COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE

DEPARTEMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

THE ROLE OF NON TIMBER FOREST PRODUCTS (NTFPs) ON LIVELIHOOD

IMPROVEMENT: IN CASE OF BANJA WOREDA, AWI ZONE, ETHIOPIA

BY; BERIHUN SHIFERAW

ID.NO; 278/10

ADVISOR; AFEWORK A.(MS.c)

A SENIOR RESEARCH PROJECT SUBMITTED TO DEPARTMENT OF

NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE BSC DEGREE IN NATURAL
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT.

DECEMBER, 2020

WOLAITA SODO, ETHIOPIA

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First of all I would like to express my deepest thanks to my God, who helped me in all aspects of
my life. Next to God, I would like to express my great thanks to my advisor Afework A(MS.c), for
her unreserved support, guidance, encouragement and constructive comments at all stage of the
research work. I would like also to thank those farmers participated in this study, people who are
interested to respond for my question and other concerned issues. Finally I would like to thank my
family for helping me in any financial case.
 ABBREVIATIONS

DA Development Agent

PAs Peasant Associations

NTFPs Non Timber Forest products

HH Household

ii
Table of contents page
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS..................................................................................................................i
ABBREVIATIONS.............................................................................................................................ii

ABSTRACT........................................................................................................................................v

1. Introduction..................................................................................................................................1

1.1. Background...........................................................................................................................1

1.2. Statement of problem and justification.................................................................................2

1.3. Research question.................................................................................................................2

1.4. Objectives..............................................................................................................................3

1.4.1. General objective...........................................................................................................3

1.4.2. Specific objectives.........................................................................................................3

1.5. Hypothesis.............................................................................................................................3

1.6. Significance of the study.......................................................................................................3

2. Literature review..........................................................................................................................4

2.1. NTFP in Ethiopia..................................................................................................................4

2.2. The role of NTFP on livelihood............................................................................................5

3. Materials and methods..................................................................................................................7

3.1. Description of the study area....................................................................................................7

3.1.1. Climate...........................................................................................................................7

3.1.2. Topography and Soil type..............................................................................................7

3.1.3. Water and forest resources.............................................................................................8

3.1.4. Wildlife..........................................................................................................................8

3.1.5. Land use.........................................................................................................................8

3.2. Methods of Data Collection..................................................................................................8

iii
 3.2.1. Sampling Technique and Sample size...........................................................................9

3.2.2. Method of Data Analysis...............................................................................................9

4. RESULTS...................................................................................................................................10

4.1 Socioeconomic characteristics of the sample household.........................................................10

4.2 Livelihood strategies and their contribution to household income..........................................10

4.2 The role NTFP on livelihood improvement.............................................................................12

4.2.1 Diversity and availability of NTFPs:.................................................................................12

4.3.2 Households dependence on NTFPs and its determinants..................................................14

4.3.3 Marketing of NTFPs..........................................................................................................14

4.4 Constraints...............................................................................................................................15

4.4.1 Forest decline and reduced availability of NTFPs............................................................15

4.4.2 Constraints related to production and marketing of NTFPs..............................................15

5. DISCUSSION............................................................................................................................16

6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS........................................................................17

6.1 Conclusions..............................................................................................................................17

6.2 Recommendation.....................................................................................................................17

References..........................................................................................................................................18

Annex: questionnaire........................................................................................................................20

iv
 ABSTRACT
Millions of people throughout the world make extensive use of goods and service of forest
resources. Forest goods are either timber or non-timber. Non-timber forest products (NTFPs) are
harvested for both subsistence and commercial use and play a key role in the livelihoods of
millions of rural people. It has received increased policy and research attention due to its
perceived potential to meet sustainable rural development and tropical forest conservation. In
Ethiopia studies in different parts of the country have shown that many rural households depend
on NTFPs for subsistence and cash income. It aimed to assess and analyze the contribution of
NTFPs to rural livelihood improvement. Structured questionnaire survey method was applied to
collect the necessary information from farm households. Study site was selected based on its
proximity from the Banja Forestry Natural resources and availability of NTFP extraction
practices. Formal survey was carried out on a total of 25 households (HHs) selected using
stratified random sampling. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics methods. The results
indicate that Local people practice diverse livelihood activities mainly crops cultivation (cereals
and cash crops) and livestock husbandry, gather forest products and off-farm/off-forest activities
for survival. The income from NTFPs accounted for about 8% of the total household annual
income. The study has shown that NTFPs play a significant role in improving the livelihood of
the people while conserving a forest. Rural development and future forest conservation strategies
and interventions should pay attention to the contribution of NTFP to peoples livelihood and
environmental sustainability.

