic importance of the forest have also been identified to influence household
head participation in PFM (Wambugu et al., 2018). Hence, various socio-economic factors influence the
participation of the community in forest management. In Southwest Ethiopia, all household heads are
not engaged in PFM activities. Consequently, what enables or hinders these household heads to
participate in PFM needs to be investigated. Previous studies mostly have focused on the performance
of PFM and its role in forest conservation and livelihood improvements rather than addressing factors
influencing household participation in PFM. This study therefore examines the issue of what
socioeconomic factors enhancing and/or hindering the participation of household heads in PFM
activities as this issue has not been investigated well. The study provides valuable information on factors
that influence the participation of household heads in PFM and contributes to the literature on related
topics. The identification of factors determining the participation of household heads in PFM leads to
the successful implementation of PFM, which can be used to enhance forest conditions and the well-
being of the community.

1.2. Statement of the Problem

Globally, 52% of the total forests are in tropical regions and they are known to be the most
important areas in terms of biodiversity (Agrawal, 2005). Local communities living nearby
depend on these forests for their livelihoods. For instance, forest trees provide resources like
food, traditional medicine, energy, timber, shade, and habitats for other organisms. The rapid
increase in human population near forest ecosystems has increased threats of degradation and
fragmentation to these ecosystems.Many scholars forwarded that it is important to conduct
studies on the participation of the local communities on forest management integrated with
livelihood and forest condition improvements (Agrawal and Ostrom, 2008).Among the studies
conducted in Ethiopia (Teketay,2009), studies concluded that nothing could be done without

local community‟s participation and involvem community in any natural resources management
activities in general and forest resources management particularly in participatory forest
management(PFM) while improving forest condition and livelihoods of participant communities
should be taken as the backbone and indispensable asset or input to forest management and
conservation.

In rural areas of Gibe district, the fact no research was conducted on the activities of community
participation in conservation and management of natural resources in general and forest
resources management in particular; this study contributes how their participation improved
forest condition with their livelihood improvement. Gibe district specially where forests are
vulnerable to mixed agricultural and subsistence farming practices like livestock keeping, sheep
rearing, fuelwood, timber forest products (TFPs) extraction, charcoal burning and the pressure of
urbanization on forests were inevitable. However, there are communally and/or jointly managed
forests over which the surrounding communities rely on for different purposes specially using
forest resources for livelihood improvement. In this case, the society use their own indigenous
ways of forest conservation and management ruled by local laws, regulations and commendation
as well as punishments over those who misuse forests. In contrary with this; there is another
forest on which less management and conservation was applied rather than exploitation to get
consumption for livelihood