HAWASSA UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF SOCIAL SCIENCE AND HUMANITIES

DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY AND ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES

ASSESSMENT OF FARMERS’ PARTICIPATION ON FOREST CONSERVATION:

IN THE CASE OF SIGEZO KEBELE IN TEMBARO WOREDA
By:

MENDARO DENSAMO

A senior essay Proposal submitted to the department of Geography and Environmental

Studies in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the bachelor of Art Degree in
Geography & Environmental Studies.

Advisor: Abera Abiyo

August, 2021
Hawassa, Ethiopia
 APROVAL PAGE

Assessment of Farmers’ Participation on Forest Conservation: The Case

of Sigezo Kebele in Tembaro Woreda

By:-

Mendero Densemo

Hawassa University

Department of Geography and Environmental Studies

Date defended: _____________

Approved by Board of Examiners: Signature

__________________________ __________

Chairman

__________

Advisor

___________________________ __________

Examiner
 ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Above all I thank the almighty of heavenly GOD for his kindness and grace upon me during
all my works and in all my life.

Following, I would like to express my sincere thanks and deepest gratitude to my advisor
Ms. Abera abiyo for his guidance, constructive comments and encouragement throughout
the course of my work. His valuable advice, tireless assistance and availability whenever I
needed he had helped me realize the thesis.

I would like to express my sincere to Tembaro Woreda Agricultural office experts,

development agents and farmers of study area for their cooperation. My deepest appreciation
also goes to my class mates for their intimate cooperation. Eventually, the deepest
gratefulness goes to my family especially my grandmother her relatives for their moral
support and encouragement in all my study and work times.

Page i
 TABLE OF CONTENT

Contents……………………………………………………………………………….Page

APROVAL PAGE ........................................................................................................................ 2

ACKNOWLEDGMENT ............................................................................................................... i

TABLE OF CONTENT ................................................................................................................ii

LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................ v

LIST OF ACRYNOMS ...............................................................................................................vi

ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................vii

CHAPTER ONE ........................................................................................................................... 1

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

1.1 Back ground of the study ........................................................................................................ 1

1.2 Statement of the problem ........................................................................................................ 3

1.3 Objectives of the study ............................................................................................................ 4

1.3.1 General Objective ........................................................................................................ 4

1.3.2 The specific objectives ................................................................................................ 5

1.4 Research questions................................................................................................................... 5

1.5 The significance of the study .................................................................................................. 5

1.6 Ddelimitation/Scope of the study ..................................................................................... 6

1.7 Limitation of the study ............................................................................................................ 6

CHAPTER TWO........................................................................................................................... 7

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

Page ii
2.1 Forest resources and Forestry ................................................................................................. 7

2.2 Purposes of forest conservation .............................................................................................. 7

2.3 The concepts of assessments of farmers participation .......................................................... 8

2.4 Factors that restrict farmers from participatory forest conservation .................................... 8

2.4.1 The dependency of local people on forest resources ................................................. 8

2.4.2 The increasing of farm and grazing lands .................................................................. 9

2.5 Community forestry practices in Ethiopian High lands ........................................................ 9

2.6 Agro forestry practices .......................................................................................................... 10

CHAPTER THREE ..................................................................................................................... 11

3. STUDY AREA AND RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ..................................................... 11

3.1 Description of Study Area ..................................................................................................... 11

3.1.1 Relief and drainage of the study area........................................................................ 11

3.1.2 Climate........................................................................................................................ 11

3.1.3 Geology and Soil ........................................................................................................ 12

3.1.4 Vegetation cover ........................................................................................................ 12

3.2 Research Methodology .......................................................................................................... 13

3.2.1 Location of study area ............................................................................................... 13

3.2.2 Data Type and Sources .............................................................................................. 13

3.2.3 Data gathering instrument ......................................................................................... 13

3.2.4 The sample size and sampling technique ................................................................. 13

3.2.5 Data analysis .............................................................................................................. 14

CHAPTER FOUR ....................................................................................................................... 15

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ............................................................................................ 15

Page iii
4.1 Demographic characteristics of study area .......................................................................... 15

4.2 Marital status and family size ............................................................................................... 15

4.3 Age structure ......................................................................................................................... 16

4.4 Socio-economic characteristics of the study area ................................................................ 17

4.4.1 Educational status of households .............................................................................. 17

4.4.2 Farm size and fragmentation ..................................................................................... 18

4.4.3 Crop production ......................................................................................................... 18

4.4.4 Livestock production ................................................................................................. 19

4.5 Land use ................................................................................................................................. 20

4.6 Deforestation, its causes and consequences ......................................................................... 21

4.5 Composition and structures of natural forests ..................................................................... 23

4.7 Limiting factors of farmers’ participation in forest conservation ....................................... 24

CHAPTER FIVE ......................................................................................................................... 28

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION ........................................................................ 28

5.1 Conclusion ..................................................................................................................... 28

5.2 Recommendation ................................................................................................................... 30

References.................................................................................................................................... 31

APPENDIX ................................................................................................................................. 34

Page iv
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 4. 1: Sex of respondents ................................................................................................................ 15

Table 4. 2: Marital status and family size of household heads in Sigezo Kebele................................ 16

Table 4. 3: Age groups of household heads in the Kebele .................................................................... 17

Table 4. 4: Educational characteristics of the household heads ........................................................... 17

Table 4. 5: Land holding size of sample household heads in Sigezo Kebele ...................................... 18

Table 4. 6: Livestock population in sample kebele ............................................................................... 20

Table 4. 7: Status of deforestation in the study kebele .......................................................................... 22

Table 4. 8: Factors for agricultural productivity decline in the study area .......................................... 23

Table 4.9: Types of tree varieties............................................................................................................ 24

Table 4. 10: Farmers responses about limiting factors for participation on forest conservation in
Sigezo Kebele .............................................................................................................................. 25

Table 4. 11: Farmers’ attitude about forest conservation ...................................................................... 26

Table 4. 12: Areas of farmers’ participation on forest conservation .................................................... 26

Page v
 LIST OF ACRYNOMS
CSA Central Statistical Agency

DA Development Agents

EFAP Ethiopian Forestry Action Program

FAO Food and Agricultural Organization

MOA Minster of Agriculture

NGO Non-Governmental Organization

TLU Tropical Livestock Units

Page vi
 ABSTRACT
The study is undertaken in in the case of Sigezo kebele in Tembaro woreda Tembaro Woreda
in Kambata Tambaro Zone, SNNPR Ethiopia. It is located between 32°98'E to 34°29'E&
8°08'N To 8°9'N. Longitude. This research attempts to assess the farmers’ participation in
forest resource conservation in the area. The primary data for the study was collected from
farmers, zonal and Woreda agricultural experts. A total of 16 officials were interviewed, for
76 farmers questionnaires were distributed. Data were analyzed by using tables, cross
tabulation, percentage and frequency.

