SOCIO-ECONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF

DEVOLUTION OF NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT IN ADABA-DODOLA

FOREST PRIORITY AREA

M. Sc. Thesis

ZERIHUN GETU

December 2005
Alemaya University
 SOCIO-ECONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF
DEVOLUTION OF NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT IN ADABA-DODOLA
FOREST PRIORITY AREA

A Thesis Submitted to the Department of Agricultural Economics, School of Graduate

Studies
ALEMAYA UNIVERSITY

In Partial Fulfilment of the Requirement for the Degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE IN AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS

By

Zerihun Getu

December 2005
Alemaya University
 SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES
ALEMAYA UNIVERSITY

As members of the Examining Board of the Final M Sc Open Defense, we certify that we
have read and evaluated the thesis prepared by Zerihun Getu Entitled "Socio-Economic and
Environmental Impact Assessment of Devolution of Natural Resource Management in Adaba-
Dodola Forest Priority Area" and recommend it be accepted as fulfilling the thesis
requirement for the degree of: MASTER OF SCIENCE IN AGRICULTURAL
ECONOMICS.

--------------------------------------- -------------------------- ------------------

Name of Chairman Signature Date

--------------------------------------- -------------------------- ------------------

Name of Major Advisor Signature Date

--------------------------------------- -------------------------- ------------------

Name of Internal Examiner Signature Date

--------------------------------------- -------------------------- ------------------

Name of External Examiner Signature Date

Final approval and acceptance of the thesis is contingent upon the submission of the final
copy of the thesis to the Council of Graduate Studies (CGS) through the Departmental of
Graduate Committee (DGC) of the candidate's major department.

I hereby certify that I have read this thesis prepared under my direction and recommend that it
be accepted as fulfilling the thesis requirement.

--------------------------------------- -------------------------- ------------------

Name of Thesis Advisor Signature Date

ii
 DEDICATION

To my beloved Father, Getu Mekuria and my beloved Mother

Tirunesh Ephrem

iii
 STATEMENT OF AUTHOR

First, I declare that this thesis is my bonafide work and all the sources of materials used for
the thesis have been duly acknowledged. This thesis has been submitted in partial fulfilment
of the requirements for and advanced MSc degree at the Alemaya University and is deposited
at the University Library to be made available to borrowers under the rules of the Library. I
solemnly declare that the thesis is not submitted to any other institution anywhere for the
award of any academic degree, diploma, or certificate.

Name: Zerihun Getu Mekuria Signature: ----------------------

Place: Alemaya University, Alemaya
Date of Submission: --------------------------

iv
 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

CBNRM Community Based Natural Resource Management

FBAC Forest Block Allocation Contract
FPA Forest Priority Area
GTZ Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit
IFMP Integrated Forest Management Project
m.a.s.l meter above see level
NRM Natural Resource Management
ORLANRAA Oromiya Rural Land and Natural Resource Administration Authority
PA Peasant Association
PFM Participatory Forest Management
PRA Participatory Rural Appraisal
RFPA Regional Forest Priority Area
SE Standard Error
TCA Tree Cover Assessment
TCI Tree Cover Index
WAJIB Waldaa Jiraattota Bosonaa (Forest Dwellers Association)

v
 BIOGRAPHY

The author was born on January 8, 1976 in Nansabo district of Bale Zone, Ethiopia. He
attended Worka Junior Secondary School and Dodola Senior Secondary High School between
1983 and 1994 in Bale Zone. After passing the Ethiopian School Leaving Certificate
Examination, he joined Wondo Genet College of Forestry in 1994 and graduated with
Diploma in Forestry in 1996. In the same year he joined Alemaya University and graduated
with B.Sc. degree in Agricultural Extension on 8th of July 2000.

Until he joined Alemaya University for Postgraduate Studies in September 2003, he was
working for Integrated Forest Management Project Adaba-Dodola (IFMP).

vi
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

As Dr. Myles Munroe, the renown international motivational speaker, best-selling author,
lecturer, educator, and consultant for government and business, usually expresses, we are a
sum total of what we have learned from all who have taught us, both great and small.

At the outset, I fell very much honoured and it is my utmost pleasure to pass my heartfelt
thanks to the Integrated Forest Management Project Adaba-Dodola (IFMP) for partially
sponsoring my study and for other supports I obtained during my study and stay with the
project. I am also very grateful to Centre for Environmental Economics and Policy in Africa
(CEEPA) for sponsoring training on Environmental Economics at University of Pretoria and
the research work.

I am very much indebted to Dr. Ayalneh Bogale, research advisor, whose coaching and
valuable comments have shaped this study to its current feature. I am also very glad to owe
my deep sense of gratitude to Dr. Richard Baptist, the former team leader of IFMP, currently
working in Mauritania, who is keen enough to read and offer me constructive comments and
suggestions from his wealth of experience and professional wisdom from the design of the
study up to the final write-up. I further extend my gratitude to Dr. Kebede Kassa, the ex-dean
of the School of Graduate Studies, and Dr. Melkessa Waqjira for beneficial and precious
comments during proposal writing, developing the questionnaire and for spending time to
assist me in any regard. Lastly I am much grateful to all friends and colleagues who have
commented on my work and have encouraged me during the fieldwork as well as the write-
up.

vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ..............................................................................................................................V

BIOGRAPHY...................................................................................................................................................... VI

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ..............................................................................................................................VII

LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................................................X

LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................................................ XI

LIST OF APPENDICES ...................................................................................................................................XII

ABSTRACT...................................................................................................................................................... XIII

1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................1

1.1 BACKGROUND .......................................................................................................................................1

1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM ...............................................................................................................2

1.3 OBJECTIVES ...........................................................................................................................................5

1.4 SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY ...............................................................................................5

1.5 OUTLINE OF THE STUDY ........................................................................................................................6

2. LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................................................................7

2.1 PROPERTY RIGHTS AND COMMON PROPERTY REGIME ..........................................................................7

2.2 DEVOLUTION OF NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT .....................................................................10

2.3 SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT..............................................................................................................13

2.4.1 Conflict and natural resources management ....................................................................................13

2.5 FOREST RESOURCES AND RURAL LIVELIHOODS ..................................................................................18

3. DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA................................................................................................20

3.1 LOCATION ...........................................................................................................................................20

3.2 SOCIO-ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF THE STUDY AREA................................................................21

3.3 FOREST RESOURCES OF ADABA-DODOLA FOREST PRIORITY AREA ....................................................22

3.4 THE WAJIB FOREST MANAGEMENT APPROACH ..................................................................................22

viii
 TABLES OF CONTENT (continued)
4. METHODOLOGY.....................................................................................................................................27

4.1 SAMPLING............................................................................................................................................27

4.2 TYPES OF VARIABLES ..........................................................................................................................28

4.3 ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................................................29

4.3.1. Descriptive statistics...........................................................................................................................29

4.3.2. The econometric model.......................................................................................................................29

4.3.3. Variables definition and hypothesis ...................................................................................................32

5. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS...............................................................................................................36

5.1 HOUSEHOLD CHARACTERISTICS ..........................................................................................................36

5.2 CONFLICT OVER ACCESS AND USE OF THE FOREST RESOURCE ...........................................................39

5.3 DEPENDENCE ON THE FOREST BEFORE AND AFTER WAJIB................................................................42

5.4 ECOLOGICAL IMPACT OF WAJIB.........................................................................................................53

5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................................................................57

6. REFERENCES ...........................................................................................................................................59

7. APPENDICES ..................................................................................................................................................64

ix
 LIST OF TABLES

Tables pages
1. Sample structure (number of respondents per category).............................................. 28
2. Family structure ........................................................................................................... 36
3. Wealth category of the respondents ............................................................................. 38
4. Conflicts on clearing of forest...................................................................................... 39
5. Conflict on rights of access .......................................................................................... 40
6. Conflicts after WAJIB in general terms....................................................................... 42
7. Ranking of benefits from the forest ............................................................................. 43
8. Home consumption versus sale of wood products ▪ .................................................... 43
9. Dependence on wood products as a source of revenue● .............................................. 44
10. Income generated from sales of forest products and part of livelihood covered ....... 46
11. Dependence of forest dwellers on marketable forest products as a source of revenue by
wealth status .............................................................................................................. 47
12. Dependence of non-forest dwellers on marketable forest products as a source of revenue
with wealth status...................................................................................................... 48
13. Average household annual incomes from sales of wood products ............................ 49
14. Forest products, which the NFDs obtain through purchase after WAJIB.................. 50
15. Subjective overall assessment of WAJIB impacts in qualitative terms* ................... 51
16. Sources of variation of overall assessment of WAJIB impact by respondents.......... 52
17. Annual tree cover assessment results for 7 forest blocks........................................... 53
18. Significance of deviations of annual tree cover indices from blocks' initial values .. 56

x
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page

1. Education level of household members ....................................................................... 37

2. Age pyramids of household members.......................................................................... 38
3. Annual tree cover assessment per forest block ............................................................ 54

xi
 LIST OF APPENDICES

1. Tree Cover Assessment Methodology ......................................................................... 65

2. Survey Questionnaire ................................................................................................... 67

xii
SOCIO-ECONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF
DEVOLUTION OF NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT IN ADABA-DODOLA
FOREST PRIORITY AREA

BY

ZERIHUN GETU, B.Sc., ALEMAYA UNIVERSITY

ADVISOR: AYALNEH BOGALE, PhD, ALEMAYA UNIVERSITY

ABSTRACT

A 3% annual forest resource depletion in Oromiya reveals that conventional approaches to

forest management haven’t been able to guarantee the conservation of forest resources. To
reduce the continuing overexploitation of the remaining natural forests in the region, the
regional government has decided to tryout the WAJIB approach in Adaba-Dodola Forest
Priority Area.

The WAJIB approach is based on devolution of management to the forest dwellers

associations (WAJIB). The approach excludes a large part of the rural populations (the non-
WAJIB members) to resources that may play an important role in social and economic terms.
The WAJIB groups have assumed legal rights and duties of forest management.

The present study intends to assess the impact of the WAJIB approach on emerging conflicts
between WAJIB and non-WAJIB members, on income, which both groups generate from sales
of charcoal, construction materials and firewood and the impact of WAJIB approach on
forest condition in the WAJIB blocks. Descriptive and multiple regression analysis were
employed to analyse the data.

To address the first two objectives primary data was generated from both groups by using a
structured questionnaire. TCA data of IFMP was used to address the third objective.

xiii
Results of the study have revealed that conflicts on access to, and use of forest products were
there before the implementation of the WAJIB approach occurring mainly between the state
conservation agencies and the community. After the implementation of the WAJIB approach,
conflicts between the WAJIB and non-WAJIB groups have become prominent without
developing into “unmanageable” crises. The income of both WAJIB members and non-
members from sales of firewood, construction materials and charcoal has been significantly
curtailed. Assessments of the annual TCA results of the WAJIB-blocks indicated a positive
impact of the WAJIB-approach on forest condition in WAJIB-blocks. The regression of
overall WAJIB impact assessment on seven independent variables indicated that dependence
on the forest for grazing, after-WAJIB, dependence on the forest as a source of revenue,
number of young (15-29 years of age)in the family and WAJIB membership were significant
at 10 and 1% probability levels.

In the process of putting the whole Forest Priority Area under the WAJIB-scheme, pressure
on the access-free remaining parts will increase. Thus, conflict potential will gradually be
exacerbated unless alternative income sources are developing. Therefore, the project or the
official stakeholders should continue efforts reducing the dependency of non-forest dwellers
on forest income on the one hand and developing forest product substitutes on the other hand.
Furthermore, the duty of WAJIB groups to pay annual forest rent is the socially and
economically appropriate price for their exclusive use rights. However, the income of forest
dwellers from sales of forest products too has been curtailed and population growth affects
forest dwellers as well. This implies the need for finding more alternative sources of income
for forest dweller households than the sole eco-tourism promotion in the area can provide.

xiv
 1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

Until recently, forest management in Ethiopia had been geared to the motto "forest
conservation by the state for the people" rather than the popular motto” conservation by
the people for the people" (MNRDEP, 1994). The forest sector was clearly dominated by
the State in terms of the right of disposal of and access to forest resources. However, state
forest administration was unable to develop sufficient capacities to effectively do justice
to their monopolized mandate in forest management. The State's right of disposal tends to
conflict both with common law patterns and with traditional use rights. The limited
capacities of state administrations to implement forest management according to existing
regulations and conflicting customary use regulations on the ground have considerably
contributed to deforestation and forest degradation (MNRDEP, 1994).

Most of the remaining forests of the nation are limited to Oromiya Regional State. These
forest resources, however, are exposed to high human pressure due to demographic,
institutional and other factors. Mainly because of the transformation of forestlands to
other land uses, particularly to agriculture, and tree cutting for commercial purposes,
deforestation rate in the region is estimated to be about 3.1% (NRDCD, 1995).

Tsegaye (1999) has noted that the observable and continued deforestation and forest
resources degradation in Oromiya reveals that conventional approaches to forest
management have not been able to guarantee the conservation of forest resources.
Exclusion of communities living in and around forest zones has created lack of trust and
hostility toward forest administration units. Many people think that access to forest
resources such as tree cutting for construction, fuel wood, and settlement, farming and
grazing is free or open. As a result, forest resources have been exposed to risk of overuse
due lacking of sense of ownership and concomitant uneconomic use. To reduce the
 continuing overexploitation of the remaining natural forests in Oromiya, the regional
government has decided to devolve the management of natural forests to the local
communities through granting of exclusive use rights to forest dwellers. The consent of
the former has been finalized through the establishment of the forest dwellers association
under the name of WAJIB- the local vernacular to the forest dwellers associations (Aklilu
and Tsegaye, 2000).

