UNIVERSITY OF GONDAR

COLLEGE OF SOCIAL SCINCE AND HUMANITIES DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY AND ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES

AN INVESTIGATION OF DETERMINANTS OF DEFORESTATION AND THEIR IMPACT ON LOCAL LEVEL FOREST MANAGEMENT IN ADI ARKAY WOREDA (A CASE OF MYTEKLIT FOREST)

BY

MEHAMMED HASSEN

AUGUST, 2020 GONDAR, ETHIOPIA

i

AN INVESTIGATION OF DETERMINANTS OF DEFORESTATION AND THEIR IMPACT ON LOCAL LEVEL FOREST MANAGEMENT IN ADI ARKAY WOREDA

(A CASE OF MYTEKLIT FOREST)

BY

MEHAMMED HASSEN

A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY AND ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ART IN GEOGRAPHY

ADVISOR: BELAYNASH KEBEDE (PHD) CO-ADVISOR: MUSSIE YEBABE (PHD)

AUGUST, 2020 GONDAR, ETHIOPIA

I

AN INVESTIGATION OF DETERMINANTS OF DEFORESTATION AND THEIR IMPACT ON LOCAL LEVEL FOREST MANEGMENT IN ADI ARKAY WOREDA

(A CASE OF MYTEKLIT FOREST)

BY

MEHAMMED HASSEN

Approved by Board of Examiners

Advisor Signature Date ……………….. ………………………. …………………………. Co-advisor Signature Date …………………...... ………………… Internal Examiner Signature Date …………………… ………………….. ………………….

External Examiner Signature Date ...……………………. ……………………. ………………..

DECLARATION

I, the undersigned, declare that except where reference is made to the work of others, the work described in this thesis entitled: “An Investigation of Determinants of Deforestation and their Impact on Local Level Forest Management In Adi Arkay Woreda Myteklit Forest’’ is my own or was done in collaboration with my advisor. This thesis does not include proprietary or classified information. I have also duly acknowledged and referenced all materials used in this work. I understand that non-adherence to the principles of academic honesty and integrity, misrepresentations/fabrications of any idea/fact/source will constitute sufficient ground for disciplinary action by the university. Above all, this observance of the rule, originality and quality of the paper was basically for the true taste of the mind through the actual performance of the work.

Name: Mehammed Hassen

Signature: ……………………………….

Date of Submission: August 31, 2020

I

Acknowledgments

Firstly, I would absolutely like to thank Almighty God for His strength and wisdom that has enabled me to persevere, even when things became stressful and difficult.

I would like to thank my thesis advisor, Belaynesh Kebede (PhD) and my co-advisor, Mussie Yebabe (PhD)for their heartily support, advice and encouragement throughout the course of this study. I am so grateful for their willingness to help in reviewing drafts of each chapter of this study.

I am greatly indebted to the Adi Arkay Agricultural and forest management officers and other households who participated as participants of the study in the study area, for without their cooperation, this study would not have been possible.

I am also highly appreciative of the financial support from the University of Gondar, for this could enable me to conduct the study without worrying about research based expenditures.

Finally, I would like to express my sincere appreciation and gratitude to my parents and colleagues and others, for their patience, understanding and consistent support throughout the course of this study.

II

Contents DECLARATION ...... I Acknowledgments ...... II List of Tables ...... VI List of Figures ...... VII Abbreviations and Acronyms ...... VIII Abstract ...... IX CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ...... 1 1.1 BACK GROUND OF THE STUDY...... 1 1.2 Statement of the Problem ...... 3 1.3 Research Questions ...... 5 1.4 Research Objectives ...... 5 1.4.1 General Objective ...... 5 1.4.2 Specific Objectives ...... 5 1.5 Significance of the Study ...... 5 1.6 Delimitation of the Study ...... 6 1.7 Limitation of the study ...... 6 1.8 Operational Definitions of Key Terms ...... 6 CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE ...... 7 2.1 Deforestation ...... 7 2.2 Determinants of deforestation ...... 8 2.2.1 Direct determining factors of deforestation ...... 9 2.2.2 Indirect determining factors of deforestation ...... 10 2.3 The practice of forest management at local level ...... 13 2.3.1 Efforts made to reduce deforestation ...... 14 2.4. Effects of deforestation ...... 16 2.4.1 Climate change ...... 16 2.4.2 Water and soil resources loss and flooding ...... 17 2.4.3 Decreased biodiversity, habitat loss and conflicts ...... 18 2.4.4 Economic losses ...... 19 2.4.5 Social consequences ...... 19 CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ...... 20

III

3.1 Description of the Study Area ...... 20 3.2 Site Selection ...... 21 3.3 Research Design ...... 21 3.4 Target population and Sampling ...... 22 3.4.1 Target population ...... 22 3.4.2 Sampling Technique ...... 22 3.4.3 Sampling Procedure ...... 22 3.5 Data Collection and Instruments ...... 23 3.6 Data Collection Procedures ...... 24 3.7 Data Processing and Analysis Strategies ...... 24 CHAPTER FOUR: DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS OF RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ..... 25 I. Introduction ...... 25 II. Characteristics of Respondents ...... 25 4.1 ANALYSIS OF RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ...... 26 4.2 Descriptive Analysis: The major Determinants of Deforestation ...... 26 4.3 Econometrics Analysis: Determinants of Deforestation ...... 31 4.4 The Forest Management Practice in the Study Area ...... 33 4.5 Multiple Linear Regression: The Impacts of determinants on local level ...... 34 forest management ...... 34 4.6 The Impacts of Deforestation on Forest Management in the Study Area ...... 36 CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMENDATIOMS ...... 38 5.1 SUMMARY ...... 38 5.2 CONCLUSION ...... 40 5.3 RECOMENDATIOMS ...... 42 REFERENCES ...... 43 Appendix A: Determinants of deforestation ...... 49 Appendix B ...... 51 The interview guide set for professionals and different households ...... 51 Appendix C ...... 52 Forest Observation Checklist ...... 52 ቅጽ ሀ ፡ የደን መጨፍጨፍ ወሳኞች ...... 53

ቅጽ ለ ...... 56 IV

ቃለ መጠይቅ ለ ባለሙያዎች እና ለተለያዩ ቤተሰቦች ...... 56

ቅጽ ሐ ...... 57

የደን ምልከታ መስፈርቶች ...... 57

V

List of Tables

Table No. Page

Table1: Backgrounds of the participants ………………..…………………………………...... 25

Table 2: Direct determinants of deforestation ………………………………………………….26

Table 3: Indirect determinants of deforestation ………………………………………………...27

Table 4: Percentages of the major Causes of the Deforestation as rated ‘Always’…...... 28

Table 5: Results of the forest observation concerning causes of deforestation….………………..29

Table 6: Determinants affecting deforestation in the study area……………………………...…..31

Table 7: Results of forest observation regarding the practice of forest management in the study area………………………………………………………………………………………33

Table 8: Regression Results of Factors affecting local level forest management…………..…….34

Table 9: Results of the forest observation with respect to the impacts of deforestation …....…...36

VI

List of Figures

Figures or photos page

Figure 1: Location map of the stydy area………………………………………………………....20

Photo 1: The photo of Mytekilit Forest………………………………………………………..….21

Bar chart 1:Major Causes of Deforestation as rated ‘Always’ by respondents …...... 29

Photo 2: The photo showing urbanization…………………………………………………...……32

VII

Abbreviations and Acronyms

FAO: Organization for Food and Agriculture UNFCCC: United Nations FrameworkConvention on ClimateChange KLHK: Kementarian Lingkungan Hidup & Kehutanan UNRISD: United Nations Research Institute for Social Development FPU: Forest Product Users NIMOS: National Incident Management Organizations SBB: Foundation for Forest Management and Production Control UNIQUE: Unified Quality Environment UNDP: United Nations Development Program MoFED: Minisrty of Finance and Economic Development FARM: Protected National Forest Priority Areas REDD+: Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradetion RGB: Land and Forest Management SFM: Sustainable Forest Management EESRC: Ethipian Energy and Research Center GHG: Green House Gase, and FDRE: Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia

VIII

Abstract

The present study was conducted to find out the determinants of deforestation and their impact on local level forest management in Myteklit Forest, Adi Arkay Woreda. Descriptive survey design was mainly used to assess this objective.. The patricipants in this study were 91 Agricutural Experts and other households. Simple random and Stratified probability sampling techniques were used to select the households, but for the forest, purposive sampling was employed. Data were collected through questionnaire and semi-structured interview and forest observations. Mixed Approach was employed with an emphasis on triangulation design. Descriptive statistics like frequency and percentage and Inferential statistics such as Tobit regressions & Multiple linear regressions were used to analyze the quantitative data, while the qualitative data were analyzed by narration and description of the respondent’s ideas. The finding of the study showed that the major determinants such as low attitude, urbanization and charcoal production had significant impact on deforestation of the study at .001 and .05 significance levels respectively. In addition, determinants like poverty and climate change or drought had a significant impact on the forest management at a local level in the study area at .05 significance level. The finding of the study also showed that there very limited practice of forest management in the study area. Besides, it was found out that the dominant negative impacts of deforestationin at the local level accounted for high rise of temprature and severe shortage of water. To sum up, the study implied that the forest is at risk and with out due attention and protection. Hence, in order to reduce the forest degradation and the excess demand for fuel wood and charcoal production, the forest users should access to using improved cooking and baking stoves as weel as be eductated and convinced to conserve this natural blessing accordingly.

