article · Ecological Processes
Degradation of forests in Tehulederi District, South Wollo, Ethiopia, has highlighted the limitations of top-down state forest management. An evaluation of local views and management practices revealed that community forestry is far more favoured than state-run governance. Over 83 percent of surveyed households supported community forestry, driven by anticipated benefits such as wood products, fodder, medicinal plants, infrastructure development, and recreational values. In contrast, approximately 70 percent held negative attitudes towards state forestry, largely due to restricted resource access and resulting conflicts between residents and government authorities. Qualitative assessments indicated that community-managed forests achieved a better ecological status, operated more sustainably, and provided more equitable support for local livelihoods. Establishing supportive legal frameworks and formal recognition of communal ownership rights appears essential for long-term sustainable forest governance.
Top-down conservation programmes often fail when local populations are excluded from resource stewardship. By demonstrating that community governance fosters healthier forests and reduces social conflict, these findings show environmental policymakers, conservation agencies, and development funders that empowering local communities with clear resource rights is critical for successful landscape restoration and rural livelihood security.
The abstract does not indicate an application pathway.
AI-generated from the published abstract. Always read the original work before citing.
Restoring the degraded sites with vegetation cover is an optimal solution to mitigate environmental disasters. Starting from the 1980s, donor-assisted land rehabilitation activities were taking place in Tehulederi District, South Wollo, Ethiopia. Meanwhile, majority of the forests were destroyed; part of the problem was associated with the top-down approach of forest management. The challenge is, therefore, to find a system of management that can enhance the combined effect of both the community and the state. The community forestry (i.e. a forest development activity which is practiced and managed collectively by the community members on their communal land) is one such alternative. The objectives of the study were to (1) examine the views and attitudes of local people towards community versus state forests governance and (2) evaluate the management practices implemented in the community versus state forestry and their implications on the forest status and the livelihood of local people. A structured questionnaire consisting of closed- and open-ended questions was developed to collect quantitative data from randomly selected households. Moreover, key informant interviews and focus group discussions were conducted to gather qualitative data. Descriptive statistics and multiple linear regression were used to analyze and interpret the quantitative data. The data obtained through key informant interviews and focus group discussions were synthesized and narrated using a qualitative method. Several socioeconomic variables significantly affected the views and attitudes of local people towards community versus state forests governance. Generally, local people had positive views and attitudes towards the community forestry. Over 83% of the respondents agreed to accept and practice community forestry. In contrast, about 70% of the respondents had negative views and attitudes towards the state forestry. The positive views and attitudes of local people towards the community forestry may be connected with the perceived benefits (e.g. infrastructure development, source of medicinal plants, wood products, and source of fodder) and the values (e.g. aesthetic and recreational) that local people expect from the community forest. However, the negative views and attitudes of local people towards the state forestry could be attributed to the fact that the community may have limited access to forests when they are exclusively managed by the government. Moreover, such forest management may aggravate antagonistic relationship between the government and local people and be manifested as forest use conflicts. The results obtained from key informant interviews and focus group discussions suggested that the community forest had a better status than the state forest. This may have resulted from the relative advantage of the community forestry to make better use of the community forest, manage it more sustainability, and contribute more equitably to satisfy local livelihoods than does the state forestry. The respondents also illustrated the dependence of local people on forests, utilization, protection, management, and silvicultural schemes implemented in the community versus state forests. The findings emphasize the importance of collective decisions in forest management and governance. The intervention for a legal framework and institutional development particularly through formal recognition of local people’s ownership and right over the use of forests is indispensable towards sustainable forestry.
This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.
DOI: 10.1186/s13717-018-0157-1
Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.
Discussion
Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.
No discussion yet. Open the first thread.
New to MARATTO™? Create a free account.
