ARBA MINCH UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES

DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT

REVIEW ON FORESTS MANAGEMENT PRACTICES AND THE

CHALLENGING FACTORS IN ETHIOPIA

A SENIOR SEMINAR PAPER SUBMITTED TO DEPARTMENT OF

NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT, FOR THE PARTIAL
FULFILLMENTS OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE COURSE SENIOR
SEMINAR (NARM, 3162).

PREPARED BY: -MOHAMMED ABDU

ID NO. RAS/284/10

ADVISOR: -YEMEGNU .Y (MSC)

JANUARY, 2020

ARBA MINCH, ETHIOPIA

I
 TABLE OF CONTENT

Contents PAGE
TABLE OF CONTENT ................................................................................................................... I

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ............................................................................................................ III

LIST OF ABBREVIATION AND ACRONYMS ........................................................................ IV

ABSTRACT..................................................................................................................................... V

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

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

1.2 Objectives ............................................................................................................................... 3

1.2.1 General Objective ........................................................................................................... 3

1.2.2 Specific Objectives ......................................................................................................... 3

2. LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................................................... 4

2.1 Definition and Concepts of Forests ....................................................................................... 4

2.2 The Definition and Concepts of Sustainable Forest Management ........................................ 5

2.3 Participatory Forest Management ......................................................................................... 6

2.4 Forest management practices ................................................................................................ 7

2.5 Significance of People’s Participation in Community Forest Management ......................... 8

2.6 Challenges of forest management ......................................................................................... 9

2.6.1 High population growth ................................................................................................ 10

2.6.2 Overgrazing .................................................................................................................. 11

2.6.3 Deforestation ................................................................................................................ 11

3. CONCLUSION ......................................................................................................................... 13

4. REFERENCES ......................................................................................................................... 14

II
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Firstly, I would like to thanks almighty God for the prevision of his potency and solidarity in the
course of my work. Secondly, I would like to give my special and heart full thanks to my
advisor, Yemegnu.Y (MSC) for his valuable comment, constructive suggestion, unlimited advice
to success my work and positive approach from beginning up to accomplishment of senior
seminar.

Finally, deepest special thanks to Arba Minch University Kulfo campus for its unlimited
computer access starting up to ending and its support and I would also like to appreciation for
department of natural resource management for such amazing and facilitating condition.

III
 LIST OF ABBREVIATION AND ACRONYMS

CBFM ..........................................................Community Based Forest Management

CBNRM …………………………………..Community Based Natural Resources Management

CFM ………………...…………………….Community Forest Management

EFAP …………………..………………… Ethiopia Forest Action Program

FAO ……………………………………....Food Agricultural Organization of the united nation

IFMP ……………………………….….…Integrated Forest Management Project

LDCs ……………………………….….…Less Developing Countries

MOA ……………………………….…....Ministry of Agricultural

MoFED…………………………….……..Ministry of Finance and Economic Development

SFM …………………………………..….Sustainable Forest Management

NCS…………………………………….. National Conservation System

NGOs …………………………….…….Non-Governmental Organization

PFM ……………………………………Participatory Forest Management

PFM ……………………………………Participatory Forest Management Project

UNDP …………………………………..United Nation Development Program

IV
 ABSTRACT
Forest is a combination of many larger and smaller tree species that is used as a home of
many wild animals .Sustainable forest management is the process of managing and conserving
forests to accomplish one or more clearly specified objectives of management with regard
increasing continuous production and without undue reduction of its inherent value and future
productivity and with effective physical and social environment protection. Forest is a
combination of many larger and smaller tree species that is used as a home of many wild
animals. And also a climatic condition (temperature, rainfall and humidity) can determine the
type of plant that can grow in the area. Management practices need local people’s participation
in each specific ecosystem plan in order to avoid over exploitation and forest degradation. The
main important challenging factors which affect sustainable forest management is exclude of
local communities from taking active part and involvement in management process .government
has good participation in the forest management. But in Ethiopia , PFM approach and NGO’s
who can play a great role to improve or increase the forest resource by creating awareness for
the local people, how they use the forest resource and how they increase their agricultural
production in the small farm land rather them destroying forest land

V
 1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background
Tropical forests are being destroyed at an alarming rate all over the world. More than 5 million
hectors per year are being converted to poorly manage secondary vegetation (CIFOR, 2001). To
overcome the problem or at least to minimize the development actors mainly NGO, s introduces
the concept of PFM in Ethiopia. The Participation of the general public in both rural and urban
areas in tree planting and conservation of the natural forests is very important to achieve the
proposal strategies like development plan. This can be done though participatory process where
farmers and local people are involved in planning, design and implementation of the
management plan. This exchange of information and creation of partnership will help build
confidence and provide assurance that the programs are relevant to their needs and ensure that
they have a sense of responsibility (Irwon, 2004).