Key words: Determinants, forest, management, impacts

IX

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACK GROUND OF THE STUDY

According to FAO (2010), the livelihood of most rural people of developing countries is strongly linked to natural resources like forest. Currently problems related to environment and climate changes like land degradation, deforestation, over extraction of both renewable and nonrenewable natural resources are a controversial issue throughout the globe particularly in LDCs since the lives of the people directly and indirectly depend on the existence of these resources (Bedru, 2007 & FAO, 2010). Terefe (2003) pointed out that the major factor to exacerbate such severe problems are high rate of population pressure with low rate of economic growth and low level of technological improvement, increased consumption of non-renewable natural resources. Moreover, the rural poor who have not accumulated wealth are unable to build reserve asset from the utilization of these resources in order to tackle problems in hard times (Tola, 2005). He further explained that rather depletion has continued and the remaining resources especially those endemic species both fauna and flora are in endanger position. In addition to human factors topography is also another factor of land degradation and forest depletion i.e. highland areas are more vulnerable than the lowland areas (Gebremedhin, 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 Winberg (2010), between 1955 and 1979, over 77 % of the country‟s forested area disappeared and it continues to lose 8 % of its remaining forests annually. Her study 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 statistics 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 study concludes that, the remaining closed natural high forests are 4.12 million ha or 3.37% of land area.

1

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). 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 (MoFED, 2013).

According to him, the need to provide for an increasing population combined with other social, economic and political factors has resulted in an ever increasing expansion of the agricultural frontier and hence, subsequent deforestation and land degradation. In line with this, some writers estimated that within a year about 80,000 ha of natural high forests are changed to farmland for subsistence agriculture; and about 50,000ha of acacia woodlands are deforested for charcoal production and for state farm expansion, and about 30,000 ha of woodland, thickets and bush are cut for fuel wood in the country (UNDP/ World Bank, 1988 cited in Tola, 2005). Moreover, this study advocated that wild fire, land tenure insecurity, various inappropriate conservation approaches, lack of integration between new innovative approach and indigenous knowledge, and lack of awareness are considered as the contributing factors to deforestation.

Since the mid-1970s the management of forest resources in Ethiopia was mainly carried out as state and community forestry programmes. 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 the 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 forefront of rural development initiatives.

Amhara, the northern region of the country, is considered as one of the most extreme cases posing degraded environment difficult challenges to farmers contributes to low agricultural production, in turn exacerbating rural poverty (FAO, 2010 & Mastewal, 2010). According to this study, except in some remote areas and around churches, by 1975 the natural dry land forest and woodland vegetation of the Amhara region had been destroyed.

2

This was because of overgrazing, the progressive increase in demand for fuel wood and land for cultivation. According to FAO (2010), since the 1990s, the Amhara natural resource bureau has made concentrated efforts to conserve environment and forest resource by integrating communities, since one of the major Millennium development goals achieving food security and reduce bio diversity lose specifically forest resource by motivating and mobilizing the rural people in the region using participatory forest management policy measures. This study further explained that many areas of natural forest and woodland have reappeared on hillsides following agreements by local communities to restrict access by people and grazing animals to these areas including Myteklit Forest of Adi Arkay Woreda.

1.2 Statement of the Problem

There is no expert consensus on Ethiopia's historical forest cover despite the frequently cited assertion that the country had close to 40% forest cover only a century or so ago. This figure has been derived from the work of the forester, Brietenbach (1962) who considered the effect of climatic factors to determine the extent that the climax forest vegetation cover must have had (FAO, 1981). Historical sources, for example Alvares who visited the country in the beginning of the sixteenth century, describe the Ethiopian highlands as extensively cultivated with many trees, but few closed forests (Prester John, 1961). It is, therefore, not possible that Ethiopia has ever had a closed forest cover within historical times as extensive as that described by FAO. The history of changes in vegetation, reconstructed from various written sources, has been summarized by Tewolde Berhan (1990) for the period since 1500 A.D. His conclusion is that Ethiopia's forests were of limited extent, and that they were at their most extensive state, in the 19th century.

Historically, deforestation in Ethiopia, particularly in the long-inhabited highland areas, has been a severe and persistent process (Demel Teketay 2001). Agricultural expansion since the third and fourth millennium BC resulted in extensive deforestation and forest degradation in the northern highlands of Wello (Phillipson, 1990). A study on the environmental history of Amhara, based on the analysis of geomorphologic and other evidences, revealed that the highland plateau was extensively covered by dense vegetation before the advent and expansion of agriculture in the middle Holocene (Bard et al., 2000). Similarly, using evidences from charcoal and pollen analysis of sediments, Darbyshire et al. (2003) reported that forests in the highlands of Wello have been steadily cleared for agriculture during the last 3000 years. Melaku (1992), after extensive SESA report for the implementation of REDD+ in Ethiopia review of the historical accounts, concluded 3

that much of the forests in the central and northern highlands had already been converted for cultivation before the sixteenth century.

Deforestation and forest degradation in the southwestern highlands, where there is one of the last remaining largest patches of high forests in the country, dates back to the last Century. Some historical accounts indicate that a large part of the high forest is secondary growth from abandoned cultivated fields (Melaku, 1992). From floristic evidence, Russ (1945) stated that large areas of the forests were cleared and cultivated but reverted to forest again in the past one or two hundred years. This was attributed to the massive depopulation of the region due to war and other causes in the middle of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries (Montaden, 1912; Russ 1945; Melaku, 1992). The opening of inroads and the start of forest logging (introduction of sawmills) during the Italian invasion caused rampant deforestation for agriculture and increased sporadic in- migration of people to the region. During the inventory of the southwest forests, Chaffey (1978) described extensive clearing of forests for cultivation. For example, 50% of the southwest forest was cleared for cultivation in less than 20 years (Reusing, 1998). Deforestation in the region continued on a larger scale after the resettlement of people from the degraded and drought- affected regions of the country (Mekuria Argaw, 2005).

The absence of regular forest assessments at national level has limited the availability of up-todate information on the dynamics and extent of forest cover change. The most current and relatively thorough assessments of deforestation and degradation are therefore limited to specific forest areas connected to development projects on forest management and conservation, or those forests considered for academic or other studies. There is a general consensus among experts in that the problem of deforestation and forest degradation in Ethiopia has its roots in unsustainable land use (particularly agricultural expansion), unsustainable wood consumption, lack of appropriate institutional, legal and regulatory frameworks, economic and demographic factors. Of particular interest, in this regard, is the institutional instability of the forest sector which is believed to contribute to the irrecoverable loss of the most precious forest reserves of the country loss of institutional memory and discontinuity of planned activities to total neglect of the sectors valuable socio-economic contributions (Forum for Environment, 2009)

4

1.3 Research Questions

The investigator has set the following specific research questions:

1. What are major determinants of deforestation in the study area? 2. What does the existing forest management practice look like in the study area? 3. What are major determinants affecting local level forest management in the area? 4. What are the impacts of deforestation on forest management of the study area?

1.4 Research Objectives

1.4.1 General Objective

The general objective of this study was to investigate the determinants of deforestation and their impact on forest management in the study area.

1.4.2 Specific Objectives

The specific objectives of the study included the following:

To examine major determinants of deforestation in the study area. To identify the existing forest management practice in the study area.  Find out the major determinants affecting the local level forest management in the area. To analyse the impacts of deforestation on the forest management of the study area. 1.5 Significance of the Study

The findings of this study will have great role in contributing with critical assessment of the topic under investigation which is called determinants of deforestation and its impact at local level forest management. In this regard, this research study is expected to be indispensable for all stakeholders that have their own stakes and being engaged in the exploration of determining factors, impacts and possible practices of forest management and in providing basic information to all stakeholders like private, governmental and non-governmental organization which, operate their duties in community and local centered forest conservation with deforestation and forest degradation in the central focus.

Furthermore, the study examined what activities are undertaken in the study area to tackle the biodiversity losses as well as serves as a good basis for forthcoming researchers who have a strong desire to carry out a research on this or related topics in this area or elsewhere. 5

1.6 Delimitation of the Study

The study focused on rural areas of Adi Arkay Woreda. It was delimited to a rural set-up simply because many of the forests are found in the rural areas. As such, the researcher needed to investigate the existence of the major determining factors that cause mild or severe deforestation and the impact of it in the study area. The study was further be delimited to rural Adi Arkay communal forest of two kebeles. The study was conducted purposefullly in the surrounding of Adi Arkay town which is relatively forest abundant area in the kebele which both urban and local people participate in one or another way in the forest. As the researcher information gathered from preliminary discussion with forest supervisors of the Woreda, this makes the area unique and this uniqueness has attracted attention of the researcher in to researching about the area.