1.2 Statement of the Problem

According to the 1994 national Population and Housing Census, there are about 200,000
persons or some 40,000 households living in and around the Adaba-Dodola Forest
Priority Area. Model calculations on wood consumption by Uncovsky (1998) estimated
the wood consumption of a household in the area to be three cubic meters per year. Based
on this estimation, a simple mathematical manipulation gives the annual wood
consumption of the entire households to be equal to 120,000 m3. Tsegaye (1999)
contends that the entire households practically satisfy the whole of their wood demands
from the forest and for some; the forest is a source of livelihood. He notes that the
pressure on the forest is immense perhaps because the community considers access to the
forest as “open” even if it is grandfathered by the state.

Furthermore, a rough Participatory Rural Appraisal by Ficarelli (1996) estimates the

number of livestock (cattle, equines and small ruminants) in the two districts to be
480,000. The livestock belonging to households within and at the vicinity of the Regional
Forest Priority Area (RFPA) boundary obviously graze in the forest all seasons.
Livestock movement from the northern plain to the forest, including herds from across
the Wabe River during the wet season (when land is under crop cover), also makes the
RFPA a place where cattle rove around freely (Tsegaye, 1999).

According to IFMP (1999), the most serious threat for the forest is the decline in tree
regeneration. Seedlings rarely develop into trees because of the severe grazing, browsing

2
and trampling effects of livestock. In addition, excessive wood off-take (for firewood,
charcoal, timber, fencing, etc) is progressively degrading the remaining stands.
Expansion of farmland and pastures has gradually reduced the forest area. The general
underlying problem is the unregulated access to the natural forest and the resulting sell-
out at prices far too cheap for a depleting resource.

Change detection by comparison of land cover classes in 1993 and 1997 employing
Remote Sensing Landsat TM 3 and Spot XS2, which covered approximately 25% of the
project area revealed a deforestation rate of 3% per year (IFMP, 1999). If the 3% annual
rate of deforestation and the current rate of population growth continue, the forest will be
finished in 20 years from now (Uncovsky, 1998).

The continuing rate of deforestation and the weakness of conventional forest protection
practices made IFMP look out for a more promising strategy. This was also motivated by
the fact that sporadic organizational and administrative changes undergone by the forestry
services exerted serious financial constraints and technical bottlenecks on their forest
protection activities. After three years (1995-1997) of initial field experience, the Project
team realized that protecting forests by involving the whole community of a peasant
association cannot be possible as it would only perpetuate unregulated and free access to
scarce resources (Tsegaye, 1999). The last resort was seen in forest dwellers safeguarding
the natural forest as they are in the best position to keep out intruders, i.e., humans and
livestock, if they are provided with the necessary legal right and backup. Through
persistent discussions at community, administrative and institutional levels, a consensus
was reached to try out the WAJIB approach as a new instrument of forest conservation
(Abdurahiman, 1999).

The devolution of forest conservation to the forest-dwellers through the WAJIB approach
restricts access of the non-members to the forests under WAJIB jurisdiction. In addition,
it subjects the WAJIB groups to beat the cost of deforestation in the form of higher forest
rent and/or expulsion from the forest when the TCI of subsequent years is less than the
TCI during the formation of the WAJIB group. In other words the WAJIB forest

3
conservation approach is a ‘serious’ measure that jeopardizes the access of non-members
to the forest for grazing, construction materials, firewood for home consumption and sale.
Furthermore, due to the obligation of WAJIB groups to maintain or improve the Tree
Cover Index of the forest in their respective blocks, they have assumed new responsibility
of keeping out intruders in from outside and free rider among themselves, which may
affect their social and historical relationship with the non-forest dwellers.

4
1.3 Objectives

Any forest management approach is to strike an appropriate balance between restricting

access to a scarce and vital resource on the one hand and the need for satisfying basic
needs of resource-poor rural populations on the other hand. Resistance to the WAJIB-
approach, which is on its way of being widely implemented in Adaba-Dodola FPA,
mainly stems from its radical exclusion of a large part of the rural populations from
unrestricted forest use. How promising is the approach in striking the right balance? This
is the question, which the present study wants to address. Put differently, the study
attempts at looking into the question of whether the envisaged positive ecological impact
of WAJIB merits its probable social costs.

Thus, the general objective of the present study is to assess the impact of granting
exclusive user rights to forest dwellers, which implies restricting the access of non-forest
dwellers to resources that may play an important role in social and economic terms. More
specifically, the present impact assessment intends to:
1. Examine the trend of social conflicts that may have emerged between WAJIB
members and non members with the implementation of the WAJIB approach;
2. Analyse the trend of forest condition in WAJIB blocks;
3. Assess the impact of the WAJIB approach on revenues both forest and non-forest
dwellers generate from the sales of wood products;

1.4 Scope and limitations of the Study

The present study has attempted to attain its underlined objectives. Nevertheless, there
were a lot of bottlenecks that has limited its scope. Among these, the study has
purposively considered only two PAs, which pioneered to implement the WAJIB
approach, from the 36 PAs that are located in and around Adaba-Dodola Forest Priority
Area. In addition, the study has looked into very specific economic, environmental and

5
social aspects of the approach and therefore there will be a greater room for subsequent
studies on the same with wider scope and in-depth considerations.

1.5 Outline of the Study

The thesis consists of six major parts. The first part includes the background, statement of
the problem and objectives among others. Under the second major part review of relevant
literatures is presented. The third major part deals with description of the Adaba-Dodola
FPA and leads to part four, which presents an overview of the explanation of the research
methodology. Results are presented and discussed in part five. The last part summarizes
the findings of the study and provides pertinent recommendations.

6
 2. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Property Rights and Common Property Regime

Bromley (1991) defines “property right” as “the capacity to call upon the collective to
stand behind one’s claim to benefit stream.” Property rights are the function of what
people are willing to acknowledge. A property owner’s actions are limited by the
expectations and rights of other people as formally sanctioned and sustained in law
(Meyer, 2001). A complete bundle of property rights would include assorted rights of use
(from the right to use and change the use of a resource to the right to destroy a resource)
as well as rights of alienation (e.g. transfers through bequeathing rights to heirs and/or
selling rights) (Schlager and Ostrom, 1992). Property rights that assure users the ability to
derive benefits from resources over the long term are necessary to induce them to bear the
management cost (Knox and Meinzen-Dick, 2001). The assignment and enforcement of
property rights is a way of institutionalising ownership of resources (Starret, 2003).

Common property regime is used to refer to a property rights arrangement in which a

group of resource users share rights and duties towards a resource. It represents private
property to group of co-owners. The management group (the “owners”) have right to
exclude non-members and non-members have duty to abide by the exclusion. Thus
common property is common, not to all, but to a specified group of users who share
rights and duties to a resource (Runge, 1981; Bromely and Cernea, 1989; Feeny et al.
1990; Swaney, 1990; Mckean and Ostrom 1995; McCay1996). Individual members of the
management group (the “co-owners”) have both rights and duties with respect to the use
rates and maintenance of the thing they owned (Mckean and Ostrom, 1995).

The property rights in common property regimes are exclusive to the co-owners
(members of the user group), alike in private property regime and they are secure if they
receive appropriate legal support from governments and in some settings they are fully

7
alienable (Mckean and Ostrom, 1995). Hence common property regimes are referred to
as a shared private property.

Common property regimes are ways of privatizing the rights to something without
dividing it into pieces and such a scheme would be obviously desirable when the resource
system is most productively managed as an intact whole rather than in uncoordinated bits
and pieces (Mckean and Ostrom, 1995). Common property rights are generally tied to the
community of common property owners; unlike private property, access and use cannot
be exchanged separately (Gorman, 2001).

Historically common property regimes have evolved in places where the demand for a
resource is too great to tolerate open access, so property rights in resources have to be
created, but some other factor such as resource indivisibility, uncertainty in the location
of productive zones, productive efficiency through the internalization of externalities and
administrative efficiencies makes it impossible or undesirable the resource itself (Mckean
and Ostrom, 1995).

Common property regimes have been used effectively in many countries of the world.
Nevertheless, this management regime is not a sole panacea for natural resource conflicts.
It will only work to the extent that the local community and the holders of property
claims agree to participate (Gorman, 2001). The success of the system in fishing
management, grazing, and groundwater management warrants its consideration in a wide
variety of natural resource and environmental quality situations. Conflicts regarding
environmental quality, watershed management, and forest management may benefit from
utilization of common property management regimes (Gorman, 2001)

In order to regulate the use and management of common pool forest resources, there must
be institution that authorize and secure use by a particular group of users (to the exclusion
of others), and institutions that set rules to govern this use and monitor and enforce those
rules. Thus the common property systems can function only if the groups organised, or
can organise itself, to set and implement such rules, provide individual members with

8
inputs and services that are more effective when organised collectively, and provide a
mechanism for negotiation and liaison with the state and other entities (FAO, 1998).

Common property regimes have the following advantages (Mckean and Ostrom 1995):
a) Like individual parcellation, common property gives resource owners the
incentive to husband their resources, to make investments in resources quality
and to manage them sustainabily and thus efficiently over the long term.
However, unlike individual parcellation, common property offers a way to
continue limited harvesting from a threatened or vulnerable resource system
while solving the monitoring and enforcement problems posed by the need to
limit that harvesting.
b) If human beings depend on extracting as much out of a resource system as the
system can sustainabily offer, then a careful mutual fine-tuning of their resource
use become essential. Common property regimes are essentially a way to
institutionalise and orchestrate this kind of fine-tuning when resource systems
are pushed to their limits.

9
2.2 Devolution of Natural Resources Management

Historically, governments have tended to try to increase their control in forests in pursuit
of revenue and environmental objectives, and consequently have usually progressively
limited local rights rather than support them (Arnold and Bird, 1999). However, the last
two decades have witnessed a paradigm shift in conservation and natural resources
management from centralized and costly state-centred control towards approaches in
which local people play a much more active role in situation where local people also
draw upon the forests (Arnold and Bird, 1999 and Knox and Meinzen-Dick, 2001). These
reforms purportedly aim to increase resource user participation in natural resource
management decisions and benefits by restructuring the power relations between central
state and communities through the transfer of management of authority to the local level
organizations (Shackelton et al., 2002).

Knox and Meinzen-Dick (2001) has defined devolution as the transfer of rights and
responsibilities to user groups at the local level. Ribot (1999) indicates that devolution
involves the transfer of authority over the natural resource decision-making and benefits
from central state to local authorities. According to him, these organisations are
accountable to their membership, usually those who depend on the resource, but they
represent neither the local community nor others in society at large.

The crux of devolution policymaking is transferring the property rights to resources to

local users and strengthening tenure security-not always through ownership rights but
also devolving access, management, withdrawal and other types of rights (Knox and
Meinzen-Dick, 2001). Devolution signifies transfers of collective-choice rights and
responsibilities from state to common property regimes (Marshall, 2004). Hence property
rights and collective action lie at the heart of the devolution process because of the legal
and organizational implications of transferring authority over natural resources (Knox
and Meinzen-Dick, 2001). Devolution of power and use rights in natural resource
management to local communities can be of many kinds and granting exclusive rights of

10
forests in the WAJIB is among the many faces of those strategies and devolution
mechanisms (Terefe, 2002).

The implicit assumption of devolution is that it leads to more equitable and sustainable
use of natural resources, resulting ultimately in improvements in welfare and poverty
reduction among the resource users (Jagger et al., 2003). Many governments in Africa,
the Americans, Asia, and Eastern Europe have devolved or are adopting policies to
devolve responsibility over natural resource management to local administrations, user
groups and individuals (Knox and Meinzen-Dick, 2001; Lind and Cappon, 2001).

The past decade has seen as a growing recognition of the benefits that can be derived
from transferring control over natural resources from central governments to local bodies
and devolution has made its way to national policy agendas for several reasons. The first
reason is recognition of the limited effectiveness of the state in managing the natural
resources, especially at local level. Local users often have intimate knowledge of the
resource, which is especially important where the resources vary greatly over space and
time. Users who live and work in the area also may have and edge over government
agents in monitoring use of the resource and compliance with the rules. Because their
livelihood depend on the resource, local users often are assumed to have the greatest
incentives to maintain the resource base, particularly if they make decisions and devise
the rules (Knox and Meinzen-Dick, 2001). The second reason that devolution is
appearing on national policy agendas is that natural resources in most developing
countries are not properly managed and deforestation, over fishing, overgrazing and
deterioration of irrigation facilities have become major problems due to financial
limitation to adequately monitor the use of these resources. Finally, devolution of
resource management opens the door for more democratic processes to emerge by
shifting greater authority and decision-making to the rural people. When such reforms
place greater control over livelihood assets into the hands of the poor, such control can be
a powerful tool for poverty alleviation and self-determination

11
Knox and Meinzen-Dick (2001) contend that despite user management’s obvious
potential to reduce poverty and improve efficiency, countries that have transferred
management of resources to local users have experienced mixed outcomes. The
performance of these reforms often is related to issues of collective action and property
rights.