In Ethiopia renewable natural resource degradation has become the most serious and acute
problem. During the second half of the 20th century, the country has experienced severe
deforestations and degradation (UNDP, 2012). According to Weinberg (2010), between 1955
and1979, over 77 % of the country’s forested area disappeared and it continues to lose 8 % of its
remaining forests annually. Her review clearly stated that natural forests and woodlands covered
in Ethiopia were around 15.1 million ha in 1990 however, due to different factors the forest area
declined to 13.7 million ha after ten years in 2000. Another study revealed that in 2005, the
forest cover had further declined and was estimated to cover 13.0 million ha (FAO, 2010 cited in
Million, 2011).

This statistic showed that Ethiopia lost over 2 million ha of her forests, with an annual average
loss of 140,000 ha in fifteen years. According to the same reference data indicated currently, the
area is estimated at 12.3 million ha, with 11.9 % of the total land area. The review concludes
that, the remaining closed natural high forests are 4.12 million ha or 3.37%of land area. In
Ethiopia the fast growing population that has led to increasing need for farmland, wood for
construction, unsustainable harvest for timber and fuel wood extraction, high urbanization rate,
road construction and over grazing is taken as the major causes of environmental degradation
and forest depletion (Tola.2005 & UNDP, 2012).

1
 Obviously, the country has an agrarian economy with 83% of the population is living in
rural areas, concentrated in the highlands, and depends on subsistence agriculture (Mo FED,
2013). Since the mid-1970s the management of forest resources in Ethiopia was mainly carried
out as state and community forestry programs. These non-participatory approaches failed to
reduce tree felling and clearing, especially in Protected National Forest Priority Areas (FARM
Africa, 2000).

Further this problem was beyond the control of the state therefore, the ultimate solution for
this severe problem will be encouraging of local people to manage and conserve their resources
since they live with forests and they are primary users of forest products (FAO, 2010).
According to Yemiru (2011), in Ethiopia there is a growing understanding that deforestation and
land degradation will further exacerbate poverty, which brings natural resource conservation to
the fore front of rural development initiatives. Terefe (2003) on his side stated that community
participation is very crucial, to overcome the rate of deforestation.

Participatory Forest Management (PFM) is a new paradigm system of forest management which
is adopted and implemented in order to fulfill the interest, respecting of traditional users, and
bottom-up approach which encourage a sense of belongingness to the rural people in general and
landless rural youth in particular (winberg,2010). She further explained that this new paradigm
shift was mainly introduced as a complementary mechanism which safeguards forests.
According to FARM Africa (2000) and UNDP (2012),

the government also created spaces for NGOs engagement in sustainable forest
management, through participatory forest management (PFM) practices and a number of NGOs
and bilateral programs launched PFM in the mid-1990s. PFM was first introduced to Ethiopia
few years ago but the approach is expanding to cover more and more hectares of forest across the
country (UNDP, 2012). PFM in Ethiopia is well adopted recently including regional
governments and at every woreda offices (Weinberg, 2010).

2
1.2 Objectives

1.2.1 General Objective

The general objective is to review forest management practices and the challenging factors
in Ethiopia.

1.2.2 Specific Objectives

To review the local community to wards the forest management practices in Ethiopia

To review and identify the challenges of forest management practices in Ethiopia

To review the sustainability of forest management practices in Ethiopia.

3
 2. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Definition and Concepts of Forests

The meaning of forest is different by different people. Hundreds of more precise definition of
forest is used throughout the world, incorporating factors such as tree density, tree height land
use legal standing and ecological function. But generally forest refer to a country specific choice
of a threshold canopy cover of 10-30% and tree height 2-5m with coverage of 0.5 ha. Forest is
one of natural or human made resource that generates basic human need by utilizing part of
forest resource. Or it is naturally occurring community dominated by tree (Tamirat. 2014).