1.7 Limitation of the study

It was difficult to address all issues in this study by the researcher due to time and finance constraints. The study also selected two kebeles within Adi Arkay Worda for one reason mentioned above. As a result, conclusion drawn may not represent for all of the forests in in all kebeles of the woreda regarding determinants of deforestation and forest management at a local level.

1.8 Operational Definitions of Key Terms

 Determinant-are decisive factors or drivers of deforestation.

 Deforestation- is an act of changing forest area in to non-forest area.  Practice-the attempt made to manage the forest area from damage.  Impact- the possible consequence that deforestation brings about to the forest management.  Forest-it denotes the area coverd by a lot of forests.  Forest Management-is the process of managing and conserving forests to accomplish one or more clearly specified objectives of management.

6

CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

2.1 Deforestation

Deforestation as an environmental phenomenon driven by human activity occurring mostly in tropical countries (Casse & Milhøj, 2013). Human activity, such as agricultural purposes or any other activities that require forest clearing, is used to define deforestation. According to the FAO, deforestation is ―the conversion of forest to other land use or the long-term reduction of the tree canopy covers the minimum 10 percent threshold‖ (FAO, 2015, p. 5). The FAO definition of deforestation is further elaborated by Kooten and Bulte (2000) as a situation in which the forest is converted to non-forest land use for agricultural production, grazing, or urban areas. Timber harvesting or logging is only considered deforestation when the reduction is above 10 percent, despite the fact that the structure and functions of forest are disturbed by the logging process (Kooten & Bulte, 2000).

Different from the FAO‘s definition, the Marrakesh Accords document used a different definition. Deforestation is defined as ―the direct human-induced conversion of forested land to non-forested land‖ (UNFCCC, 2001, p. 122). Marrakesh Accords ignored the minimum tree covers, and it implies that every land cover change is counted as deforestation regardless of the percentage of tree canopy covers. The similarity was found regarding the deforestation definition by Indonesia Ministry of Environment and Forestry. Deforestation is a ―change in the condition of land cover from forest to non-forest including the changes to plantations, industrial estates, housing‖ (KLHK, 2016, p. 4). The deforestation definition used by the Ministry of Environment and Forestry also ignores the percentage of tree canopy cover.

The deforestation definitions mentioned above can be summarized into a single deforestation term that is used henceforth in this research. The study would ignore the FAO element of deforestation definition which is the minimum 10 percent threshold of tree canopy covers due to difficulties to assess the 10 percent threshold in reality. The Ministry‘s definition is selected because the deforestation definition that is provided by the government of Indonesia fits with this research and the source of data in this study. The deforestation definition that is used is the deforestation defined by Indonesia‘s Ministry of Environment and Forestry, which in this case is similar to UNFCCC (2001) definition on deforestation, which emphasized the change of forest land to non-

7

forest land. The definition provides an explanation of the land use and land cover change caused by human activities in agricultural and timber sectors.

Moreover, deforestation is explained as conversion of forested areas to non-forest land use, degradation that reduces forest quality, decreases in overall forest cover and clearing native forest land for different purposes (UNRISD, 1994). Deforestation (VOLWOOD) was used as dependent variable in Heckman two-step estimation. It is a continuous variable defined as the volume of woody biomass consumed and sold by each household measured in meter cube (mc). Woody biomass used for charcoal production, firewood, lumber, and other timber products were considered.

To come up with correct estimate of wood consumption, trees were categorized into three (large, medium and small tree) with the help of forestry experts working for Oromia forest agency western branch and local knowledgeable people. Those trees taller than 18 meters were considered as large trees whereas those less than 5 meters were considered as small trees. Those trees which lie in between these two threshold figures in length were considered as medium. Thus volume of these trees categories were used for the purpose of deforestation measuring. Following Mekuria (2007) the following formula was used to estimate wood biomass consumption for each tree categories consumed by each households. ПD2 푉 = ∗퐻∗푓 ……………………………………………………………..(3) 4 Where: D = diameter at stamp height; H = total height; f = form factor= 0.45 For example, in the study of Bekele (1992), households were categorized as forest product user and non-user (FPU) from Komto forest. It is used as dependent dummy variable that represents respondents who used forest product from Komto forest that takes value of one ,whereas it takes the value of zero for the respondent who did not use forest product from Komto.

2.2 Determinants of deforestation

Though forests have a huge significance in environmental and socio-economic development of most African countries, the rate of deforestation is very high due to poor forest management practices. For example from 2000 to 2010, Africa recorded an annual loss of about 3.4 million hectares making it second largest net forest loser in the world (FAO, 2005). Therefore, urgent policy measures are needed to ensure the sustainable management and development of forest

8

resources. According to Geist & Lambin (2001) and Rademaekers et al., (2010), deforestation may occur due to proximate and underline causes.

2.2.1 Direct determining factors of deforestation

Rademaekers et al., (2010) further explained that Proximate causes are human activities (land uses) that directly affect the environment and thus constitute proximate sources of change for example; „excessive logging‟ or „forest conversion into agricultural land‟ directly implies a reduction of forests. Scientists today agree that agricultural expansion is the most important direct driver of land use change globally, followed by infrastructure development and wood extraction. For example the direct drivers of deforestation in Africa reflect the global pattern with agricultural expansion as the main driver of deforestation (FAO, 2005). Direct conversion of forest area into small-scale permanent agriculture accounts for approximately 60% of the total deforestation whereas direct conversion of forest area into large-scale permanent agriculture accounts for another 10% (FAO, 2002). However, also wood extraction and infrastructure development play a significant role in deforestation across Africa (Geist & Lambin 2002). According to this study the main direct drivers of deforestation in Africa (ranked based on relative importance) are thus: Small-scale permanent agriculture (deforestation); Large-scale permanent agriculture (deforestation); Fuel wood consumption (degradation); Commercial logging and timber production (degradation); illegal logging (degradation); and Infrastructure development (deforestation).

Besides, according to the recent findings of NIMOS, SBB and UNIQUE (2017), the main direct drivers of deforestation in order of importance in Suriname from 2000 to 2015 were mining (73%), road infrastructure (15%), and urban development (4%). All drivers of deforestation have increased over that time period. In terms of forest degradation, shifting cultivation and forestry are two proximate drivers quantified. A number of other activities may have a negative impact on forest health and composition, e.g. forest fragmentation due to mining or non-anthropogenic natural causes such as forest fires or storms. These however, have not been analyzed in the scope of this study as these are difficult to quantify in terms of their spatial impact due to a number of reasons, including the extent of these drivers may be fragmented and below the minimal mapping unit, making them difficult to observe through remote sensing. It is recommended to assess these activities in the near future.

9

Shifting cultivation deserves special attention in the context of Suriname as this land use exemplifies the different stakeholder perspectives. SBB considers expansion of shifting cultivation as forest degradation because the forest carbon stock is reduced when transitioning from primary forest to shifting cultivation. Other stakeholders have a slightly different perception, stating that shifting cultivation is comprised of diverse agro-forestry systems, some of which can be considered deforestation if the trees established in that system do not meet the minimum criterion of forest cover, while others recuperate the minimum forest cover over time. The forest area affected by shifting cultivation has expanded less (50% less) in the period 2009-2015.

The predominant forestry practices in Suriname entail selective logging where forest cover (albeit degraded to different degrees) remains post-harvesting. More data is needed to assess forest degradation from logging and the potential to address this in the REDD+ strategy. It is recommended to conduct field research in the near future to measure the impacts of the various forest management types in terms of forest degradation and carbon stock losses.

Although road infrastructure and urban development contribute directly to deforestation, these drivers are also highly relevant as underlying causes as they often lead to increasing deforestation in other land use sectors such as mining and agriculture. Therefore, road infrastructure and urban development are analyzed taking their cascading effects into account. Further, there is a significant link between mining and expansion of energy generation, since energy needs of the mining sector motivates the construction of hydro-dams with negative impact on forest cover.

2.2.2 Indirect determining factors of deforestation

Underlying driving forces (or social processes) are seen to be fundamental forces that underpin the more obvious or proximate causes of tropical deforestation (Geist & Lambin, 2001). In terms of spatial scale, underlying drivers may operate directly at the local level, or indirectly from the national or even global level. The indirect drivers of deforestation vary from country to country and even within a country and are often complex in nature. Due to Africa‟s diverse set of cultures, traditions, languages and political systems, a tendency is seen that in the majority of cases, deforestation is driven by the full interplay of institutional, demographic, economic, technological, and cultural variables rather than by single-factor causation. For Africa the following indirect drivers are most often mentioned in deforestation studies (in order of importance): demographic, economic, technological, governance and socio cultural (Geist and 10

Lambin, 2002). Furthermore, worldwide bio energy policies and demand also play an indirect role in deforestation. Some of the underline causes of deforestation are; Demographic drivers, Socio cultural driver, Economic driver and Government driver.

In contrast to the above idea some studies showed that the idea towards causes of tropical deforestation have changed in the 21st century, which has required changes in the policies necessary to protect tropical forests (FAO, 2011). For many years, scholars assumed that tropical forests was clear largely for the purpose growing numbers of subsistence farmers moving into forests and cutting trees down for cropping such as corn, beans, and cassava. But several recent scientific studies show that not subsistence farmers are the cause, large commercial agricultural and timber enterprises are the major actors and principal agents of tropical deforestation (ibid).