Deforestation has been a major environmental and economic problem over a long period
time. Majority of respondents answered that agricultural land expansion, fuel wood
demand, settlement, timber production and pasture land uses are the status for deforestation
in the study area. The major limiting factors which hinder farmers’ participation in forest
conservation in the study area are shortage of cultivating lands, low educational status and
failures of forestation. The main areas of farmers’ participation in forest conservation in the
study area are forestation and reforestation, protecting forests from illegal burning and
protecting from animal interaction. The types of government action that was taken place in
the area are educating farmers about forest resource conservation, providing work for food
funds for active participation in forest conservation, organizing and coordinating the
society, planning program for reforestation and forestation and applying area closure
methods of natural resource managements

Soil degradation in the form of soil erosion and soil fertility decline is the main problem of
study area which had influenced the environmental quality and productivity of land.
Moreover, loss of vegetation cover, drought and climatic change were another recently
prevailed environmental problem which further affects the livelihoods of rural people and
the production potential of the area.

Keywords: Farmers ’participation, sigezo Kebele, Forest conservation

Page vii
 CHAPTER ONE

1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Back ground of the study

The total global forest area has declined by 3%, from 4128 million ha in 1990 to 3999
million ha in 2015 (FAO, 2015; Keenan et al., 2015). The annual rate of net forest loss
halved from 7.3 million ha per year in the 1990s to 3.3 million ha per year between 2010
and 2015. The natural forest area declined from 3961 million ha to 3721 million ha between
1990 and 2015, while planting forest (including rubber plantations) increased from 168
million ha to 278 million ha (Keenan et al., 2015). The Africa total forest area is declining
from 705 million ha in 1990 to 624 million ha in 2015. Due to both natural causes such as
drought, fire, storms and disease, and human cause such as clearance for agriculture, over-
exploitative timber harvesting, the expansion of settlements, and infrastructure development,
natural forest area is declined within 25 years. But, planted forest area increased from year
to year because of expansion of reforestation, afforestation and other forest conservation and
restoration strategies through community participation (FAO, 2015; Keenan et al., 2015;
Payn et al., 2015). Ethiopia has one of the largest forest resources in the horn of Africa.
Ethiopia owns a total of 53.1 million ha covered by woody vegetation which consist of 12.5
million ha are forest land and 40.6 million ha are other wood land (FAO, 2015). The total
forest area of the country is declining from 15.1 million ha in 1990 to 12.5 million ha in
2015. The annual change rate of forest land is 104, 600 ha per year which is 0.8% of forest
cover were deforested. About 95 percent of the total high forest of the country is located in
three regions namely Oromia, SNNP and Gambela regional states (Yitebitu and Eyob,
2014).

Community based participation on natural resource management is being adopted widely as

a possible solution to address such complex problems. Active participation and knowledge
of local groups such as farmers, official experts and government organs are understood to be

Page 1
valuable bodies in community levels natural resources management, decision making and
policy planning processes (FAO, 2004).

It is also recognized that farmers’ participation in forest conservation plays an important role
in the sustainable management of natural resources, such as soil and water (Muller, 2002).
The potential disappearance of community participation in forest resource management
could have negative effect on forest resource availability and distribution on national and
world wide level (bekele, 2003). Forests and the benefits they provide in the form of wood,
food, income, and watershed protection have an important and critical role in enabling
people to secure a stable and adequate food supply (Horni, 2001). The world’s forests play
active roles such as providing renewable raw materials and energy. The farmers,
participation on forest conservation results with forest resource availability. Furthermore,
forests protect land, water and other environmental resources which were damaged by
human activities and other disturbances (Bishaw, 2005). Since the best way to maintain
species is to maintain their habitats, protected areas are an essential means for sustaining
diversity. Protected areas also help in stabilizing the local climate, protecting watersheds,
and preventing erosion. Protected areas constitute the most widespread mechanism used to
conserve the remaining natural forests of Ethiopia. However, the present coverage of natural
forest is generally inadequate and deforested in many areas of the country in general and
study area in particular.

Conservation must be a part of a broader process of managing the whole landscape. Thus,
protected areas will contribute to the conservation of the remaining natural forests in
Ethiopia, if they are able to meet the legitimate developmental aspirations of the people that
live in and around them (Sayer, 2006). Protection and conservation of the remaining natural
forests is critical to protect species and biodiversity. The identification, demarcation, and
protecting the remaining natural forests and wildlife and leaving them as a heritage to the
next generation will be beneficial to present as well as the future generations.

SNNPR Regional State has the highest forest coverage in Ethiopia But, in the kembata
Tembaro forest land is degraded due to agricultural expansion, population pressure, less land
holding size of famers and other factors. The SNNPR region as well as kembata Tembaro

Page 2
zone is practicing conservation of degraded forest land through area enclosures, tree
planting, preparation of soil and water conservation structure through
community participation in the areas and watershed development areas. This study is
conducted to assessment of farmers’ participation on forest conservation: in the case of
Sigezo kebele in Tembaro woreda.

1.2 Statement of the problem

The economic contribution of the forestry sector to Ethiopia’s overall economy has been
11.60% of the country’s total GDP in 1995 and 9.0% in 2005 (Sisay et al., 2010). The
economic contribution of forestry sector listed in Ethiopia’s existing national accounts was
6.4% in 1995 and 4.7% in 2005. Despite its significant importance, forest degradation is
severe and has a long history in Ethiopia, especially in the central and northern highlands
where subsistence farming and settlements have been changing landscapes for millennia
(Mulugeta and Habtemariam, 2014).
Forest degradation has a number of consequences that affect livelihoods of farmers in
particular and the community in general. The major impact of forest degradation are climate
change, soil erosion, loss in water resources, decreased biodiversity, habitat loss and
conflicts, fuel wood shortage and economic losses (Sumit et al., 2012).
The contribution of forests for economic development and environmental security of a
country is not questionable. Deforestation and land degradation, however, are impairing the
capacity of forests and the land to contribute to food security, and to provide other benefits,
such as fuel wood and fodder in Ethiopia. Ethiopians are facing rapid deforestation and
degradation of land resources (Yirdaw, 2003).

