The Impact of Participatory Forest Management on Local Community Livelihoods in the Arabuko-Sokoke Forest, Kenya

Paul Matiku,Mireri Caleb,Ogol Callistus

doi:10.4103/0972-4923.115724

Paul Matiku, Mireri Caleb + Show 1 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-4923.115724

Copy DOI

Abstract

This study examines the impact of participatory forest management (PFM) on forest-adjacent household livelihoods in the Arabuko-Sokoke forest in Kenya. It compares the impacts on households near PFM forests (PFM zones) with those near forests with no participatory management (non-PFM zones). The study questions were: does conservation of the Arabuko-Sokoke forest result in net household incomes?; does PFM increase net household benefits?; and are household benefits uniformly distributed within the 5 km PFM intervention zone? The hypotheses tested were: forest conservation benefits exceed forest conservation costs; PFM zones have higher household benefits than non-PFM zones; and benefits and costs reduce with distance from forest edge. In the year 2009, we collected data on household benefits and costs in PFM and non-PFM zones. Data were collected along 10 km transects at 1 km intervals, sampling 600 households up to 5 km away from the forest. The results show varied household dependence on the Arabuko-Sokoke forest. The forest benefits exceed costs in PFM zones but the forest is a cost in non-PFM zones, and costs and benefits reduce with distance from forest edge. The study concludes that, though not cheap, PFM is a tool that can help the Arabuko-Sokoke forest win the support of the adjacent local communities.

Highlights

The history of forest reserves in former British colonies is a history of struggle between competing stakeholder groups and present day policies of governments of independent African states (Barrow et al 2002)
The results from all the data when not separated into participatory forest management (PFM) and non‐PFM zones show that households living adjacent to the Arabuko‐Sokoke forest depend on the forest for their daily sustenance in one form or another
They suggest that where livelihood options are limited and where there exists no scope for local people to offset forest costs, forest managers have to find alternative ways of compensating forest‐linked household costs to avert the risk for households to convert forest natural capital into fiscal capital just for survival

Summary

Introduction

The history of forest reserves in former British colonies is a history of struggle between competing stakeholder groups and present day policies of governments of independent African states (Barrow et al 2002). With land and forest pressures increasing, permit‐based access rights were compromised, as land was encroached, degraded, and cultivated, with the forest department reacting by blaming ‘encroachers’ and evicting them, including those who may have had legitimate secure customary rights (Barrow et al 2002) The problems with this approach have led to the realisation that co‐management and a greater role for local communities, the rural and urban poor, as well as the private [Downloaded free from http://www.conservationandsociety.org on Tuesday, August 20, 2013, IP: 129.79.203.216] || Click here to download free Android application this journal

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion