POLICY GAPS TOWARDS IMPLEMENTATION OF PARTICIPATORY FOREST MANAGEMENT: THE CASE OF THE BALE ECO-REGION, SOUTHEASTERN ETHIOPIA

SUMMARY

View on forest in the Bale Eco-Region, Ethiopia

A study was carried out to identify gaps in effective implementation of participatory forest management and to particularly examine the perception of rural communities towards the success of participatory forest management in three districts located in the Bale Eco-Region (BER), in Ethiopia. Data were collected from both primary and secondary sources, which were further refined, justified and confirmed through field visits. The study revealed a mixed level of satisfaction towards participatory forest management among respondents. A key bottleneck identified is poor law enforcement perceived to be caused by a lack of good governance, poor commitment and poor implementation capacity of government officials, which ultimately affected effective implementation. This calls for significant attention to improve its actual operation, particularly in implementing the benefit-sharing mechanisms.

BACKGROUNDInvolving local people and their institutions in the management of natural resources has

been identified as one of the most appropriate approaches to sustainable development.

Conversely, excluding people from decision-making roles and denying access to

resources have been shown to increase poverty and end responsibility at local levels.

Participatory Forest Management (PFM) is being practiced in Africa as an important

measure to promote sustainable forest management. In Ethiopia, PFM was introduced

in the 1990s as one way to solve the problem of open access to forest resources. In

spite of the relatively good experiences gained in PFM there is still a concern regarding

its implementation. This study was initiated with the objective of assessing the gaps in

the implementation of PFM in the Bale Eco-Region (BER); and particularly, examining

the perception of local people on PFM approaches and its implementation in the study

sites.

SHARE TECHNICAL BRIEF SERIES NO. 04

Pho

to: T

ades

se D

esal

egne

/ IW

MI

This project is funded by the European Union

METHODOLOGYThe study was carried out in three districts located in BER,

Ethiopia. These districts had been selected as pilot districts

for PFM activities in the first phase of the BER Sustainable

Management Programme (BERSMP). In sum, nine Kebeles

were selected from which sample households were taken

randomly. Both primary and secondary data were collected.

Secondary data were collected from available documents on

rules and regulations of PFM implementation and agreement

signed between Community-Based Organizations (CBOs) and

the government bodies. Information obtained from these sources

was further refined, justified and confirmed through field visits.

Primary data were collected through carrying out a household

survey, Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) and field visits. The

survey and FGDs captured basic socioeconomic characteristics

and people’s perception on the success of PFM, the extent

of people’s satisfaction and their perception of the policy

framework. Furthermore, respondents were asked to list the

main challenges and constraints of PFM and possible solutions.

The group discussion was conducted at district and zonal

levels, with a group comprising members from administrators of

agricultural offices, management bodies, PFM experts/councils,

and model farmers. Key informant interviews were conducted

with court bodies, PFM experts and researchers, particularly

from Oromia Forest and Wildlife Enterprise (OFWE) to get a

detailed understanding of implementation and law enforcement

aspects of PFM.

Location of the Bale Eco Region (BER).

Fig. 2 Level of satisfaction with participation in PFM by district

Fig. 3 Perception towards existing policies and strategies of PFM

Fig. 4 Perceived causes of poor law enforcement regarding PFM

FINDINGS FROM THE STUDYLevel of satisfaction on PFM The level of satisfaction of participants towards their participation

in PFM was significantly different among the study sites (Fig. 2).

Most of the participants (especially in Harena Buluk (77%) and

Delo Mena (69%) districts) are highly satisfied and happy with the

contribution of PFM in improving their well-being and sustainable

forest resource management. They further stated that “PFM

created a lot of additional sources of income such as bee-keeping,

benefit-sharing from timber production and processing and other

non-timber products”. However, in Goba the satisfaction level of

participants is not as high as in these two districts (only 38% said

they are highly satisfied with PFM).

Perception towards policy/strategy on PFM and law enforcementOverall, there is a mixed perception on the current policies and

strategies in place on PFM (Fig. 3). Participants in Harena Buluk

and Delo Mena generally have a more positive perception towards

existing PFM policies and strategies, compared to those in Goba.

Yet, what is common among all participants is that, albeit the

existence of different rules and regulations/proclamations, poor

law enforcement is a key problem and actual gap to effectively

implement PFM in the study sites. Perceived causes are mainly

related to lack of commitment and good governance (Fig.4).

Perception towards benefit sharing Most of the participants in Goba stated they are not satisfied with

the existing benefit-sharing mechanism as they do not benefit

enough from forest resources. On the other hand, respondents in

Delo Mena and Harena Buluk are satisfied with the benefit-sharing

schemes. They further stated that all CBOs have agreement by

law and binding rules of a benefit-sharing mechanism of forest

resources. Participants have the signed agreement regarding

participatory administration of forest as well as the right.

Accordingly, CBOs share benefit per their agreement with OFWE

in that they get benefit in terms of cash, i.e., if the density of

the forest is 10-20 m2/ha, CBO and Oromia Forest and Wildlife

Enterprise share 50-50% of benefits from the forest. If density of

forest is >20 M2/ha, 60% of forest benefit goes to the government

and the balance 40% is given to the CBO.

Girl in Ethiopia fetching water Photo: Petterik Wiggers/IWMI

To sum up, mixed perceptions exist with regard to the level of satisfaction towards PFM. Even though policies and strategies are promising

and satisfactory to most of the participants, their implementation is different from district to district, i.e., some of the communities are

satisfied while others not. This is simply because they do not benefit enough from forest resources. According to respondents, law

enforcement of PFM implementation is a key problem causing participants’ dissatisfaction towards the overall PFM activities. Therefore,

this calls for an improvement, especially, of the commitment of government officials towards implementing the laws and regulations in a

fair and transparent way so that the community will benefit.

ABOUT THE SHARE BALE ECO-REGION PROJECT

Conservation of Biodiversity and Ecosystems Functions and Improved Well-being of Highland and Lowland Communities within the Bale Eco-Region (BER) is one of the European Union (EU)-funded projects that stands for Supporting Horn of Africa Resilience (SHARE). In Ethiopia, the project covers 16 districts (Woredas) in West Arsi and Bale Zones of Oromia Regional State, with around 22,000 km2, comprising a population of about 3.3 million. The life span of the project is 42 months starting in July 2014 and ending in November 2017. Five partners are implementers of the project, which are: Farm Africa, SOS Sahel, International Water Management Institute (IWMI), Frankfurt Zoological Society (FZS) and Population Health and Environment (PHE).

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSThis study was supported by the European Union and the Norwegian Embassy.

AUTHORSEndalew Muluneh, Lemma Tiki, Gonfa Kewessa (Meda Welabu University)

EDITORSInternational Water Management Institute: Daniel Van Rooijen (d.vanrooijen@cgiar.org)

Farm Africa: Biruktayet Assefa (BiruktayetA@farmafrica.org)

RESEARCH PROGRAM ON

Water, Land and Ecosystems