Various studies are conducted on the degraded forest conservation practices that are
implemented through community participation. Lack of linkage among actors (Alemayehu
et al., 2015), the absence of clearly defined property rights and user rights (Semeneh, 2015),
gender disparity in participation and lack of active community participation (Demel et al.,
2010) and the absence of rules and regulation to penalize absenteeism (Eshetu et al., 2014)
are major constraints that affect conservation practice. But, having rules and regulation on
penalties in monetary terms and in kind can increase community participation on
development activities (Haregeweyn et al., 2012). However, those studies do not elicit the

Page 3
socio-economic factors (education, benefits obtained and others, physical factors (distance
of forest from home) and demographic factors (age and family size) towards conservation
practice. In general, those studies do not elicit determinants of participation towards
conservation activities. Perception of communities in natural resources management can be
viewed from the angles of perceived economic, social and environmental benefits on
enclosures and bamboo deforestation (Mengistu and Mekuria, 2015; Semeneh, 2015) and
perceived approach of PFM (Abay, 2013). Those studies do not address perception of
farmers on participation in degraded forest conservation practices.
In addition, studies conducted on the factors affecting community participation on forest
management at PFM in Ethiopia address only the levels of participation of forest users
association or groups towards forest managements (Terefe, 2003; Abay, 2013). Similarly,
studies conducted on the determinants of collective action on bamboo forest management do
not elicit the forest conservation activities performed by the community (Semeneh, 2015).
Due to socio-economic (education, income and wealth) and perception on benefits obtained
and forest degradation effects (Tefera et al., 2005; Mengistu and Mekuria, 2015),
institutional (property rights, incentives and extension services) (Semeneh, 2015) and others
factors, participation of peoples in forest management activities to rehabilitate degraded land
vary contextually and spatially (within communities and even within individuals).In the
study area there is no investigation made on farmer participation for forest conservation.
This initiates the researcher to conduct research on assessment of farmers’ participation on
forest conservation: in the case of Sigezo kebele in Tembaro woreda

1.3 Objectives of the study

1.3.1 General Objective

The general objective of the study assessment of farmers’ participation on forest
conservation: in the case of Sigezo kebele in Tembaro woreda

Page 4
1.3.2 The specific objectives
The specific objectives of the study are:-

1. To investigate the status of forest degradation in the study area

2. To explain the role of farmers’ participation on forest conservation in the study area

3. To identify the factors which hinder farmers’ participation on forest conservation in

the study area

1.4 Research questions

Based on the specific objectives the following research questions are designed for this study.

1. What is the status of forest degradation in the study area?

2. What are the roles of farmers’ participation on forest conservation?

3. What factors are hindering farmers’ participation on forest resource conservation in

the study area?

1.5 The significance of the study

The study findings are going to help the Woreda agricultural officials, experts and
development agents to design and invest the program and projects that could bring positive
action to conserve forest resources, enhance environmental conservation, to avert the vicious
cycle of poverty and natural resource degradation. Therefore, the outcomes of the study are
used for formulating future environmental policies and strategies at local and national level.
The document can be accesses for the community via the school once it is believed to be
beneficial. The research also serves as a qualification for the researcher for partial
fulfillment of the requirements of the bachelor of Art Degree in Geography &
Environmental Studies.

Page 5
 1.6 Ddelimitation/Scope of the study

This research is delimited geographically Sigezo kebele in Tembaro woreda and

conceptually it only deals with the status of forest degradation in the study area, the role of
farmers’ participation on forest conservation in the study and it identify the factors which
hinder farmers’ participation on forest conservation in the study area. Methodologically it
delimited to descriptive research approach by using both quantitative and qualitative data.
More over in its time frame scope the research will be conducted from May,2021 to August
2021.

1.7 Limitation of the study

The study has some limitations due to the financial constraints, lack of appropriate official
secondary data, etc. Moreover, farmers and concerned official experts were reluctant to
provide data related to conservation practices and household characteristics like income,
land holding sizes, land productivity, deforestation, etc. In addition, data obtained may
suffer from inaccuracies in some aspects of measurement. And due to lack of satellite image,
detailed land use or cover change map of the study kebele is not well prepared.

Page 6
 CHAPTER TWO

2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE

2.1 Forest resources and Forestry

According to Getahun (2001) forest is an extensive continuous area of land dominated by
large trees. Since Ethiopia is ecologically suitable for vegetation, it is originally covered
with high land forests of various species and arid parts of country were covered with scanty
vegetation. The high forests consisted of dense stands of trees rising up to 30 meters in
height with more or less a continuous canopy. Forestry is the science and art of managing
wood lands, along with associated wet lands and water for the benefits of mankind. It is
chief objectives of which usually engaged on rising and harvesting of successive crops of
timber activities related to conservation of soil, water and wild life conservation
(Abdulkadir, 2004).

2.2 Purposes of forest conservation

Forest conservation has multiple purposes since the past history and which is continued but
could only leads to growing conflicts among the interests of the concern (Abe be, 2000).
Forest protection can be defined as predominantly natural areas safeguarded by law or
custom where species and ecosystems are conserved for current and future generations.
Since the best way to maintain species is to maintain their habitats, protected areas are an
essential means for sustaining diversity. Protected areas also help in stabilizing the local
widespread mechanism used to conserve the remaining natural forests of Ethiopia. However,
the present coverage of natural forest is generally inadequate. Conservation must be a part of
a broader process of managing the whole landscape. Thus, protected areas will contribute to
the conservation of the remaining natural forests in Ethiopia, if they are able to meet the
legitimate developmental aspirations of the people that live in and around them (Slayer,
2003). Protection and conservation of the remaining natural forests is critical to protect
species and biodiversity in Ethiopia. The identification, demarcation, and gazette of the
remaining natural forests and wildlife and leaving them as a heritage to the next generation

Page 7
will be beneficial to present as well as the future generations (Getahun, 2002). No country
has unlimited extents of forests and the reservation of any considerable areas for one
inclusive purposes rather it creates economic and social stress.

2.3 The concepts of assessments of farmers participation

Assessment of farmers’ participation among the rural and urban people in tree planting and
conservation of the natural forests is very important to achieve the proposed strategy.
Involving farmers and local people who live around the forests in tree planting and natural
resource management is critical for conservation and development of forestry. This can be
done through a participatory process where farmers and local people are involved in
planning, design and implementation of the management plan. This exchange of information
and partnership will help build confidence and to reassure all that the programs are relevant
to their needs and ensures they have a sense of responsibility towards the project (Uibrig,
2001).i

Attention should be given to the creation of effective local management organizations to

mobilize farmers in the conservation, development and appropriate use of forests and agro
forestry products. Institutional arrangements at the community level are often key elements
in natural resource conservation in planning agro forestry and tree planting for field
implementation (FAO. 2000). The FAO=s experience in small farmer development work
suggests organizing farmers into small homogenous groups of about 10-15 farmers or heads
of families so the people can more easily obtain government service. These informal groups
work best when farmers have similar incomes, problems and aspirations (Roan, 2004).

2.4 Factors that restrict farmers from participatory forest conservation

2.4.1 The dependency of local people on forest resources

The local peoples are both the victims and the causes for environmental degradation that
result in forest destruction. More than two third of the people of different Ethiopian
localities were in the rural areas that could fragile the environment. They depend largely on
natural resources for their livelihood. They do not have alternative man made forests. As a

Page 8
result land fewer farmers forced to cultivate unsuitable areas such as hill side where the area
are formerly covered by natural forests (EFAP, 2005).

2.4.2 The increasing of farm and grazing lands

Agriculture is the mainstay of the country’s economy in which large proportion of
population derives its livelihood from these sectors. As a result forests are cleared to obtain
more agricultural lands and grazing lands (Yirdaw, 2006). Absence of participatory forest
conservation among local people due to decline of agricultural lands leads to a continuous
decline of forest and wood lands. In this aspects forest rich high lands with their adequate
rain fall and moderate temperature have suffered much from lack of participatory forest
conservation (MOA, 2004).