Forest is a combination of many larger and smaller tree species that is used as a home of many
wild animals. And also a climatic condition (temperature, rainfall and humidity) can determine
the type of plant that can grow in the area. The type of plants and climate in turn determine type
of animals that can in habit in the area. The same thing is that soil type can determine the type of
plant grow in the area as well as animals in habited in the forest (Paul F, 2000)

According to widely used United Nations food and agriculture organization definition, forest
covered four billion hectares (15 million square miles) or approximately 30 percent of the
world’s land area in 2006. Forest is the dominant terrestrial ecosystem of earth, and is distributed
across the globe. Forests account for 75% of the gross primary productivity of earth’s biosphere,
and contain 80% of the earth’s plant biomass. Forest provides ecosystem service to human and
serves as tourism attraction. Trees and forest influence both their immediate sourcing and the
ability of larger environment, and as result have several important links to food security (FAO,
1999).

It is argued that the forest can significantly reduce soil erosion, restore soil productivity
through following system and represent store house of genetic diversity, hence boost production.
It is stated in (FAO, 1999) forest both at macro level help the stable environment conditions on
which sustainable food production depends. To ensure this fact that addressing properly the gaps
already existed with regard to community participation in forest development remains crucial
especially in developing countries characterized by steadily population (Eilas, 2004).

4
Traditionally there are people who entirely used to depend on forest for livelihood particularly in
virgin remnant forest of south western parts of Ethiopia. Forests contributes world where local
people entirely depend on forest (FAO, 1999).

2.2 The Definition and Concepts of Sustainable Forest Management

Sustainable forest management is the process of managing and conserving forests to accomplish
one or more clearly specified objectives of management with regard increasing continuous
production and without undue reduction of its inherent value and future productivity and with
effective physical and social environment protection (UNDP, 2012). FAO (2011) stated that
SFM is a multipurpose practice not only focus on ensuring to balance the ecosystem by reducing
the concentration of carbon in atmosphere but also maintain the capacity to provide other goods
and services for the benefit of current and future generations.

Therefore, Management practices need local people’s participation in each specific ecosystem
plan in order to avoid over exploitation and forest degradation. Generally sustainable forest
management provides a multidimensional benefits and values to the users themselves, and to the
living organisms at large at the global level. Based on the idea of FAO (2008), Sustainable
managed forests provide vital services to both nature and society).

According to UNDP (2012), the term forest sustainability, sustainable forestry, and
sustainable forest management are interchangeable terms which closely linked to the definition
of sustainable development. The department further explained that these terms generally include
or imply the following elements: the continued existence and use of forests to meet human
physical, economic, and social needs; the desire to preserve the health of forest ecosystems in
perpetuity; and the ethical choice of preserving options for future generations while meeting the
needs of the present. To achieve the sense of sustainability concept in forest management, it is
indispensable encouraging and creating social responsibilities of Sustainable Forest Managers.

Experiences revealed that to bring sustainable forest management programs there must put
priorities which local people at the center and based on local, regional and national level. For
instance due to discussing logging systems and annual coupes with local farmers is not a
traditional approach to forest management in many of the world’s rainforests, forests have
vanished where their needs and desires have not been considered. This all indicate that
5
sustainable based forest management practice is a powerful system of conservation which based
on decentralization, participation, interest and willingness of local people that evolved not only
ensure conserving of biodiversity but also have a good implication of in equitable distribution of
access to and benefits from them. Therefore, SFM is the core solution to the continuous
destruction of forests which causes much misery to the poor.

2.3 Participatory Forest Management

Participatory management of natural has become a major subject of policy debates in
Ethiopia in the recent past on a part with food security and rehabilitation of natural resources
(Keeiek and scones, 2002). PFM will be an umbrella term to refer to the various system that been
developed in different countries including community forest management, collaborative forest
management (Anderis, 2000). The main principle of PFM as partnership based goals and beliefs
and a common understanding between the local community (User groups) and the government
concerning the need for sustainable use, joint management and the requirement of the
participatory arrangement (Ander’s, 2000).