Though small subsistence farming through shifting cultivation and clearing forests have its own impact of tropical deforestation large commercial agriculture, infrastructure development and timber enterprise are the prominent factors for climatic change in general and forest depletion in particular in tropical forests of Africa. In addition, NIMOS, SBB and UNIQUE (2017) asserts that underpinning proximate or indirect drivers of deforestation are underlying causes. Understanding these causes is important because deforestation often finds its root causes in global trends found ‗outside the forest‘. The causes underlying forest loss and degradation differ according to driver and agent, with some underlying causes more relevant for others and vice versa.

At the same time, certain underlying causes are cross-cutting in that they affect all drivers to some degree. One of the main underlying causes identified is the lack of integrated land use planning that combines the development priorities of all relevant sectors while ensuring sustainable forest management. Forests in Suriname, except those on privately owned land, are under the responsibility of the Ministry of Physical Planning, Land and Forest Management (RGB). The control over forest management is mandated to the Foundation for Forest Management and Production Control (SBB). Other tasks, such as infrastructure development in the interior, mining exploration and mineral resource extraction, are the responsibility of other ministries or government agencies. The overarching government body (Council of Ministers linked to Cabinet and supported by the National Planning Office as technical working arm) needs to be strengthened to exercise its functions effectively by taking a lead role in balancing the trade-offs between the different land use pressures in a way that fosters REDD+.

11

In general, the analysis shows that demographic trends, such as population growth and migration, plays a minimal role in causing current and future deforestation, except for small-scale gold mining, where demographic trends play a key role as the number of small-scale gold miners is expected to increase.

Economic and technological factors such as poverty, capacity and production techniques play an important role in influencing current and future deforestation for smallholder land users. Poverty has significant explanatory power for small-scale deforestation agents such as community forest operators, small-scale miners and subsistence farmers, and in all cases, the impact of poverty is expected to become more exacerbated in the future. This is strongly linked to the technological factors such as production techniques for the different land uses. Therefore, poverty reduction strategies, e.g. through policies and measures to improve smallholder productivity or sustainable livelihood alternatives, are seen as key intervention levers to reduce deforestation while fostering sustainable development in Suriname.

The main policy issue identified relates to collective land rights, where there is a strong link with the work carried out for community perceptions. The lack of legal recognition for collective land rights is often seen as a barrier to sustainable land and forest management. This is corroborated by the work on community perceptions, which identified poor governance and lack of secure land rights as the greatest obstacles to achieving sustainable forest management and use. Securing land rights is seen as important to safeguard the protection of the land, the waters and the wellbeing of the indigenous and tribal peoples. At the same time, large commercial and development projects that are beneficial to the government and enterprises take place in communities‘ vicinity. Issues such as corruption and vague promises cause and increase distrust.

While the existence of comprehensive policy and institutional frameworks is important, their lack of effective implementation (i.e. governance) is considered a fundamental underlying cause. Weak institutional capacity at the national and decentralized level has led to poor law enforcement and a resulting negative impact on deforestation. The fact that governance is expected to continue business as usual suggests that investments to improve forest and land governance through REDD+ may be a promising approach to reduce deforestation and forest degradation in Suriname. In other words, in the lack of a REDD+ program, one can expect that poor governance will continue to be problematic in Suriname.

12

The environmental underlying causes identified are particularly important and most relevant for the mining and agriculture sectors. To a large extent, they cannot be changed. In the former, resource availability and access dictate the ability of miners to continue their practices, while in the case of agriculture, climate change and biophysical factors such as soil fertility and changing weather patterns will play an important role. The following figure shows the summary of determinants of deforestation.

Deforestation

The impact of Deforestation Climate change Drought Low productivity Famine

Immediate /proximate causes of Deforestation Agricultural Timber production/ Infrastructure extension expansion wood extraction

Underlying determinants of deforestation

Socio-cultural Economic Technological Demographical factors Factors Factors factors

Figure 1. Determining Factors and impacts of Deforestation / Conceptual Framework (Source: Geist and Lambin,2001)

2.3 The practice of forest management at local level

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

13

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. Anon (1994b), pointed out that SFM is methods that jeopardize or violate neither future harvests of forest products nor future benefits of environmental services.

Moreover, the author clearly defined the important of SFM as, nevertheless, the overall sustainability of management cannot be conclusively proven since future is uncertain, and the application of day to day good forest management practices undeniably helps maintain the value of forests as sources socio-economic benefit and balance of climatic condition. Even good management may result in unforeseen losses of non-target species and help protecting the endanger species of fauna and flora that are very essential for modifications of ecosystem processes (ibid).

2.3.1 Efforts made to reduce deforestation

Development of improved stoves Technical advances in energy efficiency are critical for developing countries like Ethiopia whose populations depend primarily on biomass fuels such as wood, charcoal, dung and agricultural residues. Overuse of these fuels depletes forest resources. In Ethiopia, a unique mode of cooking (Injera baking) requires the bulk of domestic energy demand emanated from forest. In most of the households of the country, this Injera baking is carried out using an open fire /three stone/ system. As it is known, this technique is inefficient and wasteful (Berhanu, 1999). To address this problem, many efforts have been and are being made by the government and non-government organizations since the early 1990s. The development of ‗Mirt‘ biomass Injera stove is one of the results of these efforts in the country. These days this stove is being widely promoted due to the fact that it can achieve fuel efficiency up to 50% as compared to the open fire system (Bess, 1998).

Another Lakech (‗excellent‘, ‗good‘) improved charcoal stove could be developed in 1991. Commercial production of Lakech (improved charcoal stove) was started in early 1992 in Addis Ababa. To date, millions of these improved stoves, which save over 25% charcoal relative to the

14

traditional stove, are being in use. This has resulted in the saving of hundreds of hectares of ecologically and economically important dry land forest in Ethiopia (Ethiopian Energy and Research Center [EESRC], 1995).

Each Lakech stove saves an average of 75 kg of charcoal per household per year (Bess, 1998). This led to savings of over 20,000 tones of charcoal in 1996, worth over £4 million alone. More importantly, the forest savings from the use of Lakech was equal to the equivalent of over 2,000 hectares of important dry land forest in Ethiopia . However, from the earliest days of involvement with household energy in Ethiopia, the international and local experts realized that the single most significant household energy demand side intervention was not in household charcoal use, important as this has been. Rather, the most crucial area for energy savings in Ethiopia is in household bread, or "Injera" baking (Gebremedhin, 2002).

Ethiopia meets 96 percent of its energy needs with biomass such as charcoal, wood, dung and plant residues from farming and forestry. Private households consume by far the greatest proportion of the energy generated, namely 88 percent. Half of the energy goes entirely on baking ―injera‖, a type of round flat loaf made with sour dough. The population, now totaling some 90 million is growing very quickly and so is the demand for biomass. The consequence is constant over exploitation of those forests that still exist. They now cover just 30,000 square kilometers, or only 2.7 percent of the area of the country (FAO, 2007).

Since Mirt was introduced in 1998, the project has achieved much progress in social, economic and ecological terms. In 35 smaller and medium-sized towns, about 100 small businesses have been set up which have manufactured 27,000 Mirt stoves and sold them at a price of between 40 and 50 Birr. A single stove reduces the demand for wood by 570 kilograms per year. The amount of fuel wood saved since the start of the project now totals 16,000 tones. This is equivalent to an area of 2,000 hectares of forest (Baenes, 2004). Each Mirt saves approximately 5 kg of wood per Injera baking session for the average household. Most housewives bake injera twice a week. Thus, the Mirt saves the average household nearly 260 kg of wood a year. This is a significant savings for the average Ethiopian urban household. However, the Mirt saves commercial Injera bakers over 3.5 tons of fuel wood per year (Barnes, 2002).

Area closure and soil and water conservation efforts to contain the problem of deforestation have been made at several levels. Two of the main activities have been soil and water conservation 15

works, and the establishment of area closures aiming rehabilitation of forest lands to a community-based approach . The important set of activities has been the establishment of area closures. Area closures in the Ethiopian context can be defined as that degraded land has been excluded from human and livestock interference, for rehabilitation (Gebremedhin, 2002). In principle, human and animal interference is restricted in the area closures, to encourage natural regeneration. In practice, however, cattle are allowed to graze freely in several of the area closures. In some areas, soil and water conservation activities are also being undertaken. The inception of area closures dates back to the early 1980s, which coincides with the beginning of large-scale land rehabilitation and soil and water conservation programmes in Ethiopia. The establishment of area closures has been one of the strategies for rehabilitating degraded hillsides within catchments delimited for the rehabilitation and soil and water conservation programmes (Betru, 2003).

Forest plantation as a pathway for restoration Recent operations on Ethiopia forest plantation through community participation indicates that plantations enhance the recruitment, establishment and succession of native woody species by functioning as foster ecosystems. Forest plantations established on degraded sites long devoid of a native tree cover act as successional catalysts, facilitating the recolonization of native flora through their influence on understorey microclimate and soil fertility, suppression of dominant grasses and provision of habitats for seed dispersing animals. When this natural process is augmented by silvicultural treatments intended to enhance the invasion of native species, plantations may be gradually converted to a forest which resembles a near-by natural forest (Adam, 2008).