2.5 Community forestry practices in Ethiopian High lands

The term community forestry was defined in 1978 as “any situation which immediately
involves local people in forestry activities. It embraces a spectrum of situations ranging from
woodlots in areas which are short of wood and other forest products for local needs through
the growing of trees at farm and community level to provide cash crops and the processing
of forest products at the household, artisan or small industry level to generate income, to the
activities of forest dwelling communities (Hammond, 2001). The activities so encompassed
are potentially compatible with all types of land ownership. While it thus provides a partial
view of the impact of forestry on rural development, it does embrace most of the ways in
which forestry and the goods and services of forestry directly affect the lives of the rural
people” (FAO, 2004).

Based on the definition above, community forestry is perceived as encompassing all

activities that are carried out by individual households, farmers as well as activities
involving the community as a whole. These activities are not only limited to tree planting on
farms and households, but also include activities such as the use and the management of
natural resources and the supply or provision of tree products from the surrounding
vegetation (Bekele, 2003). Community forestry also refers to the promotion of self-help
management and use of trees to sustainably improve the livelihoods of the local people. The
community sector of Ethiopia’s forestry has been assigned to strive for meeting the basic

Page 9
needs of the rural as well as partly the urban population in both fuel wood and construction
poles, including other small-scale timber (Wood, 2003)

2.6 Agro forestry practices

Agro forestry is not totally a new concept in Ethiopia. It is an age-old practice whereby
farmers maintain trees in croplands. Such woody perennials are retained for their multiple
uses and benefits, such as their nitrogen-fixing properties and soil improvement capacity,
and the provision of fodders, fuel wood, and fruits (Hoekstra. 2003). The role of agro
forestry in satisfying the basic needs of the rural peoples of Ethiopia is large, but little
research has been initiated to identify suitable agro forestry technologies and appropriate
tree species for specific areas of Ethiopia. However, based on the work done by the
Technical Committee for Agro forestry in Ethiopia (Hoekstra 2003), Following agro forestry
technologies appropriate for the land-use systems in the Ethiopian highlands. Even where
the proposed technologies were not implemented, they can at least serve as baseline
information for further development of agro forestry in Ethiopia (Bishaw, 2002).

Page 10
 CHAPTER THREE
3. STUDY AREA AND RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1 Description of Study Area

3.1.1 Relief and drainage of the study area

The relief of the study area is generally characterized by high lands and ridges which are
bounded by Mountainous features to some extent. The study area is generally characterized
by plain, plateau, ridges and rugged terrain. The altitude of the study Woreda lies between
2300m & 2800m above sea level. The slopes of the study area are categorized as flat, gentle,
moderately sloping and steep slope. Due to its location the district has high network river
system. The major permanent rivers of the districts area are Arid River, Durable Rivers’ In
the Woreda there are a number of temporary springs and permanent rivers. The entire area
drains towards the Omo valley via Omo River. (Tembaro woreda agricultural office, 2021)

3.1.2 Climate

Climate is one of the elements of the physical environment which has a pronounced impact
on settlement pattern, human way of life, the type of soil, economic activities, flora and
fauna existed and developed so forth. Among different climatic elements temperature and
rainfall have a considerable impact in such an agrarian country like Ethiopia and in the study
area. The climate of the Sigezo natural forest is characterized by moderate temperature and
rain fall and it is categorized under Woina Dega Ethiopian agro ecology zone.

The total annual rainfall of the study area ranges between 850-1200 mm. The rainfall pattern
generally is bi-modal, with over 70 percent falling between April and August. The main
rainy season in the area is summer (Keremt) that ranges from the June to August with
maximum rain fall and two minimum rainy seasons such as the spring (Tsedy) and Authomn
(Mekar) with little rain fall. The dry season (Bega) in the area is mostly from October to
February. The dry season limits the water availability in the study area. The months with
maximum rainfall and temperature are July and February respectively.

Page 11
The area has a constant rainfall distribution which is from June to August. The average
annual rainfall ranges from 850-1200mm and the average temperature 170c-220c. The agro-
ecological zone of the study area is 90 % kola and 10% of Woindega

3.1.3 Geology and Soil

Most of geomorphologic features of the study area are disturbed by exogenesis forces such
as weathering and erosion. The study area is dominated by relatively soft weathered rocks
particularly susceptible to erosion. Major type of rock in the area is sedimentary followed by
volcanic rocks. The soil on soft and deeply weathered rock is deep and free from stones. Soil
can be characterized by its structure, color, consistence, texture, and abundance of roots,
rocks and carbonates. Most soils have a distinct profile, which is a vertical section of soil
through all its horizons and extends up to the parent materials or it is sequence of horizontal
layers. Generally, these horizons result from the processes of chemical weathering,
eluviations, illuviation, and organic decomposition. The soil forming factors in the study
area are climate, parent material, relief/topography and flora/fauna. The two dominant types
of soils covering the present study area are Nit sols and Vertisols. Nitosols are the dominate
soil in the area. The soil types of the area comprise 50% silt, 20% clay and 30% sandy
(Ibid). Farmers also identified soil color of the study area as black 19 %, reddish 63 %, gray
2% and brown 16%. Generally soil color in the study area is dominated by red followed by
black. (Tembaro woreda agricultural office, 2021)

3.1.4 Vegetation cover

The area was once been covered by dense forests in hillsides, rivers and uncultivated rocky
lands. Currently, vegetation cover is at a risk of removing, and replaced by settlement,
cultivation and grazing lands. This is due to the fact that rapidly growing population result
with the removal of available forests cover of the area for the need of more land for
settlement and agricultural purposes as well as grazing with large livestock population.
Generally, the vegetation coverage of the study area is categorized in to modern and
indigenous tree varieties. (Tembaro woreda agricultural office, 2021)

Page 12
 3.2 Research Methodology

3.2.1 Location of study area

Tembaro is one of the woreda in the SNNPR of the Ethiopia this woreda named after
subgroup of kambata people. Tembaro woreda is bordered on the south by the Dawuro zone
on the west by Hadaro tunito zuriya woreda on the south east by Wolayita zone. Towns in
the Tembaro including mudula. Tembaro was the part of former omo sheleko woreda has
total population of 480573 of whom 235334 are men and 24,239 women of its population
are urban dwellers. Geographic location of Tembaro woreda;32°98'E to 34°29'E& 8°08'N
To 8°9'N.

3.2.2 Data Type and Sources

To find the accurate information about the study area, two types of data sources are used.
These are primary and secondary data sources. The primary data was collected from
villages, zonal and woreda natural resources management experts, kebele leaders and
household heads. The primary data obtained from the fieldwork were supplemented by
secondary data in order to bridge information gap from primary sources. Secondary sources
include published materials such as reports, official records, census records, project reports,
research papers and data files from internet/ web pages.