PFM is how considered an effective approach to encourage sustainable management of forest

resources as well as supports the sustainable livelihoods of forest dependent communities. It
promotes the need and the crucial role of community involvement in decision making processes
(active involvement of communities at all stages of implementation, i.e. familiarization, being
organized in community based institution, demarcation and resources assessment planning and
implementation of management plan as agreed). Over the management of forest resources of
sustainable basis, which aim at alleviating poverty by improving rural livelihoods? Promoting
more efficient and effective management over forest resources; more sustainable land
management, developing partnership between rural people, state, civil society and private sector;
as well as providing a mechanism to solve potential conflict over control and flow natural
resources in rural (MOA,2012).

6
 PFM project have the overall objective of promoting sustainable management and
conservation of forest ecosystem and improving of the livelihoods of people living in or around
these resources (IFMP, 2002, PFMP, 2006).PFM is the system of management where by a
community forest is managed by the members of the local community, and not by some external,
remote governing body (Gobeze et al., 2009).

According to FARM-Africa and SOS Sahel Ethiopia (2002), Participatory Forest

Management (PFM) is used as a broad term to describe systems in which communities (forest
users) and government services (Forest services), work together to: define rights of forest use;
develop ways of sharing management responsibilities; and agree how to divide forest benefits.
The term PFM includes Joint Forest Management, Collaborative Forest Management, and other
similar terms, that are all used to describe modes of community based forest management
systems. According to FAO (2003), the role of active community participation in ensuring
sustainable development is obviously known and undeniable. Currently, people are considered as
the most important factors and agents of development and their participations are highly required
as it is the central focus (Gebremedhin, 2004).

According to him development is unthinkable without the participation of the native people
and People should be placed first in development projects if their development is what the
activity plan aims to promote and the real aim of development should be to improve and change
the livelihood of local people. Directly and indirectly a given development project particularly
forestry program affects the life of indigenous people; since they live with forests and they are
primary users of forest products (Wily, 2002, & FAO, 2010).This reviewing stated that living
near or within forestlands, local communities are presumed to have greater knowledge and
understanding of the resources and easily identify their constraints and opportunities. Then
“Who can manage forests better than those living within or beside them?” (Agrawal and
Angelson, 2009: 2010).

2.4 Forest management practices

Before, PFM was introduced in Ethiopia; forest management practices were conventional
approach. In this method the forest management practices and conservation efforts exclude local
communities from taking active parts and involvement in the management regime. Management
7
forest had been the task of the state, particularly following the designation as state forest by the
1975 proclamation that nationalization rural lands and forest resource. Following this
nationalization local will be legally prohibited access to the traditional benefits they used to get
from state forest. However, the enforcement of the state ownership was weak and inefficient
(Bekele, 2003).

2.5 Significance of People’s Participation in Community Forest Management

PFM is the system of management where by a community forest is managed by the members
of the local community, and not by some external, remote governing body (Gobeze et al., 2009).
According to FARM-Africa and SOS Sahel Ethiopia (2002), Participatory Forest Management
(PFM) is used as a broad term to describe systems in which communities (forest users) and
government services (Forest services), work together to: define rights of forest use; develop ways
of sharing management responsibilities; and agree how to divide forest benefits. The term PFM
includes Joint Forest Management, Collaborative Forest Management, and other similar terms,
that are all used to describe modes of community based forest management systems. According
to FAO (2003).

The role of active community participation in ensuring sustainable development is

obviously known and undeniable. This review stated that living near or within forestlands, local
communities are presumed to have greater knowledge and understanding of the resources and
easily identify their constraints and opportunities. Then “Who can manage forests better than
those living within or beside them?”(Agrawal & Angelson, 2009: 2010). That is why Agrawal
and Angelsen (2009), justified excluding local communities is likely to work against community
interests, and may aggravate illegal harvesting, fire and fire-raising in forests or other illegal
activities that reduce carbon storage. From this point of view community participation is
imperative at every stage to be effective and sustained the PFM.

Natural resource management theory and practice has been well adopted significantly in
recent decades. According to Wood (2008), historically showed in most countries natural
resources management had been geared towards in the hands of national or state governments,
with little recognition of the people living closest to the resource. Currently there are some basic
facts which indicate that Community Forest User Groups are also generating financial resources,
8
which are used mainly in better forest management and community development activities
(Kanel and Dahal, 2008).