2.4. Effects of deforestation

2.4.1 Climate change

It is essential to distinguish between microclimates, regional climate and global climate while assessing the effects of forest on climate (Gupta et al., 2005) especially the effect of tropical deforestation on climate. Deforestation can change the global change of energy not only through the micrometeorological processes but also by increasing the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere because carbon dioxide absorbs thermal infrared radiation in the atmosphere. Moreover deforestation can lead to increase in the albedo of the land surface and hence affects the radiation budget of the region (Gupta et al., 2005). Deforestation affects wind flows, water vapour

16

flows and absorption of solar energy thus clearly influencing local and global climate. Deforestation on lowland plains moves cloud formation and rainfall to higher elevations. Deforestation disrupts normal weather patterns creating hotter and drier weather thus increasing drought and desertification, crop failures, melting of the polar ice caps, coastal flooding and displacement of major vegetation regimes. In the dry forest zones, land degradation has become an increasingly serious problem resulting in extreme cases in desertification (Dregne, 1983). Desertification is the consequence of extremes in climatic variation and unsustainable land use practices including overcutting of forest cover (Anon., 1994b).

Global warming or global change includes anthropogenically produced climatic and ecological problems such as recent apparent climatic temperature shifts and precipitation regimes in some areas, sea level rise, stratospheric ozone depletion, atmospheric pollution and forest decline. Tropical forests are shrinking at a rate of about five per cent per decade as forests are logged and cleared to supply local, regional, national and global markets for wood products, cattle, agricultural produce and biofuels (Anon, 2010). One of the most important ramifications of deforestation is its effect on the global atmosphere. Deforestation contributes to global warming which occurs from increased atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases (GHG) leading to net increase in the global mean temperature as the forests are primary terrestrial sink of carbon. Thus, deforestation disrupts the global carbon cycle increasing the concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide. Tropical deforestation is responsible for the emission of roughly two billion tonnes of carbon (as CO2) to the atmosphere per year. Release of the carbon dioxide due to global deforestation is equivalent to an estimated 25 per cent of emissions from combustion of fossil fuels (Asdrasko, 1990).

2.4.2 Water and soil resources loss and flooding

Deforestation also disrupts the global water cycle. With removal of part of the forest, the area cannot hold as much water creating a drier climate. Water resources affected by deforestation include drinking water, fisheries and aquatic habitats, flood/drought control, waterways and dams affected by siltation, less appealing waterrelated recreation, and damage to crops and irrigation systems from erosion and turbidity. Urban water protection is potentially one of the most important services that forest provides (Chomitz et al., 2007). Filtering and treating water is expensive. Forests can reduce the costs of doing so either actively by filtering runoff or passively by substituting for housing or farms that generate runoff (Gupta, et al, 2005). 17

Deforestation can also result into watersheds that are no longer able to sustain and regulate water flows from rivers and streams. Once they are gone, too much water can result into downstream flooding, many of which have caused disasters in many parts of the world. This downstream flow causes soil erosion thus also silting of water courses, lakes and dams. Deforestation increases flooding mainly for two reasons. First, with a smaller ‗tree fountain‘ effect, soils are more likely to be fully saturated with water. The ‗sponge‘ fills up earlier in wet season, causing additional precipitation to run off and increasing flood risk. Second, deforestation often results in soil compaction unable to absorb rain. Locally, this causes a faster response of stream flows to rainfall and thus potential flash flooding (Chomitz et al., 2007). Moreover deforestation also decrease dry season flows.

The long term effect of deforestation on the soil resource can be severe. Clearing the vegetative cover for slash and burn farming exposes the soil to the intensity of the tropical sun and torrential rains. Forest floors with their leaf litter and porous soils easily accommodate intense rainfall. The effects of deforestation on water availability, flash floods and dry season flows depend on what happens to these countervailing influences of infiltration and evapotranspiration- the sponge versus the fountain (Bruijnzeel, 2004). Deforestation and other land use changes have increased the proportion of the basin subject to erosion and so over the long run have contributed to siltation. Heavy siltation has raised the river bed increasing the risk of flooding especially in Yangtze river basin in China, the major river basins of humid tropics in East Asia and the Amazonian basin (Yin, 2009).

2.4.3 Decreased biodiversity, habitat loss and conflicts

Forests especially those in the tropics serve as storehouses of biodiversity and consequently deforestation, fragmentation and degradation destroys the biodiversity as a whole and habitat for migratory species including the endangered ones, some of which have still to be catalogued. Tropical forests support about two thirds of all known species and contain 65 per cent of the world‘s 10, 000 endangered species (Myers, 1991). Retaining the biodiversity of the forested areas is like retaining a form of capital, until more research can establish the relative importance of various plants and animal species. According to the World Health Organization, about 80 per cent of the world‘s population relies for primary health care at least partially on traditional medicine. The biodiversity loss and associated large changes in forest cover could trigger abrupt, irreversible and harmful changes. These include regional climate change including feedback 18

effects that could theoretically shift rainforests to savannas and the emergence of new pathogens as the growing trade in bushmeat increases contact between humans and animals (Anon., 2005).

Another negative effect of deforestation is increasing incidents of human-animal conflicts hitting hard the success of conservation in a way alienating the people‘s participation in conservation. Elephant habitat located at northern West Bengal in India is part of the Eastern Himalaya Biodiversity Hotspot which is characterized by a high degree of fragmentation. The heavy fragmentation of this habitat has resulted into an intense human-elephant conflict causing not only in loss of agricultural crops but also human and elephant lives. Mortality of about 50 persons and 20 elephants was reported due to these severe human-elephant conflicts from this hotspot area annually ( Asdrasko, 1990).

2.4.4 Economic losses

The tropical forests destroyed each year amounts to a loss in forest capital valued at US $ 45 billion (Hansen, 2014). By destroying the forests, all potential future revenues and future employment that could be derived from their sustainable management for timber and nontimber products disappear.

2.4.5 Social consequences

Deforestation, in other words, is an expression of social injustice. The social consequences of deforestation are many, often with devastating long-term impacts. For indigenous communities, the arrival of civilization usually means the destruction/change of their traditional life-style and the breakdown of their social institutions mostly with their displacement from their ancestral area. The intrusion of outsiders destroys traditional life styles, customs and religious beliefs which intensifies with infra-structure development like construction of roads which results into frontier expansion often with social and land conflicts (Anon, 1994b).

The most immediate social impact of deforestation occurs at the local level with the loss of ecological services provided by the forests. Forests afford humans valuable services such as erosion prevention, flood control, water treatment, fisheries protection and pollination- functions that are particularly important to the world‘s poorest people who rely on natural resources for their everyday survival. By destroying the forests we risk our own quality of life, gamble with the stability of climate and local weather, threaten the existence of other species and undermine the valuable services provided by biological diversity. 19

CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Description of the Study Area

Adi Arkay is one of the weredas (districts) in the Amhara Region of Ethiopia. Located at the northeastern point of North Gondar Zone. Adi Arkay is bordered on the south by Jan Amora, on the southwest by Debarq, on the north by the Tigray Region, and on the east by Tselemt. Towns in Adi Arkay include Adi Arkay (Around which Myteklit Forest is situated ) and Zarima. Latitudinally, it is found 13° 39‘ 59‘.99‘‘ N , and longitudinally, 38° 00‘ 0.00‘‘ E.

Source: ArchMap 10.3.1

20

3.2 Site Selection

The general objective of the study was examining factors, practices and the impacts of forest degradation/deforestation in Adi Arkay Wereda. The study was conducted purposely on Myteklit Forest which is found in Adi Arkay Woreda of between two kebeles: Adi Arkay Town and Adi Aregay. Also, the forest is located plainly at the bottom of very steep and long ranges of mountain covering about 1200 hectares of land. The kebeles‘ people participate or intervene in one way or another in the forest and that is why they were considered for selection as participants. The forest is situated 3 kilometers North East direction.

Source: own Photo

Photo 1: Mytekilit Forest

3.3 Research Design

In order to conduct this research, the researcher employed a descriptive research design and mixed approach which included both qualitative and quantitative study methods. The researcher used 21

quantitative data type in order to achieve objectives set in numbers1 and 3. Whereas, qualitative data type was used to achieve objective set in number 2. Generally, in order to make the study more accurate and reliable through triangulation, the researcher used both qualitative and quantitative types.

3.4 Target population and Sampling

3.4.1 Target population

The target population of the study was the two kebeles‘ households of users of the communal forest. Sample size was determined from the total households who were participants from the two kebeles proportionally. Due to the incapability of the researcher to manage the total target population, the total 1022 households, the researcher took 91 households as respondents. The population is homogenous as far as population characteristics are concerned. But, the researcher used stratified and systematic sampling to select sample respondents from each kebele.