In spite of its potential, devolution will not entirely resolve the problem of degradation of
natural resources. There is a strong need to address poverty, particularly in the remote
areas, where resource users may have few subsistence and income-generating alternatives
beyond exploiting their natural resource base (Knox and Meinzen-Dick, 2001). A review
of devolution approaches by Shackelton et al. (2002) across most sites in Asia and South
Africa reveals positive as well as negative consequences of devolution of natural
resources management on the local communities. They identified that devolution policies
yielded only limited benefits as an incentive to encourage people to support activities that
met government revenue or conservation interests than local livelihood needs. In addition
financial benefits from devolved management usually fall short of local expectations;
returns were far less than anticipated and inadequate to maintain local enthusiasm.

Devolution also indirectly provided other benefits in some cases. Local people previously
considered poachers, criminals and squatters were now seen as legitimate resource users
in most sites (Shackelton et al., 2002). By encouraging local people join new networks
and forge new relationships, devolution may have also contributed to villagers’
organizational capacity and political capital. In Asia where devolution has been in place
longer, local populations were demanding more autonomy bringing about such reforms
(Shackelton et al., 2002). In some countries, devolution policies addressed equity issues
and made in roads to enhancing participation of marginalized groups and women in
decision-making (ex. Makulele, South Africa, Botswana). The indirect benefits didn’t,
however occur in all sites. In some cases devolution policies damaged existing
organizational capacity, local enterprise and equitable social relations (Shackelton et al.,
2002).

12
2.3 Social Impact Assessment

Social impacts refers to the consequences to human population of any public or private
action that alter ways in which people live, work, play, relate to one another, organize to
meet their needs and generally cope with other members of the society. Social impact
assessment is a method of analysing what the government, a program or a project action
may have on the social environment (USDC, 1994). This document lists conflicts among
the important variables to be examined in social impact assessment.

2.4.1 Conflict and natural resources management

A review of conflict literature reveals numerous theoretical approaches to describing and

explaining conflict. Conflict is a function of social structure (sociology), of power or
class relations (political science) and individual utility maximization (economics). It is
positive and negative, constructive and destructive (Powelson, 1972), violent, coercive
and non-violent (Wallace, 1993). Gefu (2002) has also noted that it is generally
acceptable that where there are competing users for a resource, some amount of conflict
may be imminent.

The word 'conflict' carries a negative connotation. It is often thought of as the opposite of
co-operation and peace, and is most commonly associated with violence or the threat of
violence. This view of conflict is not always helpful. In many settings, it should be seen
as a potential force for positive social change - its presence is a visible demonstration of
society adapting to a new political, economic or physical environment (Warner and
Jones, 1998). Mitchell (1997) noted that conflicts or disputes are not necessarily bad or
undesirable. They can help to identify when a process or procedure is not working
effectively, and can help analysts and managers that there are legitimately different
values and views. Conflict can be described as negative when the outcomes are zero-sum
game (one benefits at the expense of the other) rather than a positive sum-game where
everyone benefits (Powelson, 1972).

13
Conflict over natural resources such as land, water, and forests is ubiquitous (Anderson et
al. 1996; Ayling and Kelly, 1997). People everywhere have competed for the natural
resources they need or want to ensure or enhance their livelihoods. Conflicts over natural
resources can take place at a variety of levels, from within the household to local,
regional, societal, and global scales. As noted by Homer-Dixon and Blitt (1998), the
effect of environmental scarcity such as constrained agricultural output, constrained
economic production, migration, social segmentation and disrupted institutions… can,
either singly or in combination, produce or exacerbate conflicts among groups.

2.4.1.1 Causes of conflicts

Conflicts can arise because of various reasons: the introduction of new technologies,
commercialisation of common property resources, privatisation of public services,
growing consumerism, new government policies for Community Based Natural Resource
Management (CBNRM). All of these exert pressure on individuals and community
groups towards change and eventually to conflicts that are not something that can be
avoided or suppressed (Makarabirom, 1999). Warner and Jones (1998) have added that
conflicts might arise because resources are limited and are not in infinite supply, lack of
attention to the process of effectively involving local people and other stakeholders who
care about natural resources planning management, and decision-making. Conflicts arise
also when local traditional practices conflict with imposed national policies. Natural
resource conflicts often emerge because people have different use for resources, when
interests and needs are incompatible or when the priorities of some interest groups are not
considered in policies, programs and projects (FAO, 2000). Conflicts manifest
themselves in many different ways, ranging from breaking rules to acts of sabotage and
violence (FAO, 2000). Some times conflicts are hidden or latent.

14
Based on the work of Dorcey (1986), four basic causes of conflicts are identified.
1. Differences in knowledge or understanding- implies to lack of agreement between
conflicting parties about the nature of the problem and the means to resolve it.
2. Differences in values- there might be sharp divergence regarding the ultimate
endpoint sought.
3. Differences about distribution of benefits and costs- even if the various sides in a
conflict accept the same evidence and diagnosis, and have similar values, conflict
may emerge from differences in interest. In other words conflict arises not
because of differences regarding who will be the beneficiaries, and who will carry
the burden of the costs.
4. Differences due to personalities and circumstances of interested parties-
differences may arise because of personality conflicts, or historical circumstances.

Thus one group may be angry or bitter that at some previous time one of the other groups
blocked its attempts to achieve something very important to it. As a result, regarding the
current situation, there may be determination to use this occasion to “get even”, or to
“pay back” the other side. Or there may be the belief, based on perception or fact, that on
a previous occasion another side was dishonest, or at least withheld some key
information. Consequently, there may be unwillingness to trust or respect the other side,
based on the earlier experience. On that basis, there will be reluctance to reach agreement
for fear that yet again it will later turnout that the other side had not been open or honest.

The use of natural resources is susceptible to conflict for a number of reasons. First,
natural resources are embedded in an environment or interconnected space where actions
by one individual or group may generate effects far off-site. Second, natural resources are
also embedded in a shared social space where complex and unequal relations are
established among a wide range of social actors — agro-export producers, small-scale
farmers, ethnic minorities, government agencies, etc. Third, natural resources are subject
to increasing scarcity due to rapid environmental change, increasing demand, and their
unequal distribution (Homer-Dixon and Blitt 1998). Fourth, natural resources are used by
people in ways that are defined symbolically. Land, forests, and waterways are not just

15
material resources people compete over, but are also part of a particular way of life
(farmer, rancher, fisher, and logger), an ethnic identity, and a set of gender and age roles.

2.4.1.2 Categories of conflicts

Grimble and Wellard (1997) have categorized conflicts in terms of whether they occur at
the micro-micro levels or micro-macro levels, i.e. among community groups and outside
organizations. Conroy et al. (1998) have further categorized micro-micro conflicts as
taking place either within the group directly involved (e.g. a forest 'user' group), or
between this group and those not directly involved (e.g. between the 'user' group and
women entering the forest to collect fuel wood).

Warner and Jones (1998) have affirmed that in many rural areas the competition that
arises because of a combination of demographic change and the physical limits to
renewable resources (forests, water bodies, grazing areas, marine resources, wildlife and
agricultural land) is often cited as the underlying cause of micro-micro conflicts. They
have noted that two further casual forces need to be added to these factors. The first is the
increasingly complex array of developmental pressures, which can skew access to the
natural resources, accentuate existing levels of competition and concentrate resource
degradation within small areas. The second is the presence of deeper-seated latent
conflicts. These include the structural inequalities inherent in legal definitions of land
ownership and resource use; regional economic and political elites supporting
commercial interests over-and-above those of local groups; and longstanding ethnic and
cultural differences. These latent conflicts lie often dormant until 're-awaked' by
particular set of developmental process. The effects of these conflicts can range from a
temporary reduction in the efficiency of resource management to the collapse of CBNRM
projects (whether they are sponsored by government, NGOs or donors). In extreme cases,
conflicts over NRM can escalate into physical violence. Therefore, conflict management
is considered as an essential prerequisite to ensure sustainable forest use and to bring
about fair solutions among contending parties (Warner and Jones, 1998).

16
Warner and Jones (1998) have also divided conflicts within CBNRM into two principal
types: those caused directly by new developmental pressures, and those that are normally
latent but which can be disturbed as an indirect consequences of these pressures.
Bennett (2000) has mentioned an important economic explanation for causes of conflicts
over natural resources. She revealed that the allocation of scarce resources requires trade-
offs, which become increasingly difficult as the demand for and supply of resources
changes. According to her, natural resource conflicts occur when the resource in question
has become so scarce or degraded as to raise the issues of allocation amongst the
community of users. Powelson (1972) argues that so long as the answer to 'who get how
much' is resolved by producing more, conflicts over allocation are positive because they
encourage growth. When the ecological boundaries of resources have been reached,
further expansion is no longer possible without adverse consequences and the division of
metaphorical cake has to change because the option of increasing the size of the cake is
no longer possible. At this point, resource allocation mechanisms come under increased
pressure to satisfy all users. The equity of resource allocation tends to diminish as the
ability to expand production decreases (Bennett, 2000). She has further noted that as the
government departments attempt to placate all the stakeholders, so resource allocation
decisions have to change and conflict ensues as certain stakeholders gain precedence over
others.

2.4.1.3 Stages of conflicts

Shrestha (1995) has said that conflict does not usually appear suddenly. It passes through
a series of progressive stages as tension builds. According to him a conflict may have the
following stages.
a. Latent conflict: this is a stage in which the basic conditions for potential
conflict exist but have not yet been recognized.
b. Perceived conflict: is a stage at which causes of conflict is recognized by one
or all of the actors.

17
 c. Felt conflict: Tension is beginning to build between the actors, although no
real struggle has yet begun.
d. Manifest conflict: The struggle is underway, and the behaviour of the actors
makes the existence of the conflict apparent to others who are not directly
involved.
e. Conflict aftermath: at this stage the conflict is ended by resolution or
suppression, which establishes new conditions that will lead either to more
effective co-operation or to a new conflict that may be more serious than the
first.

2.5 Forest Resources and Rural Livelihoods

Indeed forest products touch the lives of everybody. Yet forests are among the principal
components of the livelihood systems of rural populations. People living in forest
environments are likely to draw heavily on that forest and its outputs to meet their
multiple needs (Arnold and Bird, 1999). Hobley (1996) has noted that for many poorer
households the forest provides the major source of livelihood requirements. The
resources have been providing farm implements, medicines, and source of energy,
fencing and construction materials, water, fodder and shade for their livestock,
windbreaks, contour barriers against erosion and income (Hobley, 1996 and Arnold and
Bird, 1999). These inputs are often particularly important in bridging seasonal gaps, and
in helping households tide themselves over longer periods of shortage (Arnold and Bird
1999). Chambers et al. (1999) have also stated that forests and trees support the
livelihood of rural people by providing subsistence needs especially as source of income
in otherwise slack seasons; and as capital stocks or savings in a bank to be cut and cashed
to meet contingencies. Cavendish (1999) has added that poor rural households often
derive a significant share of their incomes from forest resources and the link between
these resources and the livelihoods of the poor can be very strong. The forest in addition
to provision of direct and indirect uses is an integral part of the social and cultural
framework of those living within it (Arnold and Bird, 1999).

18
In spite of this in most developing countries like Ethiopia, the government owns the
forest but local communities use them without permission of the government. Local
communities are not given the rights and obligations of what to collect from the forest
and how to use it sustainabily. However, when access to a forest is easy, and entrance
thresholds are low, dependence on the forest would be high, as the users do not bear the
associated negative externalities in addition to the cost of utilization (Mogaka, et al.,
2001).

The devolution of management of forests to the forest dwelling communities through the
WAJIB approach has got double impact on the forest management. These are the WAJIB
members can access the forest products in a responsible manner and the forest will be
protected from over-exploitation (Terefe, 2002). On the other hand, the devolution
process of the WAJIB approach restricts the customary rights of the non-forest dwellers,
who represent the majority in the Adaba-Dodola Forest Priority Area, to the forest. This
is a serious measure particularly for those households that earn most part of their income
from sales of forest products (Terefe, 2002).

19
 3. DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA

3.1 Location

The Adaba-Dodola Forest Priority Area is located in Oromiya regional state 300 km
south of Addis Ababa, in the northern foothills of the Bale Mountains (between 6050’-
7000’N latitude and 39007’-39022’E longitude (Teshome, 1999) in the districts of Adaba
and Dodola. It is one of the 58 National Forest Priority Areas under the management of
the forest administration, and was established in 1982 to cover a total area of 140,000 ha.
By then it was named as Adaba-Dodola-Lajo Forest Priority Area. The Lajo part has
since been deforested and converted to other land uses and the name of the priority area
has become that of Adaba-Dodola. The present forest patches extend over some 53,500
ha of mountain slopes (Abdurahiman, 1999). In 1996, a land use and forest inventory
study was conducted in the Dodola forest region on 26,600 ha, covering the three pilot
areas (Trainer, 1996). The whole forest area consists only of about 50% of forest cover.
The other half is made up of agricultural land and pasture (40%) and heather moors.

The forest area covers the northern slopes of the Bale Mountains from 2400 to 3764 m
a.s.l. Two main geomorphologic features characterize the area. The northern part is a vast
agricultural plain with an elevation of about 2400 m a.s.l and is devoid of tree vegetation.
The middle and southern parts are mountainous with a maximum elevation of 3764 m
a.s.l. They are covered with remnants of forest patches (Tsegaye, 1999). The mean annual
rainfall recorded by IFMP for three years (1996 to 1998) was 912.5 mm while the mean
annual temperature was 15.60C. There are 36 PAs in and adjacent to the forest.