v
1. Introduction

1.1. Background

Forests provide various goods and services ranging from timber to non timber forest products

(NTFPs). These resources play important roles in the livelihood strategies of being a substantial

source of food, materials, medicines and equipment in relatively undisturbed forest conditions, to

sources of supplementary products situations where alternative livelihood options are available.

NTFPs play a vital role in rural livelihood strategies and can contribute to sustained forested

landscapes in various tropical forest areas (Anderson, 1990; Ros-Tonen and Wiersum, 2003; Sheil

and Wunder, 2002).

NTFPs encompass all biological material other than timber such as gums and resins, honey and bee

waxes, material and aromatic plants, dying and tanning materials, bamboo and others, which are

extracted from forests for human use. They are of critical importance to the livelihoods of rural

communities and in some situations account for a significant share of household income (FAO,

2003).

NTFPs in addition to providing food and other basic needs to the rural population are source of

inputs to the agricultural system. Forest provides a huge amount of springs and stream to the

downstream, so that people at the downstream use the streams for irrigation, and they grow the

agricultural crops throughout the year by the help of irrigation water. Therefore, irrigation increases

the productivity of the land so that this increment on productivity improves the livelihood of local

community.
1.2. Statement of problem and justification

Forests in Askuna have environmental, economical and social benefits to community. Inspite of

different forest products of subsistence and commercial importance, these forests are under

increasing pressure, primarily as a result of the clearance of forests for smallholder agriculture due

to population growth.

The deforestation and forest degradation not only threaten the ecological functions of the forests,

but also impact on the livelihoods of local communities. Moreover, the extent of people

dependence on forest resources and the types of forest products extracted from forest and market

for these products have great influence on the forest resources of the area.

These extraction trends are aggravated by increase in population in the area. These factors and

others lead to forest fragmentation, decrease in forest cover, and depletion of some forest products

of the area. Finally, this would result in loss of social and economic benefits of the forests on which

local peoples livelihood is tied with for survival. Therefore, this study attempts to assess the types

of forest products extracted by households and contribution of these extracted forest products to

local livelihoods.

1.3. Research question

 How does NTFP increase the amount of household income?

 How do NTFPs contribute to the livelihood improvement of the local community?

 What are NTFPs that are commonly used by the local community?

2
1.4. Objectives
1.4.1. General objective

 The general objective of this study is to investigate the role of non-timber forest products to

the livelihood improvement of the local community.

1.4.2. Specific objectives

 To assess the types of non-timber forest products extracted from the forest in Askuna.

 To evaluate the contribution of non-timber forest products to the household income.

1.5. Hypothesis
 Households with lower income are highly dependent on non-timber forest products for

income generation.

 NTFPs extractions increase the households’ income that has significant role on rural

livelihood support.

1.6. Significance of the study

This study will have significant contribution to enhance the potential of NTFP to livelihood

improvement in the study area; and effects of NTFP on rural livelihood over time. In addition to

this the study results will allow us to look at the food insecurity in the absence of NTFP. The output

of this study will provide benefits for developmental agents who devote their effort to facilitate

NTFP based livelihood, and can be used as a guidance to assist their extension approach. Decision

makers can incorporate the output of this study as additional input to make informed decision on

the implementation of NTFP management policy in effective way to achieve its goals.

Furthermore, it will add to the knowledge in the subject area so that researchers and academicians

can use it as a reference in similar or related studies.

3
2. Literature review

2.1. NTFP in Ethiopia

In Ethiopia, non wood forest products cover a wide range of products. They are naturally produced

by certain forest species of the genera such as Boswellia, Acacia, Olea, Eucalyptus, Commiphora,

Pinus, as well as by bamboo, palms, reeds, grasses, residue products, after liquidating lumber, etc

(FAO, 2007). The exudate products are obtained by extraction or tapping or distillation, acid

hydrolysis and /or delignification and are processed to produce, incense, gum, tannin, tar,

turpentine, resins, and essential oils (Mulugeta et al., 2003). They are needed in the manufacture of

adhesives, confectionary, medicines, perfumes, varnishes, wood preservative, soap, pulp, dyes and

printing inks. Non-wood forest products can be major sources of feed stocks and energy sources.