3.4.2 Sampling Technique

The researcher has adopted probability sampling namely simple random sampling followed by stratified sampling. To select the households or the study participants, simple random sampling technique was employed. The users of communal forest in the the two kebeles were stratified as male and female household heads. This was because to give equal chance for the whole target population to be selected as a respondent. Besides, purposive sampling was used to select the forest and professional or experts at Forest Management in the Woreda.

3.4.3 Sampling Procedure

The researcher used 91 respondents from two Adi Arkay Woreda Kebeles: Adi Arkay Town and Adi Aregay. These respondents were chosen using probability sampling particularly simple random and stratified sampling techniques. As a result of this, the researcher believed that these respondents were more likely the representatives of total users and non-users of the communal forests from the Woreda.

Therefore, a total sample of 91 (11%) out of 1022 residents of the two kebeles were taken by 푛 using the allocation ratio formula R= where (R is the ratio of the sample, T is the total 푇 population and n is the number of population in each kebele) and the number of sample

22

population per kebele is R x n. Hence, the number of participants taken as sample from the Adi Arkay Town were 52, whereas 34 were selected from Adi Aregay Kebele. Furthermore, 5 agricultural and forestry experts and 2 farmers, from the already chosen households, participated in providing adequate data for the intended investigation.

3.5 Data Collection and Instruments

The methods of data collection depended upon the type (qualitative and quantitative) and primary source of data collection. In this study to collect primary data, interview, questionnaires and observation were employed. Hence, both set of methods of data collection were employed. In addition to this, the researcher believed that employing and using different tools would help for triangulation purpose. The details of each data collection tool were stated as follows:

In-depthInterview: The interview, having 3 questions, was prepared by the investigator in line with the research objectives. So long as the study focused on current issues, it had to be highly backed by primary data. These data were gathered from 5 experts primarily from agriculture and rural development office, local administrators, forestry supervisors and development agents and 2 farmers by asking semi- structured questions.

Questionnaire:The questionnaire which incorporated 23 inventories, was adapted with some modifications from the report of Federal Demoratic Repubilic of Ethiopia (FDRE, 2011). Questionnaire method was one of the most important approaches through which the primary data in this study was collected. The content of the questionnaire included structured questions. The reason why the researcher used structured questions was to get more objective data to achieve the intended objective.The questionnaire consistd of 3 likert scale statements including never, sometimes and always. The questionnaires were completed by 91 households who were around the forest area. For those who are not Amharic literate, the questionnaires were provided orally in Amharic Language.

Forest Observation: The checklist that has having 10 statements was adapted with some modifications from the report of Federal Demoratic Repubilic of Ethiopia (FDRE, 2011). It was used to get first hand information from the overall practice of the forest area users and to visualize the determinants and impacts of deforestation by the investigator himself. The observation was conducted with appropriate checklists that helped the investigator rate the practices (impact levels) with three likert scales as low, medium and high. 23

The secondary sources of data may included informations from books, jornals and research articles which related to determinants, practices and impacts of deforestation on the forest management of the study area.

3.6 Data Collection Procedures

The researcher selected 91 respondents from two kebeles of Adi Arkay woreda. The respondents were selected using probability sampling specifically both systematic and stratified sampling. Data were gathered using indepth interview, questionnaire and observation. For the purpose of reliability of the data, the researcher himself administered all the data collection process. Following this, the questionnaire was administered to the sample selected at the time of rest on Sunday, during public meetings and during forest conservation activities. In addition, the questionnaire was translated into Amharic (L1) language so that respondents feel at ease to give accurate information. Interview was held with supervisors of forestry department, development agents as well as local administrators in Amharic Language for better communication of the study issues. Moreover, as already mentioned above, the researcher conducted at least 5 observation sessions during the second semester of the study year in and around the study forest area.

3.7 Data Processing and Analysis Strategies

Data processing is an important part of the whole survey operation. It included manual editing, coding, data entry, data cleaning and consistency checking. The researcher made all these activities of data processing. Descriptive statistical tools like frequency, percentage and graphs were used. These were used to describe both determinants of deforestation and forest management. Inferential stastistics such as Multiple Linear Regression (MLR) using Statistical Pachage for Social Sicience (SPSS) version 20 was employed to analyze the determinants affecting the forest management at a local level. The forest management was used as dependent continous variable. The determinants of forest management was used idependent categorical variables. The other inferential statistic was Tobit Regression with Econometrics model using Stata 14.1. This tool was employed to analyse the significant determinants (independent categorical variables) of deforestation (dependent variable). After the analyses and interpretations of the data, summaries were recapped; conlusions were drawn; and recommendation were made.

24

CHAPTER FOUR: DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS OF RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

I. Introduction

This chapter presented the major findings of the study first and discussed the results last. All the data gathered from questionnaires and observations were organized in tabular forms and graphs. These were interpreted using frequency, percentage and mean. The information gathered through interview was also qualitatively narrated in order to give answer for the basic research questions set in the study. The first part of this study discussed about characteristics of the respondents, while the second part dealt with the analysis of the findings of the study and the discussions of the results corresponding to the basic research questions which aimed at investigating the determinants, practices and impacts of deforestation in Myteklit Forest of Adi Arkay Woreda. Hence, the data analyzed in this chapter aimed at addressing these research questions:

1. What are major determinants of deforestation in the study area? 2. What does the existing forest management practice look like in the study area? 3. What are major determinants affecting local level forest management in the area? 4. What are the impacts of deforestation on forest management of the study area?

II. Characteristics of Respondents

The characteristics of the participants (households and professionals) were asked for their sex, , age, academic qualification, year of service based on the responses to the request for personal data in the first section of the questionnaire and interview. Moreover, the analysis and interpretation of the data was also made. Table1: Backgrounds of the participants (N=91) Professionals and Characteristics house holds frequency % Male 66 72.5 Sex Female 25 27.5 <20 years 13 14.3 Age 20-30 years 30 33 >30 years 48 52.7 .Diploma 3 3.2 Educational .B.Sc./B.Ed 3 3.2 level M.A./M.Ed 1 1 Other jobs like farmers 84 92.3 25

Regarding respondent‗s sex from the above table, it is possible to see that 72.5% of the respondents were male followed by 27.5% of female participants. Therefore, there was very low participation of female participants compared to their male counterparts. In relation to age, the majority of the respondents were above 30 (52.7%), between 20 and 30 years were (33%), but below 20 years were very few (14.3).

In terms of qualification, as the table shows, majority of the respondents (92.3%) had other jobs including farmers. Also, 3 respondents (3.2%) were Diploma holders and the other 3 (3.2%) were Bachelor Degree holders, while 1 respondent (1%) was a Masters Degree holder. In relation to the respondents‘ qualification, it could be seen from the table that most of the participants were farmers and others who are around the forest, the study area.

4.1 ANALYSIS OF RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.2 Descriptive Analysis: The major Determinants of Deforestation

Table 2: Direct determinants of deforestation (N=91)

Root Direct determinants of Never Sometimes Always factors deforestation fr % fr % Fr %

1.Farming 43 47.3 37 40.7 11 12 2. Fuel wood extraction 5 5.5 27 29.7 59 64.8 3.Charcoal production 8 8.8 12 13.2 71 78

4. Construction and timber 40 44 36 39.5 15 16.5

Anthropogenic

wood extraction 5. Livestock grazing 21 23 50 55 20 22 6. Roads and infrastructure 65 71.4 7 7.3 19 21 7. Fires/human caused 50 55 6 6.5 35 38.5

8. Wild Fire 27 29.6 45 49.6 19 21 9. Climate change/Droughts 22 24 24 26.5 45 49.5

Natural 10. Flooding 19 21 23 25 49 54

As in clearly seen on Table 2 above, most of the respondents believed that the following direct determinants ‗always’ affected the study area and their percentages are presented in a descending order: among Anthropogenic factors: charcoal production,78% ; fuel wood production, 64.8%; 26

among Natural factors: flooding, 54%; Climate change/Droughts, 49.5%; and Fires/human caused, 38.5%, to mention a few. This indicates that the aforesaid factors are the major direct determinants of deforestation of the study area.

On the other hand, some of the respondents confirmed that the following direct determinants ‗sometimes’ influenced the study area and their percentages are forwarded in a declining order next: Livestock grazing,50%; wild fire, 45%; farming, 37%; Construction and timber wood extraction, 36%; and Fuel wood extraction, 27%, to mention the other. This shows that these factors are somehow considered to be direct determinants of deforestation of the study area.

Whereas, some other respondents reported that the following direct determinants ‗never affected the study area and their percentages are presented in a decreasing order: charcoal production, Roads and infrastructure, 65%; Fires/human caused 50%; farming, 43%; Construction and timber wood extraction, 40; and wild fire , 27%. This signals that the aforementioned causes are the least contributing direct determinants of deforestation of the site.

Conversely, according to the recent findings of NIMOS, SBB and UNIQUE (2017), the main direct drivers of deforestation in order of importance in Suriname from 2000 to 2015 were mining (73%), road infrastructure (15%), and urban development (4%).