20
3.2 Socio-Economic Characteristics of the Study Area

The majority of people living in and around the Adaba-Dodola FPA belong to the Oromo
ethnic group who originally were pastoralists practicing transhumance with complex
shifting patterns (Tareke, 1991). Seasonally, herders still move their livestock from the
plain to the forest and vice versa in search of better grass, water and shade for their
animals. Even today, livestock rearing plays the largest role in their social, cultural and
economic relationships. As a result, large numbers of villagers living outside the forest
zone continue using the mountain forests especially during the wet season when the
agricultural lowland is under crop cover.

Today, the major economic activity in the study area is farming. The farming system is
characterized by subsistence-level mixed farming of rain-fed crops and livestock
production.

In this community, the extended family system and polygamous marriage are very
common and many polygamous husbands settle their several wives in different places
both inside and outside the forest. Even where this is not the case, marriage ties and
kinship associations exist between spatially separated people. They have centuries old
social support practices geared to enable them cope with adverse circumstances. The
average household size in the area is estimated to be 5.02. The crude population density is
73.5 persons per km2 (OBPP, 2000, quoted in Terefe, 2002).

The data available regarding the area indicate that there are 97,112 farmers in the thirty
six Peasant Associations (PAs) inside and adjacent to the forest with an average
landholding of 2.17 ha. Land allocation or redistribution for new households is not
possible because the government stopped land reallocation processes. That is why there
are many landless among the younger generations of farmers whose claims for land
cannot be satisfied. Obviously, the available land is not enough to support the existing
population unless the farming practices are intensified (Terefe, 2002).

21
3.3 Forest Resources of Adaba-Dodola Forest Priority Area

Trainer (1996) estimated the standing volume per hectare of natural forest to around 118
cubic meters, and the sustainable yield to 1 cubic meter per hectare per year. The annual
deforestation in the area is equivalent to some 1,500 ha. However, the real shrinkage must
even be higher if other aspects such as species composition and age structure are taken
into account (IFMP, 1999).

The forest priority area plays a significant role in environmental and economic aspects. It
has some of the last remnants of afro-mountain coniferous forests in the country, which
makes it a unique source of species diversity. Apart from maintaining the climate,
protecting against soil erosion and contributing to water retention and balance, it
constitutes a buffer zone to the Bale Mountain National Park (Tsegaye, 1999). The
scenery of the land and the vegetative cover make the area attractive to visitors. In
addition, the area was a controlled hunting site at one time. At present, few species of
wild mammal species can occasionally be seen in the area. Disturbed forest, open
woodland and plantation forests have become major vegetation cover formations. The
main indigenous tree species of the forest are Hagenia abyssinica, Juniperus procera,
Podocarpus, Hypericum lanceolatum, Erica arborea, Allophylus abyssinicus and
Maytenus addat (Tsegaye, 1999).

3.4 The WAJIB Forest Management Approach

The Integrated Forest Management Project Adaba-Dodola (IFMP) is a technical co-

operation project of the Governments of Ethiopia and Germany. The Project has begun its
operation in the area since 1995. Its mission was to develop a feasible forest conservation
approach. The executing agencies are the Oromiya Rural Land and Natural Resources
Administration Authority (ORLANRAA) and GTZ, representing Ethiopia and Germany,
respectively (IFMP, 1999). The overall goal of the Project is to enhance the welfare of the
people in the two districts, Adaba and Dodola, through natural resource conservation. Its
specific objective is to develop a feasible forest conservation approach in the area.

22
During its initial years of operation, IFMP was conducting extensive village development
activities and promoting classical conservation approaches to ensure conservation of the
dwindling natural forest heritage of the area. These included guarding the forest,
confiscating wood products, setting up of village-based protection committees, letting the
village community define their own rules and regulations, etc. Considerable resources, up
to 3 million Birr (Baptist R. personal communication) were spent to carryout these
activities without any significant impact on forest conservation.

Gradually, IFMP realized that farmers made the Project's fulfilling of their "wish lists" a
prerequisite for their efforts of forest protection. Though the impacts were marginal, the
Project was successful in getting attention and active involvement of the target groups on
the road to the inception of the more holistic and systematic WAJIB approach (IFMP,
1999). The approach, which is equivalent to Forest Dwellers Association, promotes forest
conservation through granting of exclusive user rights to the WAJIB (Baptist et al., 2001).

Main Assertions

The following are among the main assertions of WAJIB:

1) Resources such as forests are not enough for all community members therefore,
identification of target groups in forest conservation is inevitable
2) Indigenous knowledge of the local people in areas of forest management must be
appreciated and respected fully to bring about necessary changes in forest
conservation
3) Local people in particular forest dwellers are capable of managing forest provided
that they are given proper rights and duties
4) The user groups/forest dwellers must derive sufficient incentive to continue
actively participating in forest conservation

Objectives of WAJIB

WAJIB has long and short-term objectives. The short-term objectives include:
• To insure improved forest conservation
• To empower local people in forest conservation

23
The long-term objectives of WAJIB include:
• To increase forest cover in the WAJIB managed areas
• To institutionalise PFM as alternative forest conservation approach
• To improve livelihoods of the forest dwellers through sustainable forest
management
• To ensure sustainability of ecological benefits of the forest for generations to
come

Implementation strategy

According to Berhanu et al. (1999), IFMP’s participatory forest management strategy, i.e.
the WAJIB approach, consists of three main components:

1. Regulating access: overcoming the ownerless status of the natural forest by

granting exclusive user rights to forest dwellers. Forest dwellers are granted
exclusive user rights with clearly defined and agreed on rights and duties;
2. Reducing pressure: by promoting private nurseries and woodlots in the adjacent
farming areas;
3. Making trees profitable: Possibilities for non-wood income from forest through
eco-tourism and wildlife utilization are assessed and implementation of options
encouraged.

Implementation procedures

For the first of those 3 purposes the Forest Priority Area (FPA) in a given PA is
subdivided into so-called “forest blocks” with an average size of 360 ha (Abdurahiman
and Tsegaye, 2002). It is commonly understood among stakeholders and stands for a
group of people that organized with a maximum of 30 homesteads on an area of
forestland with the estimated carrying capacity of 12 hectares per a homestead, based on
the calculation of a carrying capacity of 12 ha per homestead (Uncovsky, 1998).

24
In order to provide a binding agreement a Forest Block Allocation Contract (FBAC) has
been elaborated by the Project, which defines the rights and duties of the forest
administration and the forest dwellers.

The FBAC has been commented by a legal expert and has been officially approved by
Oromiya Regional Council in February 2000. The agreement is concluded between a
WAJIB group and the forest administration. It explicitly specifies the rights and duties of
the WAJIB and the use rights are upheld as long as the user groups (WAJIB) manages to
conserve the forest (Aklilu and Tsegaye, 2000).

Rights of WAJIB are

a. Settlement in the forest block and
b. Utilization of forest products for home consumption and for sale
Duties of WAJIB are
a. Restricting settlements to the agreed number of homesteads,
b. Maintaining the tree cover,
c. Paying forest rent and
d. Regulating forest use.

According to the FBAC, the annual forest rent is set to be 8 Birr per ha and is only
payable for the area not covered by forest in order to encourage the WAJIB to increase the
forest cover (Abdurahiman and Tsegaye, 2002). The allocation contract also contains
sanctions in case of failure on the side of the user group to comply with their duties. The
sanctions are imposed in case of a significant reduction of tree cover, non-payment of
forest rent, the presence of excess settlement and admitting non-WAJIB members to
utilize the forest. The most severe case of forest abuse will lead to cancellation of the
contract and expulsion from the forest (IFMP, 2000).

Follow-up procedures

The forest administration, which is the executing agency of the WAJIB approach, uses
Tree Cover Assessment (TCA) (Anonymous, 2000) and homestead census as a

25
monitoring tools to follow-up the compliance of the user groups with the contractual
duties.

IFMP has developed TCA based on the conventional relascope technique as an

appropriate scheme to monitor the user groups' conservation efforts and thereby to fix the
annual forest rent, which the user groups should pay to the forest administration as a cost
for the privilege to live in and use various forest products. The method converts relascope
counts into percent area covered by the crown projections of woody perennial plants
(Asfaw, et al., 2001). In addition, the forest administration registers the location of the
homesteads by using the Geographical Information System in order to follow up the
duties of the user group to control the number of homesteads to the allowable maximum
number. Failure of compliance of the user groups to the agreed terms of contracts will
lead to implementation of the sanctions set on the forest block allocation contract.

26
 4. METHODOLOGY

Data for the empirical study were drawn from two sources:
a. A closed formal questionnaire designed for gathering relevant quantitative
and qualitative data from respondents
b. Tree cover assessment results provided by IFMP

4.1 Sampling

A total of 100 household-heads, representing 4.5% of the total of 2,266 households of the
two PAs were randomly chosen and interviewed. The reason for choosing those two PAs
among the 36 of FPA was their pioneering role in concluding contracts with the forest
administration implementing the WAJIB approach. Forest dwellers and non-forest
dwellers represented 50% each of the sample. WAJIB blocks were stratified into groups
on the basis of distance from market centres and selection of blocks was made randomly
from each strata. Table 1 gives an overview of the distribution of respondents. The
questionnaire in appendix 2 was used and applied to both forest-dwellers and non-forest-
dwellers of two PAs in Dodola district, i.e. Daneba and Berisa.

27
Table 1. Sample structure (number of respondents per category)

Peasant
Association Respondent type WAJIB block No of respondents
Forest Dwellers Gede 7
Berisa Mudi 7
Sokora 7
Non-Forest Dwellers 26
Forest Dwellers Bulchana Hubo 7
Deneba Cangeti 7
Edo Sibillo 7
Ferekessa 7
Non-Forest Dwellers 25
Total 100

4.2 Types of Variables

Quantitative continuous variables, Quantitative discontinuous variables and dummy

variables were generated using the formal questionnaire. Average household income, for
example, was specified by the respondent in terms of birr per year. This resulted in a
typical quantitative continuous variable. Age of the respondent is other example for
responses yielding variables of the same kind. Wealth status, for example, was
subjectively self-assessed by the respondent after being explained that, in the study area,
a person is considered to be:
a. Rich, if provided with 3 or more hectares of farm land, oxen to plough his
land, and supplementary livestock.
b. Poor, if provided with only up to 1 ha of farmland and fewer than average
livestock.
c. Medium or well-off, if between the two preceding categories.

Responses on wealth status were coded using numbered levels such as 3, 1 and 2, for
rich, poor and medium respectively. The resulting descriptor represented a quantitative

28
discontinuous variable. The same coding procedure was applied to responses representing
ranks given to the elements of a set of multiple choices. For example, the two most
important sources of income amongst a choice of 6 were given the rank of 3, the two least
important ones were coded 1 and the remaining ones received a code of 2. Average ranks
were thus simply calculated as the mean of the grouped ranks.

4.3 Analysis

4.3.1. Descriptive statistics

Descriptive statistics are important tools to present research results clearly and concisely.

They help one to have a clear picture of the characteristics of sample units. By applying

descriptive statistics such as mean, standard deviation, percentages, frequency, charts,

and graphs, one can compare and contrast different categories of sample units with

respect to the desired characters so as to draw some important conclusions. In this study,

descriptive statistics were computed, along with the econometric models.

4.3.2. The econometric model

The formal questionnaire yielded variables of the 3 described kinds. Qualitative

responses were coded using appropriate scale levels (binomial or polynomial ones). This
amounted to a conversion of qualitative responses into discontinuous quantitative
variables.

Quantitative variables were compared by t-test in order to detect the significance of

possible differences between, for example, forest-dwellers and non-forest-dwellers. Chi-
square tests were applied to test the frequencies of qualitative questionnaire responses
provided by different categories of respondents.

29
In order to arrive at a more aggregate analysis of the questionnaire results, the responses
relating to the summary assessments by the individual respondents of the overall WAJIB
impacts, (the last table under question 4 in appendix 2), were coded using a discontinuous
quantitative scale for overall score. This score was subjected to a multiple regression
analysis. The model used was structured as follows.

yt= f(x1, x2, x3, x4, x5, x6, …)

Where:
yt is the dependent variable
xi are explanatory variables

Among several mathematical equations that can be used in multiple regression models,
the linear function was used to explain the relationship between the dependent variable
and its explanatory variables. The linear multiple regression model was expressed in the
following functional form:

Y= a + b1x1 +b2x2 +b3x3 +b4x4 +b5x5+ b6x6+b7x7+ut

Where:
Y is the overall WAJIB-impact. It is the calculated average of the transcribed responses
using codes of –2, -1, 0, +1 and +2 for Depletion of forest resources, Economic use of
forest products, Tree planting activity, Consumer costs for forest products, Job
opportunities in the forest, Relations with forestry services, Tourism and wildlife,
Conflicts on forest use that has been summarised under question 4 of Appendix 2.
x1 is respondent’s total household number

x2 is respondent’s dependence on the forest for grazing

x3 is after WAJIB dependence on wood products as a source of revenue

x4 is before WAJIB dependence on wood products as a source of revenue

x5 is number of young (15-29 years) family members

30
x6 is farm size

x7 is WAJIB membership

ut is the random error term

b1, b2, b3, b4, b5, b6 and b7 are the regression coefficients of the overall score on the
respondents’ characteristics.
The quantitative TCA-results of IFMP were used for analysing the time trend of the
ecological status of the forest since the implementation of the WAJIB-scheme. The
statistical tool applied was testing of the significance of the time trend observed within
forest blocks, i.e. linear regression analysis.

Prior to the estimation of the model, in order to check the severity of multicollinearity

among explanatory variables, the Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) was computed.