Medicine is one of the non-timber forest products, and traditional medicine has an important place

in the health care of Ethiopian population. It is estimated 80% of the people in Ethiopia rely on

some form of traditional medicine for their primary (Desalegn Desissa and Pierre, 2002).

Ethiopia is endowed with a wealth of plant species with high potential to produce herbal and plant

derived drugs. There are numerous forest products with potential edible fruits that can be either

directly consumed or processed in food industries. The most important non-wood forest products in

Ethiopia include honey and wax, bamboo, reed, Gum arabic, resin from soft wooded species,

incense, edible plant products, fibers, essential oils, tannins and dyes, resins, gums and latex,

ornamental plants, giant/long grasses which could be used to produce panel products and the raw

grass as the rooting cover for local construction ,edible and non-edible animal products, medicine,

mush rooms, various extractives and flavorings, sweeteners, balsams, pesticides, etc. Bamboo can

be used as a substitute of wood: as building material poles, fences, water pipes, bags, tools, musical

instruments, walking sticks, shuttle and weaving materials, furniture, pulp and paper, fishing rods,
4
etc. Some of the above non-timber forest products are being changed in to household furniture,

tools and equipment while coffee, gum Arabic, spices, and incense are marketed commercially all

over the country and exported to international trade too (FAO, 1990).

2.2. The role of NTFP on livelihood

Livelihood is the set of capabilities, assets, and activities that furnish the means for people to meet

their basic needs and support their wellbeing (FAO, 2007). Several recent studies on the livelihood

strategies of rural people in developing countries have highlighted the significance of livelihood

diversification. Today, many rural households diversify their livelihoods and combine various

strategies to obtain food, consumer goods and income, without focusing on a single activity, crop or

even space. With increasing exposure to national and international markets, new opportunities are

emerging for the acquisition of goods and income (FAO, 2007). People at the forest fringe combine

the exploitation of natural resources with farming, off-farm employment and labour migration to

cities or even abroad. Thus, most forest people are no longer merely hunters and gatherers and

many farmers are no longer exclusively farmers. Within such diversified livelihoods, natural

resource exploitation such as the collection of NTFPs still may play an important role (Wiersum

and Shackleton, 2003). On the one hand, rural communities, even if they are incorporated in

external networks, may still partly rely on NTFPs for their own consumption.

The study of Ros-Tonen and Wiersum (2003) on the importance of non-timber forest products for

forest-based rural livelihoods reveals that the role of NTFPs in people’s livelihoods is basically

twofold. In the first place, in remote areas where forest extraction still prevails, NTFPs provide

subsistence goods like food, medicines and building materials and form a safety cushion in times of

economic hardship. The increasing incorporation of rural areas into external commercial networks

5
means there is some scope for improving livelihoods on the basis of NTFP production through the

gradual domestication of NTFP species in anthropogenic forest types as well as through the

creation of NTFP-related jobs (e.g. specialised manufacturing and trade) (Wubalem et al., 2007).

Products derive from forests and trees are important source of cash income and employment for

rural poor. An estimated 15 million people in sub-Saharan Africa earn cash income from forest

related activities. Several million people derive their main source of income from forest-based

enterprises, such as fuel wood sales, charcoal making, small scale sawmilling, carpentry, furniture

making, handcrafts, and commercial hunting. FAO (2002) approximated that more than half of the

developing world relies on non-timber forest products (NTFPs) for nutritional and health needs.

Poor people who have only limited or no access to private or government forestlands depend on

communal forests to obtain many essential household products.

Depending on socioeconomic status of the households NTFPs play an important role in food

security, mostly through income generation. For the poorer households, NTFPs provide a safety-

net, especially through the open access condition of some of the products (NTFP R&D Project,

2005). Therefore; NTFP play great role for livelihood support of rural poor community.