3.2.3 Data gathering instrument

Detailed information about the study area was collected by questionnaire, field observations,
informal interview and focus group discussion. At the beginning stage of the survey,
informal meetings were undertaken with village elders, experts and development agents and
community settlement due to high population growth seriously destructs the vegetation
cover and distribution in the study area. Hence, the effect of deforestation to the removal of
vegetation cover is very great in the study area.

3.2.4 The sample size and sampling technique

In order to draw valid inferences from the sample and to ascertain the degree of accuracy of
the result, the study employed sampling procedures. Accordingly the sample kebele is

Page 13
selected from the four kebeles surrounding the forest purposely. Because the problem of
deforestation at the area is severe compared with the deforestation status of other kebeles
Then, the sample population of the study is selected from the total population of the
households in the selected kebeles.

The population of study kebele comprises 640 household heads. Thus, 12% of the total
household heads from selected sample kebeles were considered using random sampling
techniques, which make up 76 sample household heads for the study.

3.2.5 Data analysis

The methods of data analysis were employed by combining both qualitative and quantitative
methods. The data which was obtained from the respondents thought questionaries’ for the
farmers was analyzed quantitatively and the data obtained from interview that is from
official experts and focus group discussion were narrated in order to strength the finding of
the study. The qualitative methods include the verbal description of the primary data
whereas, the quantitative methods includes data tabulation, computation of frequencies and
percentage.

Page 14
 CHAPTER FOUR

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1 Demographic characteristics of study area

This chapter deal with the result and discussion of the data obtained from the respondents
thought questionnaires, interview and focus group discussion

Table 4. 1: Sex of respondents

Categories F %
Name of Kebeles

Male 52 68.4

sigezo Female 24 31.5

Source: field survey, 2021

4.2 Marital status and family size

Majority of household heads covered in the study were married 79%. And the remaining
households are single 8%, divorced 5% and widow 8% (table 4.2). The family sizes of
household heads are discussed by categorizing in to three groups. Out of sampled household
heads interviewed in the survey from the selected kebele, 79% of household heads have
family size 5-8. The remaining 13% and 8% of household heads have family size 1-4 and
greater than 8 respectively (table 4.2). The result shows that majority of household heads
(87%) have the house hold family size greater than 5 who are a heavy burden to the
economic capability of household heads.

Page 15
 Table 4. 2: Marital status and family size of household heads in Sigezo Kebele
Variable Category Over all Total
Frequency. percentage
Marital status Single 6 8
Married 60 79
Divorced 4 5
Widow 6 8
Total 76 100
Family size 1-4 8 13
5-8 62 79
>8 6 8
Total 76 100
Source: field survey, 2021

4.3 Age structure

Age compositions of family members of the survey household heads are summarized in to
three age groups including the age groups of household heads (table 4.3). Out of total
household population, 43% are between 0-14 years old and 53% are 15-64 years old.
Household family members aging above 64 years account for only 4% of the total
population of sample households. The result shows that majority of populations are at
middle age or working age group. This implies that productive age groups of population are
dominant in the study area. There are also large numbers of young age population (0 -14
years) in the study area which are the indicators of rapid population growth in the future and
low number of old-age persons (> 64 years). Generally, there are more young people than
older people; because of poor health care and lack of balanced nutrition people die at a
relatively young age.

Page 16
 Table 4. 3: Age groups of household heads in the Kebele
Variables Category Over all Total
Frequency percentage

Age group 20-40 26 34

41-60 40 53

>60 10 13
Total 76 100
Source: source; field survey, 2021

4.4 Socio-economic characteristics of the study area

4.4.1 Educational status of households

Educational characteristics of households were identified by dividing in to four educational
groups. Out of total household heads covered in the survey, 26% of respondents cannot read
and write, 16% of the respondents can read only and 50% of respondents can read and write.
The remaining 8% of household heads were attended grade 10 and above (table 4.5). The
result shows that majority of house hold heads can read and write. Thus, they have more
access to information about natural forest conservation and active participation. Generally,
better-educated households have a more realistic perception about deforestation problems
and have more knowledge related to environmental management.

Table 4. 4: Educational characteristics of the household heads

Total
Level of literacy Frequency. percentage
Cannot read and write 20 26
Only read 38 16
Can read and write 12 50
Above 12 6 8
Total 76 100
Source: field survey, 2021

Page 17
4.4.2 Farm size and fragmentation
As in most of the highlands of the country, the landholding of farmers in the study area is
very small. There is significant variation in the size of landholding among households.
Minimum and maximum sizes of landholding are 0.25 and 2.2ha, the average being 1.2ha.
As shown in table 4.6, majority of farmers (71%) cultivate less than 1 ha of land. On the
other hand, 19% of households cultivate 1.1-1.5ha. Households who are cultivating more
than 1.5ha account for only 10%. From the discussion one can conclude that farmers of the
area have very low farm size which affects livelihood of households since majority of
people in the area depends on subsistence agriculture and causes clearing of forest lands for
searching more land size. Reports for Zonal level landholding size indicted that 68% of
households cultivate 0.1 - 1ha. Majority of farmers in the study area have farm lands away
from homestead area.

Table 4. 5: Land holding size of sample household heads in Sigezo Kebele

Size of land holding Frequency Percentage
<0.25 ha 8 11
0.26-0.50 ha 16 21
0.60-1.00 32 42
1.1-1.5 12 16
1.6-2.0 4 5
>2.0 4 5
Total 76 100
Source: felid survey, 2021

4.4.3 Crop production

Crop production is mainly rain-feed. Almost all of the croplands are planted to annual food
crops, including cereals (Maize, Wheat, Tiff, Barely and Sorghum), pulses (Haricot beans,
Beans and Peas), root crop and cash crops. Perennial crops such as Inset, Banana, coffee and
Timber (eucalyptus) are also grown in the study areas. Majority of household heads produce
Tiff 86.5%, Maize 92%, Ernst 97% and Yam 81%. Inset is staple food in the area and almost

Page 18
always grown for consumption but the amount of farm land occupied by the crop is too low
(9.53ha)andit is planted around homesteads(Fig.4.1).

Figure 4. 1: Land allocations among different crop type

Source: field; survey, 2021

4.4.4 Livestock production

Farmers in the study area practice mixed agriculture in which livestock production is an
important economic activity. The total livestock population of sample kebeles indicated that
cattle accounts 94.6%, goats and sheep 2.3%, and horses, mules and donkeys account 3.1 %
of total livestock units (table 4.7). Majority of farmers in the study area have cattle which
become an important source of income. Sample farmers rear livestock for various purposes,
including draught power, milk, meat, transport and other purposes. Oxen are an important
animal for plaguing the farms, and donkeys and mules are the most common pack animal.
The availability of feed and water are serious constraints to livestock production in the study
area. The principal sources of animal feed in the study area are private grazing land, crop
residue, forest area and Communal grazing lands. Key informants replied that majority of
farmers in the study area use private grazing land for feeding their animals.