Following Gujarati (1995), VIFj is given as:

1
VIFj =
1 − R 2j

Where R2j is the coefficient of determination that results when the explanatory variable

(xj) is regressed against all other explanatory variables. VIF shows how the variance of an

estimator is inflated by the presence of multicollinearity. As R2j increases toward unity,

i.e., as the collinearity of the jth explanatory variable with the other regressors’ increases,

the VIFj also increases and in the limit it can be infinity. If there is no collinearity

between the explanatory variables, VIF will be 1. VIF, therefore, ranges between one and

infinity. The larger the value of VIFj, the more collinear is the jth explanatory variable. As

a rule of thumb, if the VIF of a variable exceeds 10, that variable is said to be highly

collinear.

31
4.3.3. Variables definition and hypothesis

Dependence on the forest as a source of revenue

In most developing economies where quite large number of population leads a meagre

subsistence living, resources such as forests play a crucial role in the day to day living of

this population. They depend on forests as a sole and/or alternative source of livelihood

particularly in times of crop failure and slack seasons. In the case of Adaba-Dodola forest

a statement coined by Tsegaye, 1999 states that “….all people living inside and around

the Adaba-Dododla forest practically satisfy the whole of their wood demands from the

forest and for some the forest is a sole source of livelihood.” Access restriction to the

forest due to the WAJIB approach is a serious measure that puts at risk the survival of

many poor households that has depended on the forest as a source of alternative income

through sale of forest products such as firewood, charcoal and construction materials.

Hence, “dependence on the forest as source of revenue” is hypothesised to negatively

affect the overall all WAJIB impact score of the respondent.

Household size

From conventional wisdom, the bigger the size of a household, the higher is its income

requirement to cover living expenses. In situations where the average land holding is

small, lack of possibility to expand land holding and the productivity per unit area of land

is small; as well as alternative sources of living are scanty, household size is inversely

related with the income from a unit of land, citrus paribus. Put differently, larger

households in the rural areas where alternative sources of living other than agriculture are

limited are more dependent on forest resources to supplement their living. Hence access

32
and utilization restriction due to the WAJIB approach affects larger households’ more

than smaller households. Hence family size negatively affects the overall WAJIB impact

score of the respondent.

Dependence on the forest for grazing

As stated by (Tareke, 1991), the majority of people living in and around the Adaba-

Dodola FPA belong to the Oromo ethnic group. Livestock rearing plays the largest role in

their social, cultural and economic relationships. Tsegaye 1999 indicated that livestock

belonging to households within and at the vicinity of the Regional Forest Priority Area

(RFPA) boundary obviously graze in the forest all seasons.

One of the basic reasons to the inception of WAJIB approach is the high pressure on the

forest from livestock. Meanwhile, the WAJIB approach restricts the free grazing access

of the non-WAJIB members to grazing sites within WAJIB jurisdictions. In addition the

contractual duty of the WAJIB approach also requires them to maintain or enhance the

TCI at signature. They are expected to minimize the trampling effects of livestock on

seedlings and saplings. Due to this, dependence on the forest for grazing negatively

affects the overall impact score of the respondents.

Farm Size

Farming is not only the source of foodstuff for a rural household but also it is one of the

most important sources of income to cover other requirements of a household. In the

study area there is big difference in farm size among households. Usually those with

33
larger farm size are relatively better-off than those with smaller farm size. In other words

those with larger farm size generate enough of what they need from their farming activity

than those with smaller farm size. Hence a respondent with larger farm size is less

dependent on the forest as a source of income and his/her overall WAJIB impact score is

higher than a respondent with small farm size whose dependence on the forest as a source

of income is higher and whose overall WAJIB impact score is lower.

Number of young (15-29 years) family members

Terefe (2002) indicated that decision of the regional government to stop land

redistribution to avoid land fragmentation and to ensure tenure security hasn’t left a room

for the young generation to claim ownership of land. There is no chance to own a farm

land for most of the young generation in the area. The young usually work on the farms

of their parents and/or contract farms of other people. This and other situations force the

younger generation to be more dependent on the forest as a source of income through

sales of forest products i.e. charcoal, construction materials and firewood than the old

generation. Tsegaye (1999) has also indicated that “--- the young and the landless youth

see the forest as a sole source of income”. Hence it is hypothesized that the WAJIB

impact score of a household with larger number of young group is lower than a household

with smaller young group, citrus paribus.

34
WAJIB Membership

The forest conservation endeavour through the WAJIB approach grants exclusive user

rights to the WAJIB members and restricts the access of non-members to the forests

managed by the WAJIB groups. The approach permits the members to utilize the forest

under their boundary in a restricted manner i.e. without affecting the tree cover

significantly (i.e. below the TCI at signature of the forest block allocation contract). For

this reason, WAJIB members see the WAJIB approach more favourably than the non-

members and the average score of the overall WAJIB impact of the members is higher

than the non-members.

35
 5. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

5.1 Household Characteristics

Table 2 summarizes statistics on family structure. With an average age of the respondents
of 43 years, the family size of 8 persons deviated significantly from the national average
of 5 persons per family. This discrepancy is probably caused by an insufficient distinction
of the notion of “family” on the one hand and “household” on the other. The sex ratio of
50% was as expected.

Table 2. Family structure

Socio-economic characteristics Average Maximum Minimum

Age (years) of the respondent 43 90 24

(household head)

Family size (no of members) 8.16 17 1

Male household members 4.22 9 1

Female household members 3.93 11 1

Source: Own computation, 2004

Figure 1 shows that nearly two thirds of household members were illiterate and only 6 %
had more than primary education levels.

36
 6%

29% Illiterate
Primary
Secondary
65%

Figure 1. Education level of household members

Source: Own computation, 2004

According to Table 3 and Figure 2 below, more than half of the sample households were
children under 15 years of age. Out of the 245 children aged 6 to 14 years only 100 (40.8
%) attended school. According to Todaro (1997) concept of “the hidden momentum of
population growth,” large proportion of children and adolescents in a population implies
high dependency ratio in the present and large number of potential parents, which will
inevitably put immense pressure on the forest resources in the future.

Meanwhile, on the FBAC document it is indicated that restricting settlements of the

agreed number of homesteads in the WAJIB blocks is one of the contractual duties of the
WAJIB groups. In other words, the WAJIB members can’t open new settlements in the
forest other than those registered homesteads during settlement census. The high
proportion of young generation in the WAJIB blocks and the contractual duty of the
WAJIB groups to restrict settlements will sooner or latter create tremendous internal
pressure that jeopardizes the sustainability of the WAJIB approach unless something
fundamental is designed.

37
 65 and more
Age group

30 to 64

15 to 29

6 to 14

Up to 5

0 50 100 150 200 250 300

Number of cases

Figure 2. Age pyramids of household members

Source: Own computation, 2004

As for wealth status (see section on “types of variables”), nearly half of the respondents
classified themselves as either poor or well off. Only 7% considered themselves as being
among the rich. Correspondingly, the average farm holding of the respondents was found
to be 1.88 ha.

Table 3. Wealth category of the respondents

Wealth class No Percent

Poor 45 45.0
Medium 48 48.0
Rich 7 7.0
Total 100 100.0
Source: Own computation, 2004

38
5.2 Conflict over Access and Use of the Forest Resource

Table 4 suggests that conflicts on forest clearing arose even before the implementation of
the WAJIB approach. Before WAJIB implementation, this conflict involved mainly
forest users from other districts and PAs, forest guards and PA officials. Since the
devolution of the role and responsibility of forest conservation and management to the
WAJIB groups, conflicts have become salient between WAJIB members and non-WAJIB
members.

Table 4. Conflicts on clearing of forest

Frequency of Occurrence
Conflict parties Before WAJIB After WAJIB
% %
Forest users from other districts 18.0 --
(PA) and PA officials
Forest users from other districts 52.0 --
(PA) and forest guards
Urban forest users and forest 1.0 --
dwellers
Forest dwellers and PA officials 2.0 --
Forest users from the same district, 11.0 --
PA officials and forest guards
Forest dwellers and forest users from 16.0 97.6
the same or other PA
Members and WAJIB leaders -- 2.4
Total 100.0 100
Source: Own computation, 2004

Similarly, conflicts on rights of access to the forest were there before the WAJIB
approach, mainly between forest users from other districts and PAs, forest guards and PA
officials. After implementation of the WAJIB approach, conflicts have become salient
between WAJIB members and non-WAJIB members.

39
Table 5. Conflict on rights of access

Before WAJIB After WAJIB

Conflicting parties No. % No. %
Forest users from other districts (PA) and PA 10 26.3 -- --
officials
Forest users from other districts (PA) and forest 20 52.6 -- --
guards
Urban forest users and forest dwellers 1 2.6 -- --
Forest dwellers and forest users from the same or 2 5.3 63 95.5
other PA
Forest dwellers and PA officials 3 7.9 1 1.5
Forest users, PA officials and forest guards 2 5.3 -- --
Members and WAJIB leaders --- -- 2 3.0
Total 38 100 66 100
Source: Own computation, 2004

Overall, conflicts on clearing of forest seem to have decreased in importance, whereas

those over use rights show an increase but no longer involve the forestry services or PA
officials. Such conflicts seem now to arise directly between the rightful forest users and
those who have lost access. The positive aspect of engaging in participatory forest
management approach is that due to the collaboration, discussion and negotiation among
the stakeholders, the rapport between the members and the respective government
agencies such as the forest department will be improved (Terefe, 2002). On the other
hand, the access restriction of the non-WAJIB members to forests under WAJIB groups
conservation and management builds-up a ‘social fencing’ between the non-forest and
forest dwellers. In other words, the devolution of management of forest through the
WAJIB approach that grants exclusive use rights to the forest dwellers draws a boundary
between the forest dwellers and the non-forest dwellers who have strong traditional
family tie and interrelated land use patterns (Terefe, 2002).

40
Table 6 puts these general findings in perspective. Conflicts that have arisen since
WAJIB implementation were rarely “unmanageable”. Out of the total of 456 assessments
only 36 were qualified as serious and arising mainly in the context of grazing and the
collection of construction materials in the forest. It cannot be assumed that this kind of
conflict did not exist prior to the implementation of the WAJIB approach. Furthermore,
conflicts between forest dwellers and non-forest dwellers are inevitable, as the latter do
not see the reason to immediately stop access to forest while the resource is still
‘abundant’ and the resource has been equally accessible prior to both groups before
devolution.

41
Table 6. Conflicts after WAJIB in general terms

Extent of conflict
Serious1 and Serious Manageable2 Manageable
frequent but rare Normal but frequent and rare
Conflict on No. No. No. No. No.
Settlement -- 2 37 1 3

Farming -- -- 42 -- --
Grazing 3 4 40 25 19
Construction material 2 20 44 10 18
Charcoaling -- -- 46 1 --
Fines to be paid -- 1 29 6 12
Administration of 1 2 30 2 13
revenue
Rent to be paid by -- 1 27 3 12
WAJIB
Total 6 30 295 48 77
Source: Own computation, 2004
1
In this context a serious refers to the strength of a manifested conflict where conflicting parties reach to
the stage of physical fight and property damage. Resolution of such conflicts calls for involvement of third
party such as the police, the court, and PA administration.
2
In this context a manifest conflict is said to be manageable if resolution of conflict doesn’t involve third
party such as police, PA officials, etc. Put differently, resolution is from within.

5.3 Dependence on the Forest Before and After WAJIB

From Table 7, the non-WAJIB groups who used to depend on the forest for various
purposes are still depending on the same mainly for grazing, firewood and construction
materials after WAJIB. This may vividly illuminate the importance of the forest resources
in the livelihood of these people and also the fact that they have got remaining access to
forest where the WAJIB approach has not yet reached. Nevertheless, there is great

42
difference on the extent of dependence of this group on the above mentioned forest
products before and after WAJIB.

Table 7. Ranking of benefits from the forest

Period Group Rank (1 to 5: most to least important)

1 2 3 4 5

Before FDs FW Grazing CM Farming Charcoal

WAJIB NFDs FW CM Grazing Charcoal Farming
After FDs Grazing FW Farming CM Charcoal
WAJIB NFDs FW Grazing CM Charcoal Farming
Source: Own computation, 2004

FDs=Forest Dwellers, NFDs=Non-Forest Dwellers, FW=Firewood, CM=Construction Materials

From Table 8 below it can be seen that both forest and non-forest dwellers were using
firewood for home consumption and sale before and after WAJIB. On the other hand
construction material is almost equally used for home consumption and sale by the forest
dwellers before and after WAJIB. From Table 8 it is also apparent that the non-forest
dwellers are using construction materials after WAJIB but in smaller proportion. Both
groups use charcoal entirely for sale before and after WAJIB.

Table 8. Home consumption versus sale of wood products ▪

Average percentage of products sold at the

Period Group surplus of home consumption
Firewood Charcoal Construction material
Before Forest dwellers 29.6 100 51.1
WAJIB Non-forest dwellers 34.3 100 38.6
After Forest dwellers 29.6 100 47.4
WAJIB Non-forest dwellers 18.6 100 6.0
Source: Own computation, 2004 ▪ 0 for home consumption, 100 for sale and 50 for both

43
Table 9 shows the degree to which the respondents depend on marketable wood products
such as firewood, construction materials and charcoal, before and after WAJIB. It is
revealed that 66.7% and 43.1% of the non-forest dwellers depend on these products as a
source of revenue before and after WAJIB respectively. The later figure shows that the
non-forest dwellers are still depending on the forest as a source of revenue. The survey
result reveals, non-WAJIB households who have continued to depend on the forest after
the implementation of the WAJIB approach virtually satisfy 80% of their forest products
from forests outside the WAJIB boundaries. On the other hand almost similar percentages
of forest dwellers depend on the forest as a source of revenue before and after WAJIB.
Table 9 also shows that the percentage of non-dependent non-forest dwellers has risen to
57% after WAJIB.

