Abstract

This study assessed the impacts of Collaborative Forest Management (CFM) initiatives on forest status of Budongo Forest reserve in Uganda and perceptions of the participating communities on the contribution of CFM towards their livelihood. Impact on conservation was assessed by applying a Participatory community based Forest Resource Assessment (PFRA) method to examine population structure, dynamics, and incidences of human disturbance across two forest compartments under CFM and comparing these with the status in two compartments without CFM, but otherwise similar to the former in terms of forest type, history of resource use-patterns, silvicultural management practices and location (in the production zone of the forest and close proximity to local communities). Impact on local livelihoods was examined through a survey that involved ten focus group discussions and semi-structured interviews among 140 randomly selected forest neighbours. With the exception of tree regeneration, CFM improved forest status in terms of more live stems of timber, pole tree species, trees with harvestable logs, merchantable volume, and lowered incidences of human disturbances. However, local people do not perceive CFM to have contributed to their livelihoods because whereas CFM created opportunities for income generation particularly through bee keeping, the in-forest activities it halted were superior sources of livelihood. As a result, nearly 50% of the respondents explicitly reported dissatisfaction with the CFM arrangements. Other reasons for dissatisfaction included the inability of CFM to deliver benefits as promised in the signed agreements, local people were frequently not consulted or involved in making key management decisions, and inequality in sharing CFM benefits amongst members of the local community. CFM at Budongo forest reserve has thus contributed to improving forest status, but is perceived to have had limited benefits to local livelihoods.

Highlights

  • In many developing countries, management of natural resources has gradually become participatory and typically involves a broad range of stakeholders (Turyahabwe et al, 2012)

  • Local people do not perceive Collaborative Forest Management (CFM) to have contributed to their livelihoods because whereas CFM created opportunities for income generation through bee keeping, the in-forest activities it halted were superior sources of livelihood

  • Compartments under CFM had more live stems of both timber and pole tree species, more trees with harvestable logs and significantly higher merchantable volume suggesting that CFM arrangements in which share rights are determined by a government agency as in the current study can improve forest condition because there is a tendency to control extraction of forest resources and limited exploitation rights for the community members

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Management of natural resources has gradually become participatory and typically involves a broad range of stakeholders (Turyahabwe et al, 2012). CFM is provided for in the Forestry Policy of 2001 and Forestry and Tree Planting Act of 2003 of Uganda as an instrument that can address disincentives of a protectionist approach to managing forests and the destructive outcomes of open access (MWLE, 2001; Government of Uganda, 2003) It is implemented by communities forming Community Based Organisations (CBO’s) which enter agreement with a National Forestry Authority and District Forestry Services to manage part of or the whole Central Forest Reserve and Local Forest Reserve respectively (Government of Uganda, 2003). It is frequently argued that realization of local benefits by communities participating in to CFM yields sustainable resource use patterns and an improved forest condition. The following research questions guided this study (i) Does CFM lead to sustainable forest management of Budongo CFR? (ii) How does the local community perceive CFM in relation to their livelihoods?

Location and Vegetation Type
Assessing Impacts of CFM Forest Status
Enumeration and Measurement of Trees
Recording Anthropogenic Activities in the Forest
Local Perception of Impacts of CFM on Livelihoods
Data Analysis
Stand Structure
Regeneration Status
Collaborative Forest Management and Socio-Economic Benefits
Local Satisfaction with CFM Contribution to Household Income
Conclusions
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call