Generally, community forest is highly threatened but provides numerous services like
balancing the environment; serve as human consumption and habitat for animal species.
According to Agrawal and Angelsen (2009), Community forest management (CFM)
encompasses two essential things: the resource (forests) and a class of manager (communities).
In addition to this the term CFM broadly known in different specific forms of names throughout
the world like: participatory forest management (PFM), joint forest management (JFM), forest
community management and community-based forest management (CBFM). Though
Participatory forest management known in various forms, it has two clear key essential goals that
are conserve bio diversity and improve rural livelihood.

Osumba (2011) advocated that the main objective of PFM was to devolve forest
governance to the local levels. For instance, the act proposed the following measures to enhance
community participation in forest conservation: encouraging sustainable use of forest resources;
supporting the establishment of community forests associations through which communities’ can
be able to participate in the conservation and management of forests; and Protecting and
encouraging the traditional interests of local communities customarily resident within and around
forests Purity.

2.6 Challenges of forest management

The main important challenging factors which affect sustainable forest management is exclude
of local communities from taking active part and involvement in management process. The worst
is that local people were observed as destroyers and encroacher rather partners that can play
significant role in the conservation and sustainable management forest resources. Hence, the
communities were excluded both from taking part in the management as well as benefits sharing
arrangements. However, such exclusion has rather exacerbated forest degradation and provide
difficult to sustain as well as costly to maintain the system (MOA, 2012).

9
 On the other hand, the incentive for users to invest in collective management is likely to be
greater if the resources are capable of meeting a sustainable part of users’ needs, and if these
benefits can be obtained rapidly and regularly. By the same taken, situations involving forest that
are producing already are likely to provide a greater incentive to local collective management
then are woodlots that will produce only after several years. Therefore, the tendency to allocate
degraded forest or scrubland for collective management in many programmers has probably
often weakened the incentive for users to participate (Tirhas, 2009)

2.6.1 High population growth

Rapid population growth affects the quality of the environment and living standard of the people
and the reverse is true. Population growth means an increasing number of people with no
proportionally growing alternative sources of livelihood. This unbalanced growth of population
and alternative resources may lead to environmental deterioration such as deforestation,
overgrazing, soil erosion, water pollution and others (Woldeamlak, 2002). Million (2001) stated
that new settlements in forest are increasing from time to time and hence resulted in the
conversion of forest land to agricultural and other land use systems. Spite of the growing public
concern about forests, the increase in population and pressures for social and economic
development continues to drive the trend towards more forest clearance. This problem is further
increased by the domination of short-term economic and market forces over environmental
considerations, which frequently results in the acceptance of unsustainable activities.

In most parts of Ethiopia, rural households are depending on subsistence agriculture; use forest
products as fuel, fodder, and building materials. In poor rural comminutes the continued need for
family labor supports high fertility and rapid population growth that places additional pressure
on natural vegetation (De Souza et al., 2003). Similarly, Medhin (2002), in his report titled with
„Sustainable Development in Ethiopia,‟ described that unchecked population growth, coupled
with overgrazing, has brought about the encroachments of the marginal areas as steep slopes and
ecologically precious lands to meet the need for wood, fuel and grazing. The subsequent

10
removals of natural vegetation and improper land use practices have resulted in the degradation
of the land and eventually conversion into wastelands.

2.6.2 Overgrazing
In the highlands, the expansion of grazing land beyond the land’s carrying capacity occurs at
the expense of the remaining natural vegetation and further land degradation. The scarcity of
grazing land and livestock feed causes the wide spread use of natural vegetation particularly
forests to feed livestock (MoARD, 2007). Livestock pressure and stock management (mainly
based on free grazing system) are major sources of land degradation .Only 25 percent of
Ethiopia’s high livestock population graze in the rangelands, where as 75% graze in the
highlands (EPA,2010).

Overgrazing destroys the most palatable and useful species in the plant mixture and reduces
the density of the plant cover, thereby increasing the erosion hazard and reducing the nutritive
value and the carrying capacity of the land. In Ethiopia, overgrazing is mainly due to keeping
large number of cattle in forest and wood lands. The consequences of overgrazing have been
land degradation, soil erosion, soil compaction as well as reduced species diversity and density
of the vegetation (Chamshama and Nduwayezu, 2002). Heavily grazed plots result in poor
quality of physical and even chemical properties of soils. High soil compaction is clearly
observed in heavily grazed plots than less grazed plots (Girma, 2001).