Table 9. Dependence on wood products as a source of revenue●

Respondents group
Non-forest dwellers Forest Dwellers
Before WAJIB After WAJIB Before WAJIB After WAJIB
Household type No. % No. % No. % No. %
Dependent 34 66.7 22 43.1 43 87.8 44 89.8
Non-dependent 17 33.3 29 56.9 6 12.2 5 10.2
Total 51 100.0 51 100.0 49 100 49 100
Source: Own computation, 2004
●
in this context, a household is said to be dependent if it generates income from sales of construction
materials, firewood and charcoal. Wood product does not include income from sales of grass, livestock
products and other forest product types.

Table 10 suggests half of the dependent non-forest dweller households used to cover less
than half of their livelihood with the revenue they generate from sales of same products
before WAJIB. Indeed, the role of the income from the forest would be higher if other
direct and indirect incomes from the forests are considered. In spite of this the lower role
of income from construction materials, charcoal and firewood in the livelihood of the
dependent households may suggest that the dependence on these forest products has not

44
emanated from real livelihood constraints but rather because access is easy and entry
thresholds are low. On the other hand low productivity of the forest due to past
mismanagement and over exploitation by the government, local communities and the
contractual duty of the WAJIB to maintain or raise the TCI at signature seriously affects
their current dependence on the forest a source of revenue. According to Table 10, 49%
and 84% of the forest dwellers that engaged on trading of wooden products respectively
before and after WAJIB cover less than half part of their annual income with the revenue
from sales of forest products. In addition it can be seen that almost 9% of non-forest
dwellers and 2.3% of the forest dwellers are generating nearly all of what they need for
their living from sales of these products after WAJIB. The implementation of WAJIB
approach and the accompanying access restriction is a serious measure for those non-
forest dwellers that entirely depend on the forest as a source of living. A study by Terefe
in 2002 reveals that the ‘excluded’ non-WAJIB members have not got any proposed
option for the lost benefit from the forest due to the WAJIB approach. The same study
reveals that out of 85 respondents interviewed, only 10 has indicated dependence on the
forest as a source of income for their households.

45
Table 10. Income generated from sales of forest products and part of livelihood covered

Part of Dependent Non-forest dwellers Dependent Forest dwellers

livelihood Before WAJIB After WAJIB Before WAJIB After WAJIB
covered N % N % N % N %
Next to nothing -- -- -- -- 2 4.7 4 9.1
Less than half 17 50.0 9 40.9 21 48.8 37 84.1
About half 10 29.4 7 31.8 11 25.6 2 4.5
More than half 5 14.7 4 18.2 8 18.6 -- --
Nearly all of it 2 5.9 2 9.1 1 2.3 1 2.3
Total 34 100.0 22 100.0 43 100.0 44 100.0
Source: Own computation, 2004

The chi-square test of significance of the relationship between dependence on wood

products as a source of revenue and wealth status was found significant at 5 percent level
of significance before WAJIB. It reveals the presence of relationship between the
household’s wealth status and dependence on the forest as a source of revenue before
WAJIB. The poorer a household is the larger is its dependence on the forest as source of
revenue. On the other hand, the relationship between wealth status and dependence on the
forest as a source of revenue was found statistically insignificant at 5 percent level of
significance after WAJIB. The Cramer’s value indicates that the association between
wealth status and dependence on the forest as a source of revenue is rather weak after
WAJIB.

46
Table 11. Dependence of forest dwellers on marketable forest products as a source of
revenue by wealth status

Dependence on wood products as a source of revenue

Wealth category of the Before WAJIB After WAJIB
respondent Number Number
Poor 20 21
Medium 22 21
Rich 1 2
Chi-square (2 df) 9.36 5.054
Upper tail probability 0.009 0.08
Cramer’s V 0.437 0.321
Source: Own computation, 2004

Alike Table 11, results in Table 12 also portray the relationship between wealth status
and dependence on the forest as a source of revenue of non-forest dwellers before and
after WAJIB. The chi-square values reveal the existence of significant relationship
between wealth status and dependence on the forest as a source of revenue before and
after WAJIB at 5% probability level. The poorer a household is the larger is its
dependence on the forest as source of revenue. The Cramer’s value indicates that the
association between wealth status and dependence on the forest as a source of revenue is
relatively weak before WAJIB.

47
Table 12. Dependence of non-forest dwellers on marketable forest products as a source of
revenue with wealth status

Dependence on wood products as a source of revenue

Wealth category of the Before WAJIB After WAJIB
respondent
Number Number

Poor 20 16

Medium 13 5

Rich 1 1

Chi-square (2 df) 7.190 10.247

Upper tail probability 0.027 0.006

Cramer’s V 0.375 0.448

Source: Own computation, 2004

From Table 13 income, which both WAJIB and non-WAJIB groups generate from sales
of charcoal, construction materials and firewood, has significantly declined with WAJIB
approach at 5% level of significance. This may be attributed to the fact that access
restriction following the implementation of WAJIB approach reduces the level of effort
being used to exploit the forest, which ultimately leads to reduced income due to reduced
harvest level. The decline in income of the forest dwellers from sales of forest products
could be due to the fact that the contractual duties they have assumed and the sense of
responsibility they have developed do not allow them to practice the uneconomical use of
forest products as they were doing before WAJIB.

A study by Baptist et al., (2001) explains that forest conservation by WAJIB-groups

implies foregone economic opportunities on their part. The sole granting of exclusive use
rights may settle the issue of unregulated access to the forest resources but it does not
seem to go along with sufficient “cash incentives” to guarantee the voluntary, system-
inherent abstention from overexploiting the forest. Nevertheless, economic incentives are

48
a vital aspect of getting people to negotiate, to reach to an agreement and to continue
participating. Hence the devolution of forest management through the WAJIB approach
should bring about numerous benefits to the WAJIB groups. Unless non-economic
mechanisms (social and legal framework conditions) such as peer pressure from within
and from the village, law enforcement, etc, prevent user groups from over-exploiting to
meet their cash needs from the forest, it is to be feared that economic pressures could
make the WAJIB fail.

The income decline of non-WAJIB from sales of forest products is as expected. As the
approach restricts the access of non-WAJIB to forests under WAJIB control, their income
from sales of forest products will further decline when the whole forest priority area falls
under WAJIB groups’ control.

Table 13. Average household annual incomes from sales of wood products

Mean annual income from sales of wood products in Birr

Respondent Category Before WAJIB After t-value df Sig. (2-tailed)

WAJIB

Forest Dwellers 583 327 5.49 21 0.00

Non-forest Dwellers 538 203 3.55 40 0.001

Source: Own computation, 2004

Following the implementation of WAJIB approach the non-WAJIB members have started
to buy some forest products such as grass, firewood and construction from the nearby
WAJIB groups. From Table 14 it can be safely said that the WAJIB groups that are
adjacent to the non-WAJIB groups are generating additional income from sales of non-
wood products.

49
Table 14. Forest products, which the NFDs obtain through purchase after WAJIB

Types of forest product No. of respondents Percent

Grass 16 53.3

Firewood 8 26.7

Construction materials 6 20.0

Total 30 100.0
Source: Own computation, 2004

From Table 15, it is apparent that WAJIB has brought a significant positive impact on
depletion of forest resources, economic use of forest products, tourism and wildlife. On
the other hand it has brought negative impact on conflicts regarding forest use between
forest dwellers and non-forest dwellers in general terms. These facts can be attributed to
the principles of the WAJIB approach, which is based on granting exclusive user rights to
the forest dwellers (WAJIB members) in order to keep out intruders and reduce the
pressure on the forest.

The independent-sample t-test of the hypothesis that there is no relationship between

WAJIB membership and overall assessment of WAJIB impact is significant at 5 percent
level of significance with a t-value of 7.59. This indicates that a WAJIB member sees
WAJIB more favourably than a non-member.

50
Table 15. Subjective overall assessment of WAJIB impacts in qualitative terms*

Impact Forest dwellers Non-forest dwellers

N=49 n=51
Depletion of forest resources 1.82 1.37

Economic use of forest products 1.51 0.98

Tree planting 0.24 0.37

Consumer costs 0.57 0.16

Job opportunities 0.10 -0.96

Relations with forestry services 0.57 0.12

Tourism and wildlife 1.49 1.22

Conflicts about forest use -0.33 -0.92

Average 0.605 0.265

Source: Own computation, 2004

* -2, -1, 0, +1 and +2 for much worse, worse, don’t know or same, better and much better respectively

Results of the multivariate regression analysis indicated that about 64% of the variation in
overall WAJIB impact assessment score was explained by the independent variables.
Among the seven independent variables, dependence on the forest for grazing,
Dependence on wood products as a source of revenue-After WAJIB, number of young
(15-29 years of age) family members and WAJIB membership were found significant at
10 and 1% probability levels. As it was hypothesized, the larger the respondent’s
dependence on the forest for grazing, the more negative attitude he/she has towards the
WAJIB approach and the smaller is his/her overall WAJIB impact score. This is
attributed to the fact that the WAJIB approach puts restriction on the grazing access of
the non-WAJIB members to the forest and the contractual duty of the WAJIB members to
develop the forest cover. In addition, access restriction of the non-WAJIB groups to the
forests under WAJIB jurisdiction and the contractual duty of the WAJIB groups to
maintain or develop the TCI at signature negatively affects the overall all WAJIB impact

51
of those respondents that depend on the forest products as a source of revenue to
supplement their living. The analysis has proved the negative and significant relationship
between respondent’s overall WAJIB impact score and number of young (15-29 years of
age) in the family. When the number of young family member increases by a unity,
respondent’s overall WAJIB impact score decreases by 0.046. As it has been indicted
(Tsegaye, 1999 and Terefe 2002), the young generation is more dependent on the forest
as a source of income due to lack of alternative sources of living as well lose access
restriction before WAJIB. Access restriction following the WAJIB approach affects the
wood-off take of both WAJIB and non-WAJIB. The hypothesis that ‘a WAJIB-member
sees WAJIB more favourably than a non-member’ in general terms was confirmed by the
significance of the variable ‘WAJIB membership’ at 1% probability level on the applied
scale of –2 (much worse) to +2 (much better).

Table 16. Sources of variation of overall assessment of WAJIB impact by respondents

Independent Variables Coefficients t-value

Constant 0.775∗∗∗ 4.764
Household size 0.001 0.069
Dependence on the forest for grazing -0.003∗ -1.663
Farm size -0.027 -0.940
Number of young (15-29 years) family members -0.046∗ -1.837
Dependence on wood products as a source of revenue- -0.198∗∗∗ -2.814
After WAJIB
Dependence on wood products as a source of revenue- -0.109 -1.532
Before WAJIB
WAJIB membership -0.246∗∗∗ -4.381
Adjusted R2 0.637
F-Value 9.965∗∗∗
Source: Own computation, 2004
∗
Significant at 0.1 probability level, ∗∗∗ Significant at 0.01 probability level

52
5.4 Ecological Impact of WAJIB

Annual tree cover assessment data were obtained from IFMP (Table 17). Standard errors
of assessment results were indicated by IFMP to be exactly the same between years
within blocks, which might point to some shortcoming in statistical data treatment.
Nevertheless, the data obtained were used as provided by the official source. Two types
of analysis were applied. Firstly, the time trend of tree cover index (TCI) was analysed
using regression model. TCI is defined as the total area of crown projections of trees and
other woody perennial plants such as bushes in percent of the total area allocated to a
WAJIB group. The extrapolation factors were derived in an extensive study of tree
allometry using sample of 3910 trees of different species (Asfaw et al., 2001). Secondly,
the deviations of annual TCI-results per block from initial values were tested for
significance by using the t-test.

Table 17. Annual tree cover assessment results for 7 forest blocks

Tree cover index (TCI) in % and standard error (SE)

Initial year 1st annual 2nd annual 3rd annual

repetition repetition repetition

Forest block TCI SE TCI SE TCI SE TCI SE

Sokora 48.00 1.54 52.20 1.54 55.65 1.54 54.65 1.54

Mudi 66.62 2.26 51.84 2.26 59.15 2.26 54.84 2.26

Gede 63.20 1.34 64.76 1.34 64.91 1.34 55.52 1.34

Cangeti 58.35 1.36 71.13 1.36 67.84 1.36

Bulchana Hubo 38.37 1.79 41.32 1.79 38.97 1.79

Edo Sibilo 51.05 1.57 59.53 1.57 51.72 1.57

Ferekessa 51.20 2.54 58.05 2.54 61.89 2.54

Source: IFMP, 2004

53
Results obtained for the annual tree cover assessment data are summarised in Table 18
and Figure 3. Figure 3 shows time trends separately for the 7 forest blocks. Significance
testing of trends per block did not seem to make sense with only 1 to 2 degrees of
freedom per block. Even though time trends cannot be expected to be homogeneous over
different blocks, a multiple regression analysis was performed for TCI as dependent
variable and block effects and time (year) as independent variables. This analysis resulted
in a non-significant regression of TCI on year "within blocks" of 0.33 percentage points
per year at 5% probability level.