Table 3: Indirect determinants of deforestation (N=91)

Root factors Indirect determinants Never Sometimes Always of deforestation Fr % Fr % Fr %

Economic 11. Urbanization 9 10 29 32 53 58 12 Unemployment 70 77 18 20 3 3 Social 13.Poverty 16 17.5 26 28.5 49 54 14. Livelihoods 11 12 29 32 51 56 15. Awareness/Education 14 15.5 54 59.5 23 25 Institutional 16.Law enforcement 11 12 28 31 52 57 Demographic 17. Population growth 13 14 14 16 64 70 18. Migration 39 43 43 47 9 10 19. Resettlement 54 59 17 19 20 22 Cultural 20. Attitudes 12 13 25 28 54 59

27

According to Table 3, many of the respondents reported that the next indirect determinants ‗always’ affected the study area and their percentages are presented in descending order: among Demographic factors: population growth,70%; Cultural factors: attitude, 59%; Economic factors: urbanization, 58%; Institutional factors: law enforcement problems, 57%; and Social factors: livelihoods , 56% & poverty,54%, to mention the major ones. This implies that the aforesaid factors are the most dominant indirect determinants of deforestation of the study area.

Whereas, some of the respondents agreed that the following indirect determinants ‗sometimes’ influenced the study area and their percentages are forwarded in a descending order next: Awareness/Education, 59.5%; Migration, 47%; Urbanization and Livelihoods, 32%; Law enforcement, 31% , and Poverty, 28.5%, to mention the others. This signifies that these factors are to some extent considered to be indirect determinants of deforestation of the study area.

None the less, some other respondents claimed that the following indirect determinants ‗never affected the study area and their percentages are presented in a descending order: Unemployment, 77%; Resettlement 59%; Migration, 43%, and poverty, 17.5%. This signals that the aforementioned causes are the least contributing indirect determinants of deforestation of the study site.

Table 4: Percentages of the major Causes of the Deforestation as rated ‘Always’ and

by Grand Mean

No. Causes of Percentage Root Factors Type of Deforestation Factor 1 Charcoal Production 78% Anthropogenic Direct 2 Population growth 70% Demographic Indirect 3 Fuel wood production 64.8% Anthropogenic Direct 4 Attitude 59% Cultural Indirect 5 Urbanization 58% Economic Indirect 6 Law enforcement 57% Institutional Indirect 7 Livelihoods 56% Institutional Indirect 8 Poverty 54% Social Indirect 9 Flooding 54% Natural Direct

28

This table vividly depicts that the first three causes: charcoal production, population growth and fuel wood production are the most dominant determinants responsible for the deforestation of Mytekilt Forest in Adi Arkay Wereda. Besides, the rest of determinants including attitude of the people, urbanization of the Wereda, law enforcement problems of the District concerned bodies, the livelihood of the community, the high poverty level and severe flooding in the summer. Moreover, the data on this table imply that the deforestation in the study area was caused much more by indirect determinant than by the direct counterparts.

Figure 1: Major Causes of Deforestation as rated ‘Always’ by respondents (N=91)

This figure obviously displays the major direct and indirect dominants of the deforestation of the study area from the higher to lower in percentages.

Table 5: Results of the forest observation concerning causes of deforestation (No. of sessions: 5)

Low Mediu High Item N m Type o Forest Observation Checklists F % F % F %

1 Expansion of smallholder traditional agriculture in forest 1 20 1 20 3 60 areas driven by population growth of communities around forests 2 Forest degradation due to charcoal production - - 1 20 4 80 3 Increased extraction of wood and other forest products - - - - 5 100 following massive population growth and the resultant high domestic energy demand 4 Forest fires related to raising livestock (pasture improvement 3 60 2 40 - - activities) due to poor incentives to local communities for Factors of deforestation of Factors sustainable forest use and weak forest protection 29

The data on this table show that all the forest observation sessions (100%) confirmed that Myteklit Forest was highly influenced due to increased extraction of wood and other forest products following massive population growth and the resultant high domestic energy demand. Also, in the investigators frequent observation, it was possible to say that 80% of the forest deforestation was caused by charcoal use at a high level. Besides, the forest was harmed by 60% of the expansion of agriculture or farming driven by the population growth around the studied forest at a high level. Yet, 60% of the observations show that the forest was caused by Forest fires related to raising livestock (pasture improvement activities) at low level.

Therefore, the forest observation results have supported the results of the questionnaire, for the major causes of the forest deforestation were observed to be increased extraction of wood and other forest products and charcoal use, but its result was different from the questionnaire regarding the expansion of agriculture or farming driven by the population growth.

What is more, most of these findings were similar to the interview results of respondents. Accordingly, the main factors were believed to be the cutting of trees by the residents of the villagers and the town dwellers for their fuel wood consumption and for selling, cutting of conifers trees (tid) for charismas purpose, removal of them for house building and for farming purpose by those who are inhabited around the forest area. After all, the part of the forest has been barren for the Asphalt road construction by the Mytsebri-Adi Arkay-Zarima Project, which lingered there for a long period of time until the project got its terminal in the near past.

The current study was a bit similar to Abay‘s (2013) study. His finding showed that 53.1% of the respondents agreed that the major cause of tree depletion in the study area (Alamata, Tigray) was illegal cutting of wood for the sake of charcoal production, fuel wood production and so on. Besides, this past study found that overgrazing (20%), agricultural expansion (13.1%) and urbanization (3.8%) were the causes of deforestation in the study area. According to the respondents, this kinds of severe problem mainly was under taken in the study area by neighborhood non users and some users, this had much misery on environment.

Furthermore, in this study from the sample respondents and information from interview indicated that another cause of deforestation was natural drought/shortage of rain fall. These sample respondents proved that this problem is not only the cause of forest depletion but also influence their participation since absence of rainfall has a negative impact on planting seedlings.

30

4.3 Econometrics Analysis: Determinants of Deforestation

Table 6: Determinants affecting deforestation in the study area

Tobit regression Number of obs = 91 F( 10, 81) = 6.81 Prob > F = 0.0000 Log pseudolikelihood = -46.350597 Pseudo R2 = 0.2560

Robust Deforested_Aarea Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval]

Fuel_Wood_Production -.0599836 .0806215 -0.74 0.459 -.2203952 .100428 Charcoal_Production .1442029 .0688431 2.09 0.039 .0072267 .281179 Climate_Change_or_Drought .0203893 .0970348 0.21 0.834 -.1726796 .2134582 Urbanization .2024403 .084175 2.40 0.018 .0349584 .3699222 Poverty .0483265 .0757203 0.64 0.525 -.1023331 .1989861 Livelihoods -.1264846 .0741833 -1.71 0.092 -.2740861 .0211169 Low_Awareness_or_Education .099312 .1018452 0.98 0.332 -.1033279 .3019519 Law_enforcement .1131252 .0664165 1.70 0.092 -.0190229 .2452732 Population_growth -.1003512 .0565605 -1.77 0.080 -.2128889 .0121865 Low_attitude .3011568 .0760107 3.96 0.000 .1499193 .4523943 _cons 1.325739 .616682 2.15 0.035 .0987353 2.552743

/sigma .390665 .0559129 .279416 .5019141

As in table 6, determinants such as low attitude, urbanization and charcoal production had significant impact on deforestation of the study at .001 and .05 significance levels respectively. Besides, population growth, law enforcement and livelihoods had a siginificant influence on deforestation at 1 siginficance level. However, the other determinants like fuel wood production, climate change or drought, poverty and law awareness or education had no significant effect on the deforestation process. Also, in order to reduce statistical errors of the Tobit regression, the Robust standard error was employed. The result of the table indicates that the increase in charcoal production, urbanization, law enforcement and the decrease in attitude and population growth led to forest destruction and degradation.

The need to provide for an increasing population combined with other social, economic and political factors has resulted in an ever increasing expansion of the agricultural frontier and hence, subsequent deforestation and land degradation. In line with this, some writers estimated that within a year about 80,000 ha of natural high forests are changed to farmland for subsistence agriculture; and about 50,000ha of acacia woodlands are deforested for charcoal production and for state farm expansion,

31

and about 30,000 ha of woodland, thickets and bush are cut for fuel wood in the country (UNDP/ World Bank, 1988 cited in Tola, 2005). Moreover, this study advocated that wild fire, land tenure insecurity, various inappropriate conservation approaches, lack of integration between new innovative approach and indigenous knowledge, and lack of awareness are considered as the contributing factors to deforestation.

Source: Own Photo

Photo 2: Photo showing urbanization surrounding the study area

32

4.4 The Forest Management Practice in the Study Area

Table 7: Results of forest observation regarding the practice of forest management in the study area(N=5)

Low Medium High M Item N F % F % F % E Type o Forest Observation Checklists AN 5 The extent to which Forest guards patrol the forest 4 80 1 20 - -

6 The frequency that forest management officers 5 100 - - - -

supervise the forest area 7 The extent to which illegal users of the forest are 4 80 1 20 - -

warned or punished properly

Practices of Forest Forest of Practices Management

Table 6 shows that, regarding the forest management, in all observation sessions (100%) of the investigator, the forest management officers and other concerned government bodies never supervised the forest area, which was very low effort and practice to manage the area properly. In addition, in 80% of the investigators‘ forest careful observation, there were no forest guards patrolling the forest. Too, 80% the observation indicated that the extent to which illegal users of the forest are warned or punished properly was very low.