2.6.3 Deforestation
Deforestation is clearing or removal of trees, shrubs, and forage plant from an area wood land or
forest for many reasons usually commercial. It is the major issue in Ethiopia since; it’s one of
main cause of prevailing land degradation. The cutting is common occurrence which has taking
place of centuries. Hundreds of years back in history some part country which are suffering from
condition caused by land degradation (Esdoman, 2006). Deforestation is the continuous cutting
down of forests without any replacement activities which completely conversion of forest area to

11
another land use or the long-term reduction of the tree canopy cover due to proximate and
underline factors (FAO, 2011).

Deforestation serves as a proxy for the loss of critical ecosystems and biodiversity, as well as
increased risk of soil erosion in steeply sloped areas (Dasgupta et al., 2004). The current
deforestation rate particularly in fewer developing countries is the worry of world Community
because its impact is dangerous to all countries (Terefe, 2003).This reviewing shows that the
degree of forest depletion has become critical in many African countries including Ethiopia
(Gaffar et al., 1998:10 cited in Terefe, 2003).

12
 3. CONCLUSION
Generally, This review clearly stated that there are different forest management practices
in Ethiopia. This review conclude that the management practices of Ethiopian forest is
traditional and influenced by age, gender, socio- economic status and religious background. The
livelihood of Ethiopia depends on forest products such as timber, firewood, grass and
agricultural products, many of the information stated the importance of forest for their livelihood
by declaring that forest is everything for them. This review also summarize that the communities
in Ethiopia have strong relation with forest that helps them to develop their own conception of
forest management. In Ethiopia Forests are affected by different human activities like,
overgrazing, deforestation, population growth …….etc.

Generally, government has good participation in the forest management. But in Ethiopia ,
PFM approach and NGO’s who can play a great role to improve or increase the forest resource
by creating awareness for the local people, how they use the forest resource and how they
increase their agricultural production in the small farm land rather them destroying forest land.

13
 4. REFERENCES
Africa, F.A.R.M and SOS Shall Ethiopia (2002). Mid –Term Review of Bale Mountain Eco
Region Sustainable Management Programmed. Full report

Africa, F.A.R.M. (2000). Assessment of timber Extraction Rate in the Chilimo Forest. FARM
Africa, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

Agrawal, A. And Angelsen, A. (2009). Why are we seeing „REDD‟? An analysis of the
international debate on reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation in
developing countries. Analyses, Institut du development durable ET des relations
international, Paris. 28p. And issues relevant to the review process of the earth. IBCR,
A.A, Ethiopia. And issues relevant to the review process of the earth. IBCR,. A.A,
Ethiopia.

Anders, S. 2000. Guidelines for participatory forest management, Addis Ababa.

BankpkTamirat S., 2014. Lecture note on Nursery Technology and management, department of
Natural Resources Management, WKU. Basin, Mountain Research and Development22
(3):263-269.

Planning Africa, F.A.R.M- and SOS Sehal Ethiopia (2002). Mid –Term Review of Bale
Mountain Eco Region Sustainable Management Programme.

Bekele. M., 2003. Forest outlook studies in Africa (FOSA): Ethiopia food and agriculture,
organization of United Nations.

Chemshama, S.A., and J.B. Nduwayezu. 2002. Rehabilitation of Degraded sub-humid lands in

CLFOR, 2001. CIFO Annual report 2001, forest for the future.

Dasgupta, N. (2004). Implicit in group favoritism, out group favoritism, and their behavioral
manifestations. Social Justice Research, 17, 143-169.

EPA. 2010. Ecosystem and Biodiversity Humanitarian Security and Environmental

Esdoman, 2006.Some country which are suffering from condition caused by land degradation
14
FAO (2003). Participatory Development: Guidelines on Beneficiary Participation in
Agricultural and Rural Development for the Rural Institutions Participation Service,
Rural Development Division Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Rome Italy (2nd edition).

FAO (2010). Policy on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples; Working Paper-10 ISBN 978-92-5-
106689-8Rome, 2011

FAO (2010). Policy on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples; Working Paper-10 ISBN 978-92-5-

FAO (2011). Tropical Deforestation: Causes, Consequences and Some Land Use
Alternatives2Rondônia,BrazilUNEPFeb52007.http://na.unep.net/digital_atlas2/webatl as.
Php? Id=29 09/02/2011.