80
Sokora
Tree cover index (%)

70 Mudi
Gede
60
Cangeti
50 Bul. Hubo
Edo Sibilo
40
Ferekessa
30
0 1 2 3
Year since initial assessment

Figure 3. Annual tree cover assessment per forest block

Source: Own computation, 2004

A second estimate of the time trend of TCI was obtained from the figures of Table 18
where the annual deviations of tree cover indices from the blocks' initial values are listed.
The average deviation turned out to be 1.92 percentage points for an average time span of
1.71 years, i.e., an overall improvement of TCI of 1.12 percentage points per year.
Table 18 gives significance levels for the deviations of annual results from every block's
initial tree cover index. As it turns out, 4 negative deviations were found to be statistically
significant versus 6 positive deviations whereas the remaining 7 deviations were non
significant at 5% probability level.

54
The overall improvement of TCI of nearly one percent per year must be seen in the light
of an annual deforestation rate of 3% found before WAJIB-implementation. Thus, the net
effect of the WAJIB-scheme comes close to 4 percentage points per year, which amounts
to 8 % of the average forest cover of close to 50 %. This is a tremendous achievement
and it can confidently be said that sooner or later this rate will have to slow down since
the declared and common objective is conservation and not reforestation as such.

55
Table 18. Significance of deviations of annual tree cover indices from blocks' initial
values

Tree Deviation
Year since cover Standard from initial Standard Significance Significance
initial index error of TCI per error of of positive of negative
Block assessment (TCI) TCI block deviation deviation deviation
Sokora 0 48.00 1.54
1 52.20 1.54 4.20 2.18
2 55.65 1.54 7.65 2.18 *
3 54.65 1.54 6.65 2.18 *
Mudi 0 66.62 2.26
1 51.84 2.26 -14.78 3.20 *
2 59.15 2.26 -7.47 3.20 *
3 54.84 2.26 -11.78 3.20 *
Gede 0 63.20 1.34
1 64.76 1.34 1.56 1.90
2 64.91 1.34 1.71 1.90
3 55.52 1.34 -7.68 1.90 *
Cangeti 0 58.35 1.36
1 71.13 1.36 12.78 1.92 *
2 67.84 1.36 9.49 1.92 *
B. Hubo 0 38.37 1.79
1 41.32 1.79 2.95 2.53
2 38.97 1.79 0.60 2.53
Edo Sibilo 0 51.05 1.57
1 59.53 1.57 8.48 2.22 *
2 51.72 1.57 0.67 2.22
Ferekessa 0 51.20 2.54
1 58.05 2.54 6.85 3.59
2 61.89 2.54 10.69 3.59 *
Average deviation from initial TCI 1.92
Standard error of average deviation 1.95
Source: Own computation, 2004

56
 5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Forest resources are vital but dwindling in terms of availability and diversity due mainly
to human factors. In Ethiopia, the annual rate of deforestation is estimated to be 160,000-
200,000 ha. The endeavour of IFMP to conserve the Adaba-Dodola FPA is outstanding in
that it privileges forest dwellers with exclusive use rights in order to regulate uncontrolled
access to the forest and to provide a sustainable solution to the “fatherless” state of the
forest. This merit comes at the expense of the obvious social cost of reduced income
mainly of the excluded non-forest dwellers losing their ‘free’ access to forest resources.
Conflicts between these social groups were to be expected but did not seem to have
materialised in any critical manner.

Results of the study have revealed that conflicts on access to, and use of forest products
were there before the implementation of the WAJIB approach occurring mainly between
the state forest conservation agencies and the community. After the implementation of the
WAJIB approach, conflicts between the WAJIB and non-WAJIB groups have become
prominent without developing into “unmanageable” crises.

A mitigating factor is to be seen in the fact that non-forest dwellers continue to derive
income from the natural forest not yet subjected to the WAJIB-scheme. On the other
hand, forest dwellers too have to make sacrifices. Sustainable forest management
necessarily yields less than overexploitation in the short run. Thus, it was to be expected
that total sales of forest products decline due to WAJIB-implementation. In fact, this is
what they should if the resource base is to be secured.

Assessments of the annual TCA results of the WAJIB-blocks indicated a positive impact
of the WAJIB-approach on forest condition in WAJIB-blocks. The overall "reforestation
rate" of nearly one percent per year must be seen in the light of an annual deforestation
rate of 3% found before WAJIB-implementation. Thus, the net effect of the WAJIB-
scheme comes close to 4 percentage points per year, which is a tremendous achievement.

57
It could even be argued that this rate will have to slow down before long, since the
declared and common objective is conservation and not reforestation as such.

Abdurahiman and Tsegaye (2002) have indicated that sustainability of the WAJIB-
approach depends on different factors such as institutionalizing PFM, legal support to the
WAJIB groups and continued technical and organizational assistance. Baptist et al., 2001
have also indicated law enforcement, peer pressure within WAJIB, peer pressure from
village community, and extra-economic functions that holds for the forest dwellers as a
favorable social and legal framework conditions safeguarding the sustainability of the
WAJIB approach. Some additional aspects concerning the future of WAJIB arise from
the findings of the present study.

In the process of putting the whole FPA under the WAJIB-scheme, pressure on the
access-free remaining parts will increase. Thus, conflict potential will gradually be
exacerbated unless alternative income sources are developing. Therefore, the project or
the official stakeholders should continue efforts reducing the dependency of non-forest
dwellers on forest income on the one hand and developing forest product substitutes on
the other hand. How this can be achieved is beyond the scope of the present study.

Sustainable forest management must tangibly improve local economic welfare, and
generate local economic benefits to sufficient levels and in appropriate forms to
counterbalance the opportunity costs incurred by sustainable forest management. The
duty of WAJIB groups to pay annual forest rent is the socially and economically
appropriate price for their exclusive use rights. However, the income of forest dwellers
from sales of forest products too has been curtailed and population growth affects forest
dwellers as well. This implies for the WAJIB approach to be sustainable, there is a need
for finding more alternative sources of income for forest dweller households than the sole
eco-tourism promotion in the area can provide.

58
 6. REFERENCES

Abdurahiman K. 1999. Community Participation in Natural Resources Conservation

(Challenges and Recommendations) Field Experience from IFMP Adaba-Dodola:
Proceedings of the workshop on Problems and Options for the Conservation of The
Regional Forests in Oromia, 26-27 August. Adama, Ethiopia.
Abdurahiman, K. and Tsegaye T. 2002. Granting Exclusive User Rights to the Forest
Dwellers in the State Owned Forest: The WAJIB-approach in Ethiopia. Participatory
Forest Management News Letter. January 2002. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Aklilu, A. and Tsegaye T. 2000. Forest User Groups in Bale Mountains, Ethiopia: I.
Wood income. Ethiopian Journal of Natural Resources 2(2): 245-253.
Anders, S., 2001. Participatory Forest Management-an Introduction. Participatory Forest
Management News Letter. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Anderson, J., M., Gauthier, G., Thomas and J. Wondolleck, 1996. Setting the Stage.
Presented at the Global e-Conference on Addressing Natural Resource Conflict Through
Community Forestry, Jan–Apr 1996. Forests, Trees and People Program of the Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Rome, Italy.
Anonymous, 2000. Methodology of Tree Cover Assessment for Blocks Allocated to
Forest Dwellers Associations. Integrated Forest Management Project Adaba-Dodola
(IFMP). Dodola, Ethiopia. (Unpublished project document).
Arnold, J.E.M. and P. Bird, 1999. Forest and the Poverty-Environment Nexus. Paper
prepared for the UNDP/EC Expert Workshop on Poverty and the Environment, Brussels,
Belgium.
Asfaw, M., Baptist R. and Tsegaye T. 2001. Forest User Groups in Bale Mountains,
Ethiopia: II. Appropriate Forest Inventory Scheme. Ethiopian Journal of Natural
Resources 3(1): 99-108.
Ayling, R. and K. Kelly, 1997. Dealing with Conflict: Natural Resources and Dispute
Resolution. Commonwealth Forestry Review, 76(3), 182–185.
Bennett, E., 2000. Institutions, Economies and Conflicts: Fisheries Management Under
Pressure. Paper Prepared for the 8th IASCP Conference 31 May-4 June 2000.
Baptist, R. Aklilu, A. and Abdurahiman K. 2001. Forest User Groups in Bale Mountains,
Ethiopia: III. Pasture versus forest income. Ethiopian Journal of Natural Resources 3(1):
109-121.
Berhanu, E., Baptist, R. and Zerihun, G. 1999. Markets for Wood Products of the Natural
Forest in Adaba-Dodola, Ethiopia. Ethiopian Journal of Natural Resources 1:235-249.
Bromley, D.W., 1991. Environment and Economy: Property Rights and Public Policy.
Oxford: Blackwell.

59
Bromley, D.W. and M., Cernea, 1989. The Management of Common Property Natural
Facilities. World Bank Discussion Paper No. 57. Washington, DC, World Bank.
Cavendish, W.,1999. Empirical Regularities in the Poverty-Environment Relationship of
African Rural Households. The Centre for the Study of African Economies Working
Paper Series. Working Paper 105.
Centre for Human Development and Lem, The Environment and Development Society of
Ethiopia., 2000. Mother Earth News Letter. Oct.-Dec. Vol. 4.4. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Chambers, R., N.C., Saxena, and T., Shah, 1999. To The Hands of The Poor: Water, and
Trees. Intermediate Technology Publishers. London, UK. P. 3-195.
Conroy, C., A., Rai, N., Singh and M., Chan, 1998. Conflicts Affecting Participatory
Forest Management: Some Experiences from Orissa (Revised Draft) Chatham: Natural
Resources Institute. (Unpublished paper).
Davies, J. and M., Richards, 1999. The Use of Economics to Assess Stakeholders'
Incentives in Participatory Forest Management: A Review. Overseas Development
Institute. London.
Desalegn Rahmato, 2001. Opening Address, Natural Resource Management in Ethiopia.
ed. Alula, P. p. 1. Forum for social science studies, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Dorcey, A., 1986. Bargaining in the Governance of Pacific Coastal Resources: research
and Reform. Vancouver, BC, University of British Columbia, Westwater Research
centre.
FAO, 1998. Managing forests as common property. FAO forestry paper, No. 136, Rome,
Italy, 67 pp.
______ 2000. Conflict and natural resource management. Rome, Italy, 20pp.
Feeny, D., F. Berkes, B. J. McCay, and J.M. Acheson. 1990. The tragedy of the
commons: twenty-two years later. Human Ecology 18:1-19.
Ficarelli, P., 1996. Report of Consultancy for Extension and Livestock Sector. IFMP,
Dodola, Ethiopia. (Unpublished project document).
Gefu, O. J., 2002. Conflict in Common Resource Use: Experiences from an Irrigation
Project. Presented at “The commons in the Age of Globalisation, the 9th Biennial
Conference of the International Association for the Study of Common Properties.”
Victoria Falls, Zimbabwe, June 17-21, 2002.
Grimle, R. and K., Wellard, 1997. 'Stakeholder Methodologies in Natural Resource
Management: a Review of Principles, Contexts, Experience and Opportunities',
Agricultural systems 55(2): 173-193.
Gorman, R. 2001. Property rights: A primer Common Property and Natural Resource
Management. University of Alaska Fairbanks.
Guenther, H., 2001. The Participatory Forest Management Working Group (PFM-WG)- a
vehicle for networking and lobbying. Participatory Forest Management News Letter.
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

60
Hobley, M., 1996. Participatory Forestry: The Process of Change in India and Nepal.
Overseas Development Institute. London.
Homer-Dixon, T.; J., Blitt, 1998. Eco-Violence: Links Among Environment, Population,
and Security. Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham, MD, USA.
IFMP, 1999. Project Synopsis. Integrated Forest Management Project Adaba-Dodola
(IFMP), Dodola, Ethiopia. (Unpublished project document).
______ 2000. Forest Block Allocation Contract. Integrated Forest Management Adaba-
Dodola (IFMP), Dodola, Ethiopia. (Unpublished project document).
Jagger, P. J. Pender and Brerhanu Gebremedhin, 2003. Woodlot Devolution in Northern
Ethiopia: Opportunities for Empowerment, Smallholder Income Diversification and
Sustainable Land Management. Environmental and Production Technology Division.
International Food Policy Research Institute, 2033 K street, N.W. Washington, D.C.
20006 U.S.A.
Knox, A. and R., Meinzen-Dick, 2001. Collective Action, Property Rights and
Devolution of Natural Resource Management: Exchange of Knowledge and Implication
to Policy. A workshop Summary Paper. International Food Policy Research Institute,
Washington, D.C. 20006 U.S.A.
Lind, J. and J., Cappon, 2001. Realities or Rhetoric? Revising the Decentralization of
Natural Resources Management in Uganda and Zambia. Nairobi, Kenya: African Centre
for Technology Studies press.
Makarabirom, P., 1999. Conflict Resolution: A Case Study on Sustainable Forestry
Management in Thailand. Progress Report, Regional Community Forestry Training
Centre.
Marshall, G.R., 2004. From words to deeds: enforcing farmers’ conservation cost-sharing
commitments. Journal of Rural Studies 20 (2004) 157–167
McCay, B. J 1996. Proceedings, Farm Foundation National Public Policy Education
Conference, Providence, RI pp. 127-138.
McKean, M.A., 2000. Common property: what is it, what is it good for, and what makes
it work? In: Gibson, C.C., McKean, M.A., Ostrom, E. (Eds.), People and Forests:
Communities, Institutions and Governance. The MIT Press, Cambridge, USA, pp. 27–55.
Mckean, M. and E., Ostrom, 1995. Common Property Regimes in the Forest: Just a Relic
from Past? Common Property Forest Resource Management, Unasylva-No. 180,Vol.46.
FAO. Rome.
Meyer, N., 2001. Property rights: A primer. University of Idaho, College of Agricultural
and Life Sciences.
Ministry of Natural Resource Development and Environmental Protection. Transitional
Government of Ethiopia, 1994. Ethiopian Forestry Action Program (EFAP). The
Challenge of Development. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Mitchell, B., 1997. Resource and Environmental Management. University of Waterloo,
Waterloo, Ontario.