6
3. Materials and methods
3.1. Description of the study area
This research was conducted in Banja Woreda, Awi zone which is found in Amhara Regional state.
Banja Woreda is located 447km north of Addis Ababa. And 120km from Amhara regional state
capital city of Bahir Dar. The district is bordered on north by Fagta lecoma, on the south by
Ankesha, on the east by Guagsa shekudad and on the west by Guangua. The district is found at
attitude of 10 ºc, 57 ºc,34 ºc N latitude and 36 ºc, 56’ ºc 11 ºc longitudes and its altitude ranges from
2540 to 3000 meter above sea level. The average annual rain fall of the study area is 1145mm and
the annual minimum and maximum temperature is 23ºc in July and 30ºc in March, respectively
(Banja woreda agricultural office).

i. Climate

The climatic condition of the study area can be categorized under weyna dega agro-ecological

zone. Annual rainfall is about 700-1400 mm on a bimodal distribution. The main rainy season

occurs between June and October with the maximum monthly rainfall in July. The short rains that

contribute up to 28% of the annual rainfall are in the period March to May. The dry season extends

from November to February, with December and January being the driest months. The mean annual

temperature varies between 17 0c and 19 0c. The altitude ranges between 1800 and 2100 m above

sea level.

ii. Topography and Soil type

In general the topography is mostly flat to undulating with depressions and some more hill parts.

The altitude range of the area is between 2,580 m a.s.l. at its highest point, i.e. Abaro Mountain and

1,600 m a.s.l. around the marshy area.

7
Soils of the study area are sandy loam textured. The soil depth is shallow on steep slopes and on

flat and gentle slopes it reaches up to 3.5m. Fertile soil suitable for the production of both cereal

and perennial crops is one of the major endowments of the area.

iii. Water and forest resources

The study area is characterized by ample water sources. Large number of small springs flow to

different directions in the forest area. In addition to the small springs at the bottom of the hills,

there are two major streams. In these streams water flows throughout the year and they provide the

opportunity for farm irrigation. The study area also embraces forest resources which are habitats for

many wild life and source of many springs and streams.

iv. Wildlife

The forest that nestles on the lower slopes of the surrounding hills is home to a variety of

mammals, birds, insects, amphibians and plants. The more notable mammals are bushbuck, dik-dik,

forest pig, hyena, white-tailed mongoose, monkey, baboon, and squirrels.

v. Land use

The land use of Askuna is mainly cash crop of sugar cane, chat, coffee using irrigation system and

enset, banana, avocado and different vegetables within home garden agroforestry. The study area is

also known to endowed with different trees, shrubs and fertile cultivated land.

b. Methods of Data Collection

The source of the data for this study was primarily obtained by employing the survey instrument in

the study area. Primary data was collected using various techniques such as face-to-face interviews,

focus group discussion, transact walk and direct observation.

8
As part of the primary data, information also was collected from Woreda agricultural experts and

Kebele leaders. The primary data that acquired from the fieldwork was supplemented with

secondary data in order to link information gap from primary sources.

i. Sampling Technique and Sample size

Initially the study site Askuna was selected purposefully on the basis of its proximity to the Banja

Forestry Natural resources and availability of NTFP extraction practices. From the selected village

sample households were selected. For selection of sample households, stratified sampling

technique was employed that involved groupings of the study population into different wealth

strata (poor, medium and rich) and selecting a random sample within each stratum. From a list of

households heads available in the PAs office sample households were selected, seven from rich, ten

from medium and eight from poor wealth category. A total of 25 household heads were selected.

Wealth classification was performed using criteria developed by key informants

ii. Method of Data Analysis

The collected data was analyzed by using descriptive statistics such as percentage, figure, table,

chart, graphs.

9
 4. RESULTS

4.1 Socioeconomic characteristics of the sample household

Of the sampled household heads’ the majority (96%) were male headed wherea s only 4% were
female headed. The age of the respondents ranged from 18 - 71 years. The majority (98.1%) were
in their productive working age of up to 65 years, while only 1.9 % of the households were headed
by men older than 65 years. Of all the sampled households, 91.4 % were married, while single,
widowed and divorced households’ heads constitute 2.9%, 3.8% and 1.9 %, respectively. Of
those who were married almost 88.1% of the respondents were married to a single wife while the
remaining 11.9% are polygamous. Family size of the sampled households varied between 2 and 14
persons with an average of 8 persons. This is explained by the polygamy practice, which is
common in the study area. Family labor is the basis for both on-farm and off-farm income
generation.
The educational level of majority of respondents 4 8.1 % was at the grade level 1- 4. While
a similar but slightly smaller proportion 1 2.4 % of household heads were illiterate or unable
to read and write whereas the remaining 37.6% were at the 5 -8 grade level and 1.9 % are at level
of grade 9-12.