Page 19
 Table 4. 6: Livestock population in sample kebele
Livestock Type Total Livestock holding
Frequency Percentage
Cows 400 15
Oxen 540 20
Heifer 382 14
Young bulls 357 13
Calves 565 21
Donkeys 113 4
Mules 2 0.07
Horses 3 0.1
Goats 195 7
Sheep 169 6
Source: field survey, 2021

4.5 Land use

The current share of different land use in the study kebele can be categorized into forest
lands covering the largest proportion of study area which accounts 176.9ha of land, fallow
land account 38ha and grazing land which accounts 53ha (Fig. 4.2). Furthermore homestead
land account 16% of total land uses of study area. Crop land accounts 125.8ha (25%) of land
use which implies high crop land coverage of study area. The discussion with key
informants show that the land use or cover change is mainly observed in changing from
forest and grazing land to crop land and settlement area. The discussion also revealed that
the formerly available forest and grazing land now become occupied by settlements and crop
production.

Page 20
Figure 4. 2: Land use/cover types in the study area.
Source: field survey, 2021

4.6 Deforestation, its causes and consequences

Deforestation is an old phenomenon in Ethiopia, associated with the old settlements and
agricultural practices (Hurni, 2001). It has been a major environmental and economic
problem over a long period time. Unprecedented deforestation, however, is widespread
phenomena since the recent century, owing to the dynamic demographic, political, economic
and social conditions. Deforestation is one of the status of soil degradation in the study area.
Among other factors, soil degradation was one of the causes for the decline of economic
capability of households in the study area. At present, soil erosion is also a major constraint
upon agricultural production and contributes to the food insecurity problems (Hurni 2001;
Tekle, 2003; Taddesse, 2001; Sonnveld, 2002). Deforestation is also a threat to biodiversity
and genetic resources, such as the loss of the gene pool of original wild populations. Tree
species under threat from deforestation include Juniper us procera, Prunus Africana, Ocotea
kenyensis, Dombeya aethiopica, Dombeya longibractata, Hagenia abyssinica, Podocarpus
gracilior, and Cordia Africana (Gatzweiler 2005).This clearly proves that the extent of
deforestation is a critical environmental and economic problem for the country and study

Page 21
area in particular. Farmers were asked about their opinions on the most important factors
that cause deforestation in the study area. About 37% of respondents answered that
agricultural land expansion, fuel wood demand, settlement, timber production and pasture
land uses are the status for deforestation in the study area (table 4.8). Out of these causes
agricultural land and settlement place expansion become the serious causes for
deforestation. Cultivated land has substantially expanded at the expense of forests, as
expressed by farmers. An increase in agricultural land at the expense of forest land was also
a widespread phenomenon in different parts of Ethiopia, as reported by various studies
(Hurni, 2001).

Table 4. 7: Status of deforestation in the study kebele

Causes for deforestation Frequency Percentage
Expansion of agricultural land 16 21
Demand for fuel wood 6 8
Settlements 12 16
Timber production 6 8
Pasture land use 8 10
All are possible reasons 28 37

Source: field survey 2021

According to the informants in the study area, the main reasons for agricultural land
expansion are low agricultural production and population increase. The key informants in
the discussion also reported that the production generated from their cultivated land is not
sufficient all year round for their rapidly growing population. Farmers reported different
multiple determinants that affect the agricultural productivity in the area. The most
frequently stated factors are scarcity of cultivated land (45%), grazing land shortage (8%),
soil erosion (26%), low fertilizer input (8%), erratic rainfall (5%) and other factors (8%)
(Table 4.8). According to group discussion with key informants, population growth is
among the main causes for the scarcity of cultivated land in the area. The problem of land
scarcity has been very acute over time, since the existing land was shared and distributed
mainly to the male children. The high population density of the area is not a recent
phenomenon, as explained by different old age informants. Therefore, all the above

Page 22
mentioned issues directly linked with the interference of people to formerly available natural
forest areas which cause the removal of forests in the study area.

Table 4. 8: Factors for agricultural productivity decline in the study area

Factors for decline of agricultural Frequency Percentage
production

Scarcity of cultivated land 34 45

Low fertilizer input 6 8
Grazing land shortage 6 8
Soil erosion 20 26
Erratic rainfall 4 2
Others 6 8
Total 76 100
Source: field survey, 2021

4.5 Composition and structures of natural forests

Like other forests Tumisa forest is composed of diversified tree species and wild animals.
The forest is characterized by mixture of many plant species and structures. During transact
walks in the study area it was observed that there is scattered trees at the boundary,
woodlots, plantation forests and stands of trees around the homesteads and in the farm
fields, along with the prevailing cultivated land, woodland and sparse trees. This clearly
proves that trees are prominent parts of natural resources and agricultural activities of the
area with widespread social and ecological implications. It also shows the people’s identity
and sense of place and their harmonious relation with the forest.

Major tree species which were observed in the study forests include Cordia Africana,
Hagenia abyssinica, Podocurpus gracilior, Olea Africana, Aningeria altissima, Croton
machrostachus, Ficus vusta, Ficus sur, Vernonia amygdolinica, Phytyolaa lodicandera,
Commiphora Africana, Ehretia abyssinica, Euphorbia ampliphyla, Euphorbia tirucalli,
Arundo donax, Prunus Africana and others (table 4.10). Informal discussion with key
informants revealed that the forest cover in the study area is declining through time due to
deforestation, increment of population settlement and over grazing. The interference of

Page 23
human population in terms of rapid spread of settlement due to high population growth
seriously destructs the vegetation cover and distribution in the study area. Hence, the effect
of deforestation to the removal of vegetation cover is very great in the study area.

Table 4.9: Types of tree varieties

Local Name Botanical Name Form of existence
Wanza Cordia Africana, Rare
Koso Hagenia abyssinica Rare
Zigiba Podocurpus gracilior Scattered
Weyera Olea Africana Scattered
Kerero Aningeria altissima Rare
Bisana Croton machrostachus Distributed
Warka Ficus vusta Scattered
Sholla Ficus sur Scattered
Grawa Vernonia amygdolinica Scattered
Endod Phytyolaa lodicandera Distributed
Dokima Commiphora Africana Scattered
Korch Ehretia abyssinica Scattered in farm boundaries
Kulkual Euphorbia ampliphyla Scattered
Shimboko Arundo donax Scattered
Source: Field survey, 2021

4.7 Limiting factors of farmers’ participation in forest conservation

Many studies associate absence of assessment of farmers’ participation in rural development
projects like forest conservation with the failure of institutions that are responsible in natural
resource conservation.

However, farmers of the study area were asked about the limiting factors of farmers’
participation for forest conservation in the study area. Out of total respondents, about 47%
of them responded that shortage of cultivating lands become the major limiting factor that
hinder participation on forest conservation. Moreover, about 26% and 27% of respondents

Page 24
 forwarded that low educational status and failures of forestation respectively were the other
limiting factors for forest conservation (table 4.10).