61
Mogaka, H., G., Simons, J., Turpie, L Emerton and F., Karanja, 2001. Economic Aspects
of Community Involvement in Sustainable Forest Management in Eastern and South
Africa. IUCN of Nature and Natural Resources: Forest and Social Perspectives in
Conservation. No. 8.
NRDCD, 1995. Five-years Development Plan of Oromia’s Natural Resources. Finfine,
(Unpublished document).
Powelson, J. P., 1972. Institutions of Economic Growth: A Theory of Conflict
Management in Developing Countries. NJ: Princeton University Press.
Runge, C.F., 1981. Common Property Externalities: Isolation, Assurance and Resource
Depletion in a Traditional Grazing Context. American Journal of Agricultural
Economics, 63:595-606.
Shackleton, S., B., Campbell, E., Wollenberg and D., Edmunds, 2002. Devloution and
Community-Based Natural Resource Management: Creating Space for Local People to
Particpate and Benefit? ODI Natural Resource Perspectives, No. 76.
Schlager, E. and Ostrom, E. 1992. Property-rights regimes and natural resources: a
conceptual analysis. Land Economics., 68(3): 249-262.
Schlager, E. and Ostrom, E. 1993. Property-rights regimes and cosatal fisheries: an
emperical analysis. In T.L. Andersons and R.T. Simons, eds. The political economy of
customs ans culture: informal soultions to the commons problem. Lanham, Md., Rowman
and Littlefield.
Shrestha, K. R., 1995. Conflict Resolution in the Community Forestry Project in Sta.
Elena, Camarines Norte. An MSc. Thesis presented to University of the Philippines at
Los Banos. Philippines.
Starret, D. A., 2003. Property Rights, Public Goods and the Environment, in: K-G. Maler
and J.R. Vincent. Handbook of Environmental Economics, Vol. I.
Swaney, James A. 1990. Common property, reciprocity, and community. Journal of
Economic Issues ( 24):451-462.
Tareke, G. 1991. ‘Ethiopia, Power and Protest: Peasant Revolts in the 20th Century.’
University of Cambridge. African Studies Centre III, Cambridge.
Terefe, T. 2002. Effects of Participatory Forest Management on the Socio-economic
Conditions of the Local Communities with Special Reference to the Forest Dwellers
Associations in Adaba-Dodola Forest Priority Area. An M.Sc. Thesis Presented to
Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Sweden.
Teshome, T. 1999. Effects of Grazing and Fire on Tree Regeneration in Coniferous
Montane Forest of Dodola Area, Ethiopia. An MSc Thesis Presented to Gottingen
University, Germany.
Trainer, J., 1996. Inventory Results for Forest Inventory of Indigenous Forest-Pilot Area.
Integrated Forest Management Project Adaba-Dodola (IFMP), Dodola, Ethiopia.
(Unpublished project document).

62
Tsegaye, T. 1999. A New Look Towards the Conservation of Adaba-Dodola Forest.
IFMP, Dodola, Ethiopia. (Unpublished paper).
Todaro, M. P., 1997. Economic Development. 6th Ed. New York University. Long man.
London and New York.
Uncovsky, S., 1998. Model Calculation of Demand-Supply Situation of Wood Products
in the IFMP Pilot Area. IFMP, Dodola, Ethiopia. (Unpublished paper).
U.S. Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
National Marine Fisheries Service, 1994. Guidelines and Principles For Social Impact
Assessment. Prepared by the Inter-organizational Committee on Guidelines and
Principles for Social Impact Assessment. Washington DC.
Wallace, G., 1993. Institutional Conflict Work in Democratic Societies. UCI
Ombudsman: The Journal 1993. California Caucus of College and University of
Ombudsman.
Warner, M. and P., Jones, 1998. Assessing the Need to Manage Conflict in Community-
Based Natural Resource Management projects: ODI Natural Resource Perspectives No.
35, London.

63
7. APPENDICES

64
Appendix 1. Tree Cover Assessment Methodology

Organise the block assessment by inviting WAJIB-members to participate as witnesses.

For every recorder hire one ASSISTANT from among the block residents.

1. EQUIPMENT (per recorder): A copy of the present rules, sketch map of the forest
block, compass and GPS-set if available, chain or string relascope, special gauge
displaying virtual DBH and DBH-class bounds, recording sheets, clipboard, pencil,
eraser, pen, pocket calculator, 2.5-m string.

2. Choose the starting point arbitrarily anywhere on the block border. Choose a SECTION
LINE across the block in any convenient direction. Keep the distance between
successive section lines at 100 meters. Cover the whole forest block with parallel
section lines.

3. If SEVERAL RECORDERS conduct the assessment simultaneously, adjacent section

lines rather than separate block sub-divisions are distributed among the recorders.

4. Locate a first SAMPLE SPOT on a section line at some distance from the block border.
Assess sample spots spaced at 100-m intervals along a section line. Make an
approximate slope correction for the distance between sample spots. Measure distance
by pacing. Apply different pace-units for level ground and slopes. At some distance
from where the next sample spot is to be thrown a fist-sized conspicuous (painted)
stone in the proper direction for chance-locating the spot.

5. Count SEEDLINGS higher than 25 cm within a radius of 2.5 m from the sample spot.
Only count healthy plants of regular shape. Skip dwarfed or stunted plants or ones
with mosses or lichens growing on them. Mark every count of a proper seedling using
the species codes listed on the recording sheet. If more than 10 seedlings are observed
stop marking after the tenth seedling.

6. For every sample spot carry out a relascope sweep. RECORD RELASCOPE COUNTS

separately for saplings, young trees, mature trees, oversized trees and bush. Mark
every count in the appropriate category using the species codes listed on the recording
sheet. In the case of bush made up of several species mark only the code for the
dominating species.

65
7. Assess BUSH in terms of virtual DBH using the special gauge. Determine bush
diameter as the average of at least two diagonal measurements. Consider as the bush
periphery the line around the bush that can be paced freely. Keep the distance
between gauge and recorder the same as the distance between bush centre and
recorder.

8. COPPICE with 3 or more shoots (of any size) on a stool of less than breast height (1.3
m) is to be treated as bush. With only two shoots remaining on a stool of less than
breast height both shoots are separately measured with the relascope and assigned to
an appropriate DBH-class if counted.

9. FORKED TRUNKS are given as many relascope counts as there are big enough shafts
at breast height.

10. Take relascope counts irrespective of whether crowns overlap or grow in MULTIPLE

STOREYS. Bush or trees growing underneath tree crowns are to be assessed separately
from the cover trees.

11. Calculate TREE COVER PERCENTAGE separately for seedlings, saplings, young trees,
mature trees, oversized trees and bush. To do so, multiply the cell count with the
corresponding factor indicated on the recording sheet. Sum up the products in the
same line to obtain the tree cover percentage of the sample spot. Calculate the tree
cover index of the whole block as the average of N sample spot percentages.

12. Determine the variance (V) of the N sample spot percentages. Calculate the
PRECISION (P) of the tree cover index for the whole block as the square root of (V/N).

13. File the completed recording sheets and calculated parameters for future impact
assessments and for MONITORING the change over time of forest condition. If the
current assessment is for initial tree cover, establish the document to be attached to
the forest block allocation contract. If there is a previous assessment compare it to the
current one. If the current index is significantly different from the previous one, or
from the initial one, revise the forest rent or proceed to impose sanctions,
respectively.

66
Appendix 2. Survey Questionnaire

Instructions for the Enumerator

1. Upon arrival greet the respondent and others who are in the household
2. Introduce yourself (name, profession, etc.) and clearly explain the purpose of the
visit/survey before you begin the interview
3. Ask one question at a time, patiently and politely, and make sure that the
respondent understands the question
4. For open questions, summarize the respondent’s response taking notes
5. For closed questions, circle/underline the choice made
6. If the respondent has to rank choices, underline with double lines the 2 most
important ones, underline with a single line the 2 least important ones and leave
others as they are.
1. Background of respondent
a) Member of Peasant Association………………………….
b) Age…………
c) Sex male female

d) Marital Status Single Married Widowed Divorced Separated

e) Spouse (s)
No. Spouse Sex Place of residence (Tick one or more as appropriate)
(S) (m/f) Town Forest where Wajib Outside Wajib Wajib- Other
hasn't reached (in the plain) block (specify)

f) In which category does your household fall in relation to other households

in the PA? Poor Medium Rich
g) In which category does your household fall in relation to the households of
your spouse or your co-spouses? Poor Medium Rich
h) What is the size of your farmland in hectares/local units? …………..
i) Where are your farming plots?

67
 Size in ha/local unit Tick one or more as appropriate
Plain Forest FPA Wajib-block Other (specify)

j) Who are the members of your household other than yourself?

No. Sex (m/f) Age (years) Permanent (yes/no) Relation *) Education**)

*) Spouse, Co-spouse, ChilD, Parent, Brother or sister, Other (specify)

**) Illiterate, Primary, Secondary, Vocational, Academic

2. Dependency on forest resources before WAJIB

a) Before WAJIB, what were the two most important benefits you got from the
forest and two least important ones?
Grazing Firewood Construction materials Charcoal Settlement Farming

b) If you used to collect products from the forest (firewood, construction

materials, charcoal) what were they mainly for?
Major use type (Tick one as appropriate)

Forest product Home consumption Sale

Firewood
Charcoal
Construct. Mat.

c) If you sold any such products, how much income did you get per average
year?
Birr/year: …………

d) What part of your livelihood did this amount represent?

Next to nothing Less than half About half More than half Nearly all of it

68
3. Dependency on forest resources after WAJIB

a) Since WAJIB, what are the two most important benefits you still get from
the forest and two least important ones?
Grazing Firewood Construction materials Charcoal Settlement Farming

b) If you continue to collect products from the forest (firewood, construction

materials, charcoal) where do they mainly come from?

Wajib-block Forest outside WAJIB-blocks Other ………………………….

c) If you continue to collect products from the forest (firewood, construction

materials, charcoal) what are they mainly for?

Major use type (Tick one as appropriate)

Forest product Home consumption Sale

Firewood
Charcoal
Construct. Mat.

d) If you sell any such products, how much income do you get per average
year?
Birr/year: …………

e) What part of your livelihood does this amount represent?

Next to nothing Less than half About half More than half Nearly all of it

f) Do you have to buy forest products? Yes No

g) If yes, which products?

Grass Firewood Construction materials Charcoal

h) If yes, where do you get them?

Local markets Dealers Purchase from WAJIB Other: ………

69
i) The implementation of the WAJIB approach, how did it affect your
livelihood?
Benefit Tick one per line as appropriate
from the No Bearing Less Same Higher Additional
forest substitute cost benefit benefit benefit benefit
found of (specify)
substitute
Settlement
Farming
Grazing
Firewood
Construct.
Mat.
Charcoal
Other:……..

j) If WAJIB affects your livelihood negatively (gray ticks of previous table),

how do you cope?
Reduced Method of compensation (Tick one per line as appropriate)
benefit from the Paying to Using forest Using Reducing Giving up
forest Wajib outside resources the activity the activity
Wajib in the plain
Settlement
Farming
Grazing
Collecting forest
products
Charcoaling
Other: …………..

70
 k) If you had to reduce or give up forest-related activities (gray ticks of
previous table), how do you expect to substitute them?
Depending on spouse or relatives

Waiting for government subsidies

Extending other current activities

Buying from WAJIB

Tree planting

Looking for job

Other: …………………………………………………………………………

4. How do you see the Wajib-implementation with regard to what it brought about in
general terms?
Tick one per line as appropriate
General aspect I don't Much Worse Same Better Much
no worse better
Depletion of forest
resources
Wise and economic use of
forest products by consumers
Tree planting
Consumer costs for
forest products
Number of jobs provided
by forest-related activities
Relations between forest users
and forestry services
Tourism and
wildlife
Conflicts between
forest-dwellers and others

71
5. Conflicts related to the use of forest resources:
If there are gray ticks in the previous table respond to the following questions

a) Before Wajib, who was mostly involved in what kind of conflict?

Tick one or more conflict party per line
Forest users Urban Forest PA- Forest
Conflict on From other forest dwellers officials guards
districts users
(PA)
Use rights
Farming plots
New settlements
Clearing of forest
Charcoaling
Other: …………………

b) In the Wajib-blocks, who is currently involved in what kind of conflict?

Tick one or more conflict party per line
Forest Urban Forest PA- Forest
Conflict on users forest dwellers officials guards
from users or
outside Wajib-
Wajib leaders
Use rights
Farming plots
New settlements
Clearing of forest
Charcoaling
Fines to be paid
Administration of revenue
Rent to be paid by Wajib
Other: ………………………..

72
c) Conflicts within Wajib-blocks, how would you rate them?
Tick one per line
Serious Serious but Normal Manageabl Manageable
Conflict on and rare e but and rare
frequent frequent
Settlement
Farming
Grazing
Fire wood collection
Charcoaling
Fines to be paid
Administration of
revenue
Rent to be paid by Wajib
Other: …………..

73