FAO, 1999. Forest resources assessment 1990, tropical countries paper, Rome

FAO/UN (2010). Progress towards Sustainable Forest Management; Global Forest Resources
Assessment main report FAO-forestry paper -163.

FMP, 2002. Integrated forest of management project: synopsis

Gebremedhin, Y. (2004). Thesis on Community Participation and Sustainable Soil and Water

Gobeze, T Bekele, M. Lemenih, M. and Kassa, H. (2009). Participatory forest management and
its impacts on livelihoods and forest status: the case of Bonga forest in Ethiopia;

Irwin, “2004 the problem with locals” partier ship and participation in Ethiopian a development
change, Ethiopia.

Kanel.k and Ram Dahal. G. (2008). Community Forestry Policy and Its Economic Implications:

An Experience From Nepal International Journal of Social Forestry, 2008, 1(1):50-60

Medhin Zewdu. 2002. Sustainable Development in Ethiopia: Report of assessment of activities

Medhin Zewdu. 2002. Sustainable Development in Ethiopia: Report of assessment of activities

Mgoriforest in Tanzania forest participation series

15
Million Bekele. 2001. Forestry Outlook Studies in Africa. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, pp.5-25.

MOA, 2012 Guideline for PFM in Ethiopia

MoFED (2013). Growth and Transformation Plan, 2010/11-2014/15, Volume I: Main Text.
Ministry of Finance and Economic Development, FDRE, Addis Ababa. Nexus Revisited:
Linkages and Policy Options

Osumba, P. (2006) Pay Back Anticipation: A Driving Force in Communities Participation in

Forest Management Paper Presented At the 13th Biennial Conference of

International Association for the Study of the Commons (Iasc) In Hyderabad, India

(10-14 January 2011)

Osumba, P.(2011) Pay Back Anticipation: A Driving Force In Communities Participation In

Forest Management Paper Presented At The 13th Biennial Conference Of

International Association For The Study Of The Commons (Iasc) In Hyderabad, India

(10-14 January 2011)

Paul F, 2000.Factors that determine the type of animals and plant to grow in the area.

Sub-Saharan Africa a Synthesis. Sokoine University of Agriculture, Morogoro,

Tanzania. Sustainability, balancing up on a Fine Line United Nations.

Tamirat S, Gebreslassie W, and Lemlem T. 2014 contribution of Non- participation in PFM,

Ethiopia

Terefe, D. (2003). Factors Affecting People’s Participation in Participatory Forest Management:

The case of IFMP Adaba-Dodola in Bale zone of Oromia Region; MA Thesis Addis
Ababa University School of Graduate Studies Regional and Local Development Studies
(RLDS)

16
Tirhas, M. 2009. Understanding local forest management institutions and their role in conserving
woody species biodiversity: A Case study of Alamata Woreda, Southern Tigray,
Northern Ethiopia. M.Sc. thesis, Mekele University, Ethiopia.

Tola, G. (2005). Prospects of Sustainable Natural Resource Management and Livelihood

development in Swondo genet area, southern Ethiopia. MA Thesis Addis Ababa
university School of graduate studies regional and local development studies

UNDP (2012). Ethiopia, United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20)

National Report of Ethiopia Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia Environmental
Protection Authority. Uppsala Doctoral Thesis Swedish University of Agricultural
Sciences

Winberg, E. (2010). Participatory Forest Management in Ethiopia, practices and Experiences

Forestry Volunteer Food and Agriculture Organization Sub Regional Office for Eastern
Africa (SFE), Addis Ababa. Food and Agriculture Organization Sub Regional Office for
Eastern Africa (SFE), Addis Ababa, June 2010

Woldeamlak, B. 2002. Land cover dynamic since the 1950s in Chemoga watershed, Blue Nile

Wood, L. (2008). Community-Based Natural Resource Management: Case Studies from

Community Forest Management Projects in Ghana, Mexico, and United States of
America NRES 523- International Resource Management Spring World

Development Vol29, No. 10, PP.1649-1672.

Yemiru, T. (2011). Participatory Forest Management for Sustainable Livelihoods in the Bale
Mountains, Southern Ethiopia Faculty of Forestry Department of Forest Products

17
18