Land is the most important fixed asset to the cultivation of agricultural crops as well as collection
of non-timber forest product from the forest landscape. The size of agricultural land holding
owned by the sampled households varied between 0.025 and 1.5 ha and with an average of
0.7625 ha. Majority of the respondents owned their land formally (42.9%), while those inherited
from their ancestors constitute 30.5 % and the remaining system of land possession was through
both formally and inherited (11.4 %), rent (7.6%), formal and rent (7.6%).

4.2 Livelihood strategies and their contribution to household income

The livelihood activities of a household in the study area include: crop production, animal
production, and forest related activities such as extraction of NTFPs and on and off farm
activities such as petty trade, cart and daily labor. The study findings showed that among

10
 the sampled households crop production, animal husbandry and forest related activities were
st nd. rd
ranked as 1 (89.1%), 2 (5.7%) and 3 (3%) main sources of livelihood activities respectively
th
and off farm activities were also ranked as 4 (2.2%) livelihood activities.

The total average annual household income is 25500 Birr. In terms of contribution to the
household annual income, crop production, livestock, and NTFPs (forest products) and off farm
contributed in the order of their importance 67 %, 21%, 8%, and 4% to the annual household
income, respectively (Figure1).

Income s o u r c e

Figure 1. Contribution of different livelihood to household income

In the study area Maize, Sugarcane, Chat, Potato, Enste, coffee and Fruit trees such as Avocado,
Banana, Papaya and Mango were found to be the major crop types cultivated. Maize, Potato and
Enset were the dominant staple food crops in the area, while Sugarcane and chat production were
the main cash crops. Annual household income from crop production constituted 67% of the
total household income.

Cattle such as ox, cow, sheep, goat, donkey, horse and poultry are the major types of livestock
reared in the study area. The average number of cattle owned by households was 7 with a
11
minimum of 2 and maximum 12. Livestock constituted 21% of the total household income. Crop
cultivation is done by oxen plough.

Off farm and nonfarm activities contributed 4% of the total annual household income. The
contribution of petty trading to the household livelihood is relatively higher than other off
farm activities. Of the sampled households 15.7% of them are engaged in petty trading.

4.2 The role NTFP on livelihood improvement

4.2.1 Diversity and availability of NTFPs:

Forest is an important source of NTFPs for commercial and subsistence use in the area. About
seven NTFPs that serve different household needs have been reported by the respondents (Table
2). Out of the sampled households 55.2 % and 40 % of the respondents ranked availability of
Dead tree, branches, small trees and Fodder in the study area as very abundant and abundant,
respectively while Farm implements availability was ranked as very abundant (9.5%),abundant
(56.2 %) and rarely abundant (26.7%). Since most of the sampled households had Dead tree,
branches, small trees and Fodder majority of the respondents ranked it as abundance than any
other NTFPs. Details of each NTFPs abundances are listed in table below.

12
Table 1 . Diversity of NTFPs and their roles in household livelihood

13
NTFPs used by households are not only collected from the forest but also outside forest. Out of the
sampled households 74.2% of the respondents collect NTFPs from inside forests, 21% of the
households collect both from the forest and farmland, and 3.8% and 1% of respondents collect
NTFPs on farmland and around homestead.

4.3.2 Households dependence on NTFPs and its determinants

The total annual income from NTFPs is 2 0 0 0 Birr. In general, NTFPs is the second
major sources of livelihoods and contributes to 8 % to the total annual household income
aggregated across all wealth classes next to crop husbandry. The study showed that 77.1% of the
respondents emphasized the importance of forest to their livelihood as a source of income in
terms of cash and household subsistence few of the NTFPs are used for cash income generation
(forest coffee and honey) but most NTFPs are used at household for household subsistence.

NTFPs contribute 72.5% of annual household income for the poor 20% for the medium and 7.5%
for the rich. Different wealth class might have specific preferences of NTFPs to fulfill household
requirements.

