| European
Tropical Forest Research Network |
NOT BY MAIZE ALONE: FOREST ACCESS AND RURAL LIVELIHOODS IN SOUTHWEST ETHIOPIA
By Yihenew Zewdie
Ethiopia's natural forests, located primarily in the Southwest regions, are rapidly depleting. While the negative impact of deforestation on forest ecosystems is self-evident, the effect on forest-based livelihoods is poorly understood. The drive for food security in Ethiopia has focused mainly on enhancing the yield of food grains, such as maize, which are harvested from individually managed farm plots. Forest-based gathering operations, which are undertaken in common pool resource (CPR) systems, have received little policy attention. Furthermore, the current debate on land tenure is polarised in terms of private versus state ownership of agricultural land, with little or no reference to the fate of CPRs such as forests.
Forest-based livelihoods
Forest resources in highland Kafa in Southwest Ethiopia (Zewdie, 2002) support
mixed farming activities and provide a venue for the practice of traditional
spiritual ceremonies. Above all, they enable villagers to meet household subsistence
and cash income needs. Wild food plants and plant medicines are collected for
subsistence needs, but are rarely marketed. Urban demand spurred villagers'
involvement in the production of wood and non-wood forest products (NWFPs) such
as honey (from hanging cylindrical log beehives on tree branches), coffee and
spices. Although the level of NWFP income varies across household groups, it
averages at least a third of the annual household cash income of communities
in the case study areas. Nevertheless, this income may not be sustainable, since
timber production in particular is sometimes excessive.
The contested terrain
of forest access
Since 1975, all land resources have become state-owned. Within this framework,
the current land law recognises farmers' 'holding rights' to farmland, but is
silent regarding the natural forest from which most of the marketable forest
goods are produced. The country's forest legislation, which classifies natural
forests into 'state' and 'regional' forests, has a strong element of forest
protection without spelling out clearly villagers' forest use rights.
In practice, local departments of agriculture, which are entrusted with the responsibility of administering these resources, have neither the capacity nor the organisational incentive to do so. Traditional principles of forest access such as prior occupancy and territoriality are therefore invoked by farmers to establish locally recognised claims on forest patches. These principles also apply to the Bonga state forest, which was demarcated in the mid 1980s in a rather top-down manner. Hence, from the perspective of farmers, the reality of 'farmer holdings' includes both farmland and tree resources in natural forest areas. This perception is also reinforced by the fact that the level of NWFPs a household harvests is factored into the determination of agricultural income taxes that farmers pay.
The advent of external
forest stakeholders
The limited capacity of local government to carry out resource management has
necessitated the involvement of NGOs. Thus, in 1996 FARM Africa started implementing
what became the Bonga Forest Conservation and Development Project within the
Bonga state forest. The re-demarcation of the state forest boundary was among
the first activities the project initiated. For farmers that regarded natural
forests as their own use domain, such an undertaking was unpopular. Moreover,
this approach inadvertently helped to strengthen the position of local administrators
imbued with a top down 'fences and fines' approach towards resource conservation.
In 1998, the threat that deforestation posed to the plant genetic resources has prompted the Ethiopian Agricultural Research Organisation (EARO) to demarcate a vast forest area in highland Kafa as an in-situ coffee preservation site. Indications are that this, too, alienated the forest holdings of local farmers.
The budding private sector is also fast becoming a source of threat to forest-based livelihoods in highland Kafa and beyond. Since the official holding right of farmers is confined to farmland areas, local authorities have been eager to attract private agricultural investment to areas of natural forest in their jurisdiction.
The imposition of outside realities on the local forest tenure scene has consequently resulted in ambiguities and uncertainties. These can only encourage short-termism in the use of forest resources, rather than sustainable management.
The way forward
Uncertainties in forest tenure have frustrated the potential forest management
partnership that could have been forged between forest villagers, external forest
stakeholders and local departments of agriculture. It is, therefore, essential
that policy makers formally recognise the forest use rights of rural households
in a manner analogous to the recognition accorded to farmland. Policy consideration
should also be given to the role forest agriculture could play in sub-regional
level food security endeavours. These measures will put an end to the governmental
practice of viewing forest-based agriculture merely as source of tax revenue,
and will be taken as an endorsement of the importance of forest agriculture
as a way of life. These are also likely to encourage the development of village
level institutional norms that would challenge destructive forest uses.
However, 'rights' for forest use advocated above have to be accompanied by corresponding farmer 'obligations' as regards forest conservation. Environmental NGOs could play a vital advocacy role in championing the legal recognition of forest use rights as well as organising communities to rise to the task of sustainable forest management. This entails a re-orientation of the existing partnership between local departments of agriculture and current and potential NGOs involved in the forestry sector.
As regards the designation of state forests or protected areas, a purpose-specific approach, like the one EARO spearheaded, could be employed, rather than the existing practice of territoriality, i.e. demarcation of contiguous forest areas. At any rate, external forest stakeholders that are keen on establishing such schemes have to appreciate the need for negotiating the outcomes with forest villagers and should be prepared to compensate for lost livelihoods from their activities.
Reference:
Yihenew Zewdie (2002). Access to forest resources and forest-based livelihoods
in highland Kafa, Ethiopia: A resource management perspective. PhD Thesis, University
of Huddersfield, UK.
Further information:
Yihenew Zewdie
P.O.Box 21220
Addis Ababa
Ethiopia
E-mail: yihenew.zewdie@iied.org