Table 4. 10: Farmers responses about limiting factors for participation on forest conservation
in Sigezo Kebele
Variables Observation Frequencies Percentage
Factors that limit Shortage of farm & grazing lands 36 47
forest conservation Insecurity of land tenure 8 11
Failure of foresters 12 16
Low educational status 20 26
Total 76 100
Source: field survey, 2021

As depicted in the above table, the most influential factors which limit forest resource
conservation practices in the area are shortage of farm and grazing lands. Agriculture is the
main stay of the economy and the primary livelihood for the people in the study area.
According to the discussion with focus group members, the farmers need to produce high
food crops to feed the rapidly growing population that result with the expansion of
cultivation lands to forest and range lands. This condition further causes the clearance of
available natural forests for more plots of land and causes the loss of forest resources in the
study area.

Regarding the participation on forest resource conservation in the area, out of total
respondents 84% of them had positive attitude about forest conservation. On the other hand
few respondents (11%) had negative attitude (table, 4.11). This shows that majority of
households had a good idea and attitude about participation in forest conservation. Even
though there is limiting factors in the area, farmers of the area were active involvers in the
participation of forest conservation program.

Page 25
 Table 4. 11: Farmers’ attitude about forest conservation
Farmers’ about forest conservation Frequencies Percentage
Positive 64 84
Negative 8 11
Not known 4 5
Source: field survey, 2021

On other hand the main areas of farmers’ participation on forest resource conservation in the
study area was discussed. About 90% of sample interviewed households heads responded
that the main areas of farmers’ participation include a forestation and reforestation,
protecting forests from illegal burning and animal interaction (table, 4.13). As it was
observed during transact walks across the forest area, there was active a forestation
processes by government plan with the support of community participation during recent
times. The key informants also revealed that the community participation on forest
conservation nowadays are becomes increasing in its dimension thus the current forest
availability covers wide area.

Table 4. 12: Areas of farmers’ participation on forest conservation

Main areas of Farmers’ participation Frequencies Percentage
Afforest ion and reforestation 4 4
Protecting from illegal burning 4 4
Protecting from animal interaction 2 4
All are possible answers 66 88
Source: field survey, 2021

According to data collected from the farmers, there are also government plan for managing
natural forests in the study area. The types of government action that was taken place in the
area are educating farmers about forest resource conservation, providing work for food
funds for active participation in forest conservation, organizing and coordinating the society,
planning program for reforestation and a forestation and applying area closure methods of
natural resource managements (table 4.13). The discussion with key informants also

Page 26
described that from the recent time on wards the government workers especially DA’s,
agricultural officials and experts together with NGO’s were actively involved in the
coordination and facilitation of condition and programs for forest resource management in
the study area. Thus, further enhances the forest coverage of the area.

Table 4. 13: The government actions for conserving forests in the study area.

Government actions Frequencies Percentage

Educating farmers for forest conservation 6 8
Providing work for food fund program 2 3
Organizing and coordinating the community 4 5
Planning program for forestation and reforestation 4 5
Applying area closure methods 6 8
All are possible actions 54 71
SOURCE; field survey, 2021

Page 27
 CHAPTER FIVE

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

5.1 Conclusion
The active participation of the farmers in the planning, design and implementation of the
forestation and reforestation work helped guarantee success in the community forest
resource management practices. The study area was characterized by moderate to steep
slope and undulating terrain with hilly slop lands and few plain areas. The climate of the
study area was characterized by moderate temperature and rain fall and it was categorized
under woina dega Ethiopian agro ecology zone. The mean annual temperature is about
19.5ºc. The total annual rainfall of the study area ranges between 850-1200 mm. The
vegetation types of the study area were categorized in to modern and indigenous tree
varieties which are on the way of removing and replacing by settlement, crop land and
grazing land. Regarding household characteristics, majority of farmers belong to the young
and the middle-aged groups which was an indication of sufficiently large labor force in the
study area. The main sources of incomes for household in the study area are sales of crop
production and animals. Community based participation on natural resource management is
being adopted widely as a possible solution to address forest resource conservation
problems. The potential disappearance of community participation in forest resource
management could have negative effect on forest resource availability and distribution on
national level as well as study area. The most important factors that cause deforestation in
the study area are agricultural land expansion, fuel wood demand, settlement, timber
production and pasture land uses are the status for deforestation in the study area.

The limiting factors of farmers’ participation for forest conservation in the study area are
shortage of cultivating lands, low educational status and failures of forestation. On other
hand, majority of farmers in the area have positive attitude for forest resource management.
The government action that was taken place for forest conservation in the study area are
educating farmers, providing work for food funds for active participation in forest conser

Page 28
conservation, organizing and coordinating the society, planning program for reforestation
and a forestation and applying area closure methods of natural resource managements.

Page 29
 5.2 Recommendation

In light of the problems that evidently observed in the area regarding assessment of farmers
Participation, the reasonable and possibly attainable suggestions are forwarded in attempts
to mitigate the problems:

1. In order to mediate the existing large family size and low crops production, farmers
should cultivate their plots using modern agricultural systems such as applying hybrid
seeds, artificial fertilizers and insecticides and pesticides to produce much food
production instead of expanding farm lands to increase production.

2. There is rapid population growth in the study area which result with expansion of
settlement to forest land causes the decrease of forest resources. Therefore, any
concerned government organs should apply family planning strategy and creating job
opportunity to unemployed male youngsters to avoid the mare dependency on limited
land resources.

3. To solve the problems related with low educational status of farmers in the study area,
strong effort should be made by the agricultural office in order to teach the farmers about
the importance of participation on natural forest conservation.

4. The rate of deforestation exceeds the rate of afforests ion or reforestation in the study
area. Therefore, the government organs, NGOs and agricultural experts and DA’s should
formulate a plan and annual program for panting new seedlings and plants in place of
deforested area. Furthermore the forest area should be closed and protected from animal
and human interruption for the future.

5. Finally, some of locally available indigenous trees varieties were on the verge of
disappearance due to uncontrolled fuel wood and construction purposes by local peoples
in the study area. So that the government action should included for reserving the
indigenous tree varieties.

Page 30
 References

Abebe (2000). Construction of Soil Conservation Structures for improvement of crops and
soil productivity in the Southern Ethiopia Journal of Environment and Earth Science.
Vol 1, No.1, 2011.

Abdulkadir, A. (.2004) Report of periodic productivity of Acacia saligna and Leucaena

leucocephala hedgerows grown in alleys with maize. Faculty of Forestry, Alemaya
University of Agriculture, Ethiopia. 8p.

Bekele, E. (2003). Causes and Consequences of Environmental Degradation in Ethiopia. In

Forum for Social Studies, March 2003. Environment and Environmental change in
Ethiopia. Consultation papers on Environment No. 1, PP 24 - 31. Addis Ababa,
Ethiopia.

Bishaw B. (2005). Deforestation and Land Degradation on the Ethiopian Highlands: A

Strategy for Physical Recovery. Northeast African Studies 8:7-25

Bishaw, B. (2005). An A forestation Program in the Legeambo Farmers Producer

Cooperative, Hararghe Highlands Ethiopia. Mountain Research and Development 8,
no.2/3

Central Statistical Authority (CSA), 2006. Ethiopia Statistical Abstract. Addis Ababa.