4.3.3 Marketing of NTFPs

60 % of the respondents were found to be involved in the sale of NTFPs to get cash income and
most of them sale their forest products (NTFPs) on local markets. The most important NTFPs for
sale are Dead tree, branches, small trees, Fodder, Farm implements and Medicinal plants.

Most of the sampled households sale their NTFPs to private trader (57%) in the local area,
followed by directly to consumers (22%) and to both private and consumer (21%). Similarly,
out of the sampled house holds 94 % of the respondent sale their produces on cash.

14
4.4 Constraints
4.4.1 Forest decline and reduced availability of NTFPs

86.7 % of the respondents pointed out that there is decrease in forest cover of the area, which
they also foresee to continue in the future. These respondents indicated that the supply of most
economical NTFPs is also decreasing. These respondents attributed the forest decline to the poor
management of the forest and its NTFPs, increased collectors, population pressure, expansion of
farm land, illegal settlement of immigrants, and the consequent deforestation. Of the sampled
households 37 %, 29 %, 26.4 %, 7.6% of the respondents indicated that population pressure,
expansion of farmland, deforestation and drought (climatic change) were some of the main
reasons for the decline in availability and yield of NTFPs, respectively.

4.4.2 Constraints related to production and marketing of NTFPs

The study results showed that of the sampled households 59.3 %, 16.2% and 14 % of the
respondents had constraints on collection of NTFPs due to shortage of labour, lack of knowledge
to manage NTFPs and lack of technical assistance, respectively. The remaining 10.5 % of the
sampled households had a problem of access to all NTFPs.
Regarding the Marketing of NTFPs 55.3 % of the respondents had cited problem of both low
market price to sale their NTFPs at fair market price.

15
 5. DISCUSSION

The study result showed that the local people of the study area depend on range of income
sources for living. Crop production, animal husbandry, forest and non-farm activities are the
main livelihood strategies of the households. Dependence on such diversified livelihoods
activities is what has been observed under numerous case studies. For instance, Shackleton and
Shackleton (2004) and Ros-Tonen and Wiersum (2005 ) indicated that forest product extraction
(NTFPs) does not stand alone to support households but forms an integral component of a
diversified livelihood strategies of rural household in the tropics. They combine extraction of
forest resources (NTFP) with other livelihood activities to improve and sustain rural welfare.
Yet, the rural community also highly depends on the forest resources for their livelihood.
Particularly NTFPs contribute a significant amount of income to rural annual household income.
In this study, extraction of NTFP makes a significant contribution to the livelihood of the rural
people, on average 8 % to the total household income. It is the third most important contributor
next to crop production (67%) and livestock rearing (21 %).
Concerning the role NTFPs plays in the total household livelihood strategies; it provides
subsistence goods like fuel wood, liana, construction materials, and Farm implements and honey
as a source of cash income. They also serve as a safety net function (coping strategy)
particularly during shortfalls in agricultural products, which is parallel with research
findings by Shackleton (2004) and Byron and Arnold (1999) who showed that dependence on
forest resources increases during period of a shortfall in agriculture production. Similarly,
Pattanayak and Sills (2000) reported that commercial NTFPs can be an important natural
insurance against unexpected agricultural risk.

On average the contribution of NTFP to cash income in the current study was 8 % and this is
comparable to many studies. Similarly, many studies in Ethiopia reported a similar or even
higher percentage up to 50% (e.g. Arsema, 2008; Neima, 2007). For instance, Arsema (2006)
showed that on average 47% of the annual income of households is derived from bamboo sale in
Shedem PA of Goba district. Similarly, Neima (2008) reported that NTFPs alone contribute on
average 54% of the household total annual income, which was greater than the income from
agriculture that contributed only 38% of the total annual households’ income.
16
6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 Conclusions
The livelihood of the households in the study area depend on range of activities in which NTFPs
is one of the major role player. The collection of NTFPs is the major cash income source to this
rural people particularly for the poor as they have less alternative sources of income. The use of
these products adds crucial dimension to a diversified livelihood base, thus act as a safety net
particularly when there is a short fall in agricultural production to minimize risk and fill the gap
of food shortage.
Generally the major bottlenecks affecting productivity of NTFPs is poor market access and
infrastructure. Improving the existing poor market infrastructure will simultaneously solve
related problems that limit the development potential of the study area. Unfortunately, forest
coverage and forest resources of the study area are declining, which may affect future prospect of
sustainable NTFPs and thus livelihoods. In this regard concerted efforts from all actors are
needed to reverse the situation through an appropriate forest management strategy.

6.2 Recommendation

1. The contribution of NTFP to the HH income is often overlooked in various economic and
conservation surveys. However in practical the Role of NTFP to rural household economy is
significant so Government and NGOs should support and encourage NTFP and NTFP based
activities as part of the diversified livelihood strategies.
2. Currently of the study area forest and forest resources are experiencing human pressure from
surrounding community and people migrating (Immigrants) from different part of the country
in search of farmland. It is recommended that Forest management strategies and
interventions that are designed to minimize or reduce pressure on the forest should consider
how the above mentioned problem can properly be addressed and sustainability of the
resource are assessed.
3. Local markets are guarantee way of reaching some of the poorest people and play a crucial
role in strengthening livelihood and improving income opportunities. It is recommended that
policies or strategies aim at improving marketing facilities for NTFPs.

17
References
Adugna T. (2008). Farmers’ Perception on Soil Erosion and Decision on Land Management in
Assosa Woreda, Ethiopia;MSc Thesis,Hawassa Univerisity,Ethiopia.

Anderson, A.B. (ed.) (1990). Alternatives to deforestation: steps towards sustainable use of the
Amazon rain forest. New York: Columbia University Press.
Arsema Andargatchew (2008). Value Chain Analysis for Bamboo Originating from Shedem
Kebele, Bale Zone. Msc thesis, Addis Ababa University, Ethiopia.
Byron ,N and M,Arnold ,1999.What futures for peoples of tropical forests ?world development
27,5:789-805.
Desalegn Desissa and Pierre,B. (2002). Uses and Conservation status of Medicinal plants used by
Shinasha people.The use of traditional Medicine in Ethiopia.
FAO (1990). Forestry and food security. FAO Forestry Paper 90.FAO, Rome.
FAO (2002). Non-wood forest products .Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
FAO (2003).Africa Foretss:A View To 2020,Forstey Outlook Study for Africa,European
Commission Africa Development Bank,Food and Agriculture Organization of United
Nations.
FAO (2007).Negotiation and Mediation Technologies for Natural Resource Management: Prepared
in the frame work of the Livelihood Support Program (LSP),An International program for
improving support for enhancing livelihood of the rural poor.
Mulugeta Lemenih, Tarekegn Abebe and Olsson, M. (2003) ‘Gum and resin resources from some
Acacia, Boswellia and Commiphora species and their economic contributions in
Liban,South-East Ethiopia’, Journal of Arid Environments 55: 465-482.

Neima Aliyi ,2008 An analysis of socio-economic importance of Non-Timber Forest

Products for rural households: Case study from Bale Mountains National Park,
Ethiopia. MSC Thesis. Department of Forest and Landscape Faculty of life science,
Denmark.

18
NTFP R&D Project (2005).Non-Timber Forest Products Research and Development Project in
South-West Ethiopia; Strategy frame work, July 2003-July 2007,Mizan Teferi and
Huddersfield.
Pattanayak and Sills, 2001 .Do tropical forests provide natural insurance? The microeconomics of
non-timber forest product collection in the Brazilian Amazon, Land Economics 77 (2001)
(4), pp. 595–612.
Ros-Tonen, M.A.F and Wiersum, K.F. (2003). The importance of non-timber forest products for
forest-based rural livelihoods. Paper presented at the International Conference on Rural
Livelihoods, Forests and Biodiversity 19-23 May 2003, Bonn, Germany.
Shackleton S., 2004 .The importance of non-timber forest products in rural livelihood security
and as safety nets: a review of evidence from South Africa Journal of Science South
Africa.

Sheil, D. and Wunder, S. (2002). The value of tropical forest to local communities: complications,
caveats, and cautions. Conservation Ecology 6(2): 9.

Wiersum and Shackleton, C.M. (2003). The role of natural resources in maintaining and enhancing
livelihood diversification in Southeastern Africa. Paper presented at the Seminar ‘Land and
livelihood in Eastern and Southern Africa’, Cape Town, South Africa, 27-31 January, 2003.
Wubalem, T., Getachew, D. and Alia, R. (2007) ‘Natural gum and resin bearing species of Ethiopia
and their potential applications’, Investigation Agrarian: System as Recourses Forestalls 16:
211-221.