Ethiopian Forestry Action Program (EFAP), 1993. Ethiopian forestry action program: the
challenge for development (Vol. II). Ministry of Natural Resources Development
and Environmental Protection, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

FAO, (2004). Forest Resource Assessment 1990. Tropical countries. FAO Forestry paper
series 112. FAO, Rome 59 p.

Page 31
FAO. (2004). Land Use and Land Cover Ethiopia 1:1,000,000. Ministry of Agriculture,
Land Use Planning and Regulatory Department, Addis Ababa, Development and
Environmental Protection, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

FAO. (2004). Ethiopian highlands reclamation study, Ethiopia. Final Report. FAO, Rome

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), (1981). Ethiopian
highlands reclamation study, Ethiopia. Final Report. FAO, Rome

Gamachu, D. (2001). Soil conservation measures Environment and Development in

Ethiopia. Department of Geography, Addis Ababa University, Ethiopia, 54–96.

Getahun, A. (2002). An Overview of the Ethiopian Highlands: The Need for Agro forestry
Research and Development for the National Survival. In IAR/ICRAF National Agro
forestry Workshop Proceedings. Awassa, Ethiopia, 5–16.

Habtamu E. (2006). Adoption of physical soil and water conservation structures in Anna
watershed, Hadiya Zone, Ethiopia. Regional and local development studies, Addis
Ababa, Ethiopia.

Hammond, L. (2001). Lessons Learned Study: Ethiopia Drought Emergency 1999-2000.

Commissioned by USAID/Food and Humanitarian Assistance. Ethiopia.

Hoekstra, D., E. Torquebiau and B. Bishaw, eds. 2003. Agro forestry: potentials and
research needs for the Ethiopian highlands. No. 21. ICRAF, Nairobi, Kenya. 115 p.

Hurni, H. (2001). Degradation and conservation of the resources in the Ethiopian highlands.
Mountain Research and Development 8: 123-130.

Hurni, H. (2001). Land degradation, famine, and land resource scenarios in Ethiopia, in:
Pimentel, D. (Eds.) , World Soil Erosion And Conservation. Cambridge, pp. 27–61.

Kuru, A. (2002). Roots of Deforestation Problems in Ethiopia. In: Matti, P. et. al. (ed.)
Deforestation or Development in the third World? Vol. III. Helsinki.

Page 32
Ministry of Agriculture (MOA), (1991). Forestry Report Ethiopia. Prepared for the Tenth
World Forestry Congress. (Unpublished) Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

Rao, Y.S. (2006). Some socio-economic and institutional aspects of forest land use. P. 3-10.
In Land use, watersheds, and planning in the Asia-Pacific Region. RAPA Report
1986/3. FAO/UN, Bangkok.

Sayer, A.J., Harcourt, S.C. and Collins, M.N., (eds) (2006). The conservation Atlas of
tropical forests Africa. IUCN. Cambridge, UK. 282 p.

Sonneveld, B.G.J.S., (2002). Land Under Pressure: The Impact of Water Erosion on Food
Production in Ethiopia. Shaker Publishing, Maastricht.

Tadesse G. (2001) Land degradation: A challenge to Ethiopia. Environmental Management

27:815–824.

Tekle K (2003) Land Degradation Problems and Their Implications for Food Shortage in
South Wello, Ethiopia. Environmental Management 23:419-427

Uibrig, H. (2001). Report on land use survey in the Alemaya Catchment, Hararghe
Highlands, Eastern Ethiopia. Faculty of Forestry, Alemaya University of Agriculture,
Ethiopia. 54 p

Wood, A. (2003). Natural Resource Management and Rural Development in Ethiopia.

Ethiopia Rural Development Options. P. 187-198. Zed Books Ltd.

World Agro forestry Center, (2003). http://www.worldagroforestrycentre.org/.

Yirdaw, E. (2003). Deforestation and Forest Plantations in Ethiopia. M. Palo and G. Mery
(eds), Sustainable Forestry Challenges for Developing Countries, 327-342. @1996
Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.

Zeleke G. and Hurni H, (2001). Implications of land use and land cover dynamics for
mountain resource degradation in the north-western highlands. In Mountain
Research and Development. 21, 184-191

Page 33
 APPENDIX

HAWASSA UNIVERSITY

DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY AND ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIE

QUESTIONNAIRE PREPARED FOR RESIDENTS (FARMERS)

The objective of this questionnaire is to assess of farmers’ participation on forest

conservation: in the case of sigezo kebele in Tembaro woreda so you are kindly requested
to give your correct response without biases since plays great role in this solving this
problem. Dear respondents fill the following questionnaire by encircling or writing the
appropriate answers in a given spaces.

Part I: Back ground of respondents

1 .Age of the household head:
A.0-20 B.21-40 C.41-60 D.>60

1.1. Sex of the household head:

a. Male b. Female
1.2. Marital status: a) Single c) Divorced (separated)
b) Married d) Widow
1.3. Size of the household _____________

a) 1-4 c) >8

b) 5-8

1.4. What is the educational status of the household head?

a. Cannot read and write d. Attended up to grade _________

b. Only read e. Graduate diploma and above

1.5. What are the major sources of income?

a. Sales of crop production c. Income from migration

Page 34
 b. Sales of animals’ d. off farm income

Part II Socio-economic condition

2. What is the source of animal feed (rank the source of animal feed according to their
importance)?
1. Communal land
2. Private grazing land
3. Crop residue
2.1 .How do you perceive the problem of deforestation?
a. Very great c. Low
b. Great d. Very low

2.2. What is the size of landholding of the household in (ha)?

a. <0.25 c. 0.6-1.0 e. 1.6-2.0
b. 0.26-0.50 d. 1.1-1.5 f. >2.0
2.3. What is the share of different land uses?
Crop type Land allocation (in ha)

Crop production

Fallow land

Grazing land

Forest

Home stead area

Reserved land

Others

Page 35
2.4. How do you describe the land use or cover change of the study area?
a. Change from grazing land to crop production c. Change from crop land to forest
b. Change from crop production to grazing land e. From forest land to crop land
d. No change is observed
2.5. How do you describe the settlement condition of study area?
a. Densely populated c. Nomadic population
b. Sparsely populated d. None

Part III: The natural forest conservation in the study area

3 What are the factors that limit forest conservation in the study area?

3.1. Who benefits from natural forest?

3.2. What is your attitude for the forest resource conservation?
3.3. What is the reason for the people dependency on forest resource?
3.4. To what extent you are dependent on natural forest?
Part IV: FGD
4. What are the main aims of farmer’s participation on forest resource conservation?

4.1. How do you explain the status of current forest resource conservation?

4.2. Discuss on the role of farmer’s participation on natural forest resource conservation?

4.3. What are the main reasons that hinder farmers’ participation on forest resource
conservation?

4.4 What are the major methods of forest resource conservation in your local area?

Page 36