19
Annex: questionnaire
1. Name of Kebele_______________________________

2. Household characteristics
1. Name of the household head: ___________________________
2. Gender of household head 1. Male 2. Female
3. Age of household in years -------
4. Educational level: ________________
5. Marital status: 1. Single 2. Married 3. Widow 4. Divorced
6. Family size ____________
8. Were you born here? 1. Yes 2. No
8.1 If No, how long have you stayed here? ________ years
8.2 If No again, why did you come here?
1. Resettlement 2. Own migration 3. To seek job
3) Land possession
1 Do you have Land?
1. Yes 2. No
2 If yes, how did you get Land?
1. Distribution 2. Inheritance 3. Own clearance
3 What is the size of your land holding in ha?
Farm land --------, grazing land ----------, homestead --------- others
4. What are your main sources of livelihood? Fill in the table below

No Farm Activity Rank

1 Crop production
2 Animal production

3 Forest related activities

4 Off farm/non farm
5 Remittance

4. Crop production
4.1 Would you tell us the main type of crops you produce?
1. Barley, 2. Maize, 3. Sorghum, 4. potato, 5. teff, 6. sugarcane 7. chat 8.
Others, specify ______________________
4.2 Would you tell us amount of crop you produced, sold and consumed at home in 2004 E.C?

20
 amount
Produced amount Amount Price

N Crop type Qun/year consumed( Sold(Qt) /Qt Remar

o ks
1 Barley Qt)

2 Maize

3 Sorghum

4 Teff

5 Potato

6 Cash crop
Others
5. Animal Production
5. 1. Would you tell us the type Animals you Rear? Could you also tell us their size?
Cattle---------Sheep--------Goat--------Donkeys --------- Mule--------Horse--------Others------
5.2. Did you sell some of your livestock last year to get additional income? 1. Yes 2. No
5.3. If Yes, Could you tell us the type of livestock, their number and the amount of income
you earned?
Animals Total

N Type Number sold Price income Remarks

o Oxen
1
2 Cow

3 Sheep

4 Goat

5 Horse

6 Mule

7 Others

21
 6. Forest related Activities
6.1. Do you tell us if the forest provides you with any livelihood in the form of income or
other services (household uses)? 1. Yes 2. No
6.2. If yes, would you tell us the income or services you get from Forest?

N Type of Amount Amount Amount Price Remar

o
NTFPs consumed ks
collected at Sold (in
(in Kg) Kg)
each season
1 Forest coffee

2 honey

3 Fire wood

4 liana

5 fodder

6 bamboo

7 Others

6.3.Would you tell us the cost you expend for collection and production of NTFPs including
marketing?
Inputs used for collecting and processing of NTFPs
N Types of NTFPs Material Transportation Labor
o
cost cost cost
1 Forest coffee
2 honey
3 Fire wood
4 liana
5 fodder
6 others

22
i. Availability of non timber forest product in the area
1. What are the different types of NTFPs available in the area?
N Type of Non Timber Forest Relative
o
1 Products
Forest coffee Abundance
2 Honey
3 Fire wood
4 Liana
5 Fodder
Key for Abundance 1= very abundant, 2= Abundant, 3= Rarely Abundant

2. Which NTFPs are used as subsistence and which are for income?
a) Subsistence: b) for income
i. ______________________ i. ______________________
ii. ______________________ ii. ______________________
iii. ______________________ iii. ______________________
iv. ______________________ iv. ______________________
v. ______________________ v. ______________________
3. Where do you find these NTFPs?
1. In the forest 2. On the farm land 3. Around homestead 4. others
4. Are you engaged in Collection of NTFPs? 1. Yes 2. No
5. If yes what types? 1. Medicinal Plants 2. Honey 3. Wild coffee 4. bamboo 5. All
6. What is the purpose of collection of these products?

No Type of Purpose of collection

NTFPs
Househol Income
Both
d generation
1 Forest coffee
2 honey
3 Fire wood
4 liana
5 fodder
Key 1 for house hold use 2 for source of income 3 for both

23
24