Never the less, the data show that the concerned bodies including the Forest Management Officers and the Agriculture experts have exerted some efforts to sometimes manage the forest by assigning a guard to patrol the forest and enable him control the forest area, and sometimes by giving warning, and very rarely, by punishing the illegal tree cutters when found red-handed.

Plus to these, as the data from the household and professionals questionnaire indicate the trial to manage the forest from temporary and permanent damage was very limited. For example, most of them rated ‗Always’ that law enforcement problems (57%) and lack of awareness and/ or education (25%). This also implies that the practice made to safeguard the forest was inadequate.

On the other hand, some interviewees reported that there were some efforts made to manage the forest and maintain safe from degradation as follows:

 The wereda forest-based experts had prepared a forest development program by growing different seedlings to consolidate the forest area and around the forest until the program was stopped a decade ago.

33

 Besides, the concerned bodies of the wereda had demarked the forest area to be considered as a forest.

However, most of these respondents assured that the attempt to conserve the forest from multidirectional hazards and losses were limited in the following ways:

 The forest development centre around the forest was removed and become dysfunctional.  There was no attempt done to substitute to the damaged forest areas by the road construction project.  The forest has no a permanent guard hired by the government to patrol the forest area.  Miserably, there is also evidence that the wereda has decided and planned to convert the forest area in to new settlement for the people of the kebeles of Adi Arkay Town and Adi Aregay Peasants association.

As far as forest management is concerned, Kobbail (2012) noted that the misuse of the natural resources leads to irregularity or intermittency and reduction in rainfall and such conditions do not favor any form of productive cultivation. Though people‘s involvement in various forest practices like illegal cutting of tree, fuel wood collection and harvesting other forest products in the studied kebeles are significantly increased, the practice is still going on due to weak legal action on illegal users and lack of alternative energy sources.

4.5 Multiple Linear Regression: The Impacts of determinants on local level

forest management

Table 8: Regression Results of Factors affecting local level forest management

Model Summary Model R R Square Adjusted R Std. Error of Change Statistics

Square the Estimate R Square Change F Change df1 df2 Sig. F Change 1 .376a .141 .080 .33789 .141 2.306 6 84 .041 a. Predictors: (Constant), Climate_Change_or_Drought, Low_attitude, Population_growth, Fuel_Wood_Production, Poverty, Low_Awareness_or_Education

34

ANOVAa Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. 1.580 6 .263 2.306 .041b 1 9.590 84 .114 11.170 90 a. Dependent Variable: TotalForestmanagment b. Predictors: (Constant), Climate_Change_or_Drought, Low_attitude, Population_growth, Fuel_Wood_Production, Poverty, Low_Awareness_or_Education

a Dependent Variable=Total Forest Management

Table 8 clearly displays that determinants like poverty and climate change or drought had a significant impact on the forest management at a local level in the study area at .05 significance level. On the other hand, the households‘ low attitude had significantly affected the study area at 1 siginificance level. These independent variables had also a 14.1% total impact on management activites in the study area (R2=.141). Whereas, the rest determinants on this table had no meaningful influence on the forest management practices. In addition, the result had no considerable multi coolinearity problem since the VIF is below 1.7. This signifies that even though the households had no severe awareness problems, they had rapid population growth and used forest for fuel wood production, they tend to deforest the study area due to lack of attitude. Moreover, because of the drought and hotness of the area the concerned government officials, the supervisors and the forest guards failed to protect the forest from illegal forest users at a regular basis.

35

4.6 The Impacts of Deforestation on Forest Management in the Study Area

Table 9: Results of the forest observation with respect to the impacts of deforestation (N=5) Low Medium High Item N Type o Forest Observation Checklists F % F % F % 8 Increasing Climate /atmospheric change in the - - 1 20 4 80 surrounding 9 The rise of high temperature in the surrounding - - 1 20 4 80 - - - - 5 100

10 Continuous Drought and water shortage in the Deforestation Impacts of of Impacts surrounding

Table 9 depicts that 100% forest observation tend to signal that continuous drought and water shortage in the surrounding and in the two kebeles of the District were the leading negative consequences of the deforestation in the study area and in the attempt to manage the forest in a meaningful manner. Also, based on the data obtained from 80% of the forest observation, increasing climate /atmospheric change in the surrounding could be taken as the other major impact of deforestation on local level forest management in the study site. Similarly, the rise of high temperature (80%) was another bad influence of the deforestation in the towns and the villages.

Additionally, many of these results were congruent with the interview results of respondents. Accordingly, the main negative impacts of deforestation of the study area included severe shortage of Myteklit Water, very pure and quality water which originate from Myteklit forest and used to serving majority of the people of Adi Arkay Town and villages as drink and sanitation of different purposes. By the way, since it is famous for its all-round safety a singer has sung about it. Hence, presently, the people are moving for fetching water much further than before.

In addition, they confirmed that due to this degradation, there is high temperature from which a lot of people suffer. The surrounding of the forest area was also used for recreational sake, but now it is not that much suitable for that purpose.

Furthermore, several scholars and researchers approved that deforestation has a huge atmospheric, soil, hydraulic, and so on impacts at local and global levels. For instance, tropical deforestation is responsible for approximately 20% of world greenhouse gas emissions. Deforestation, mainly in tropical areas, account for up to one-third of total anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions

36

(Tsegaye, 2007). Trees and other plants remove carbon in the form of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere during the process of photosynthesis and release oxygen back into the atmosphere during normal respiration (Maddox, 2006).

Ethiopian rain forests are widely believed by laymen to contribute a significant amount of world's oxygen, although it is now accepted by scientists that rain forests contribute little net oxygen to the atmosphere and deforestation will have no effect on atmospheric oxygen levels. However, the incineration and burning of forest plants in order to clear land releases tones of CO2 which contributes to global warming. Forests are also able to extract carbon dioxide and pollutants from the air, thus contributing to biosphere stability (Brown, Lester and Plan, 2006).

Deforestation also contributes to decreased vapor-transpiration, which lessens atmospheric moisture which in some cases affects precipitation levels downwind from the deforested area, as water is not recycled to downwind forests, but is lost in run off and returns directly to the oceans (Jonathan, Ruth, Gregory and Carol, 2005).

With regard to soil impact, deforestation generally increases rates of soil erosion, by increasing the amount of runoff and reducing the protection of the soil from tree litter. This can be an advantage in excessively leached tropical rain forest soils in which Ethiopia is part of the tropics (Hobbs and Harris, 2001). Ethiopia‘s Plateau was covered of forest millennia ago. Since then it has been eroding, creating dramatic incised valleys, and providing the sediment that causes the flooding of the river in the lower reaches.

37

CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMENDATIOMS

5.1 SUMMARY

This study aimed at investigating determinants, practices of forest management and impacts of deforestation in Myteklit Forest of Adi Arkay Wereda, in Adi Arkay District of North Gondar. The investigator was instigated by this research because most of the studies were carried out around the world and to some extent in Ethiopia; there was little studied, particularly in the study area of Adi Arkay Woreda. The forest was chosen purposively while 91 respondents from two kebeles were selected based on the simple random and stratified sampling techniques.

To answer the research questions, questionnaires, interviews and forest observation were used as data gathering tools. Most of the items of tools were slightly adapted from previous studies and ideas of scholars, except for the interview questions, which were organized by the investigator himself.

Both the questionnaires‘ data and the forest observation data were analyzed through frequency counts like frequency and percentage. In particular, inferential statistics like Tobit regression among Econometric Models and Multiple linear regression among Regression Models were employed to analyse the data obtained from the questionnaire. On the other hand, the interview data were narrated descriptively in a thematic manner. The questionnaire presented the concerned households was with the intention of investigating mainly about the causes of deforestation and determinants of forest management, whereas both forest observations and interviews were used to answer all research questions and to triangulate the results obtained from each other.

Generally, in the attempt made to achieve the research general and specific objectives, the current research has collected important data, analyzed the presented data and discussed the findings in relation to the findings of the other empirical studies as much as possible.

Consequently, the current study has come up with the following major findings:

 The finding of the study showed that the major determinants such as low attitude, urbanization and charcoal production had significant impact on deforestation of the study area.  In addition, determinants like poverty and climate change or drought had a significant impact on the forest management at a local level in the study area. 38

 The finding of the study also showed that there very limited practice of forest management in the study area.  Besides, it was found out that the dominant negative impacts of deforestationin at the local level accounted for high rise of temprature and severe shortage of water.

39

5.2 CONCLUSION

Based on the the major findings, the following conclusions were drawn:

 Forest has essential place in the maintaining of an environment that brings permanent development. Also, forests have long lasting effects in bringing balanced climatic situations and have the power to protect soil, erosion, land degradation, and drought. In fact, the main factors of deforestation in Ethiopia are proved to be rapid population that results in other related problems like agricultural expansion, fuel wood production, and urbanization.  Likewise, in light of the current study, majority of the factors of deforestation were the removal and burning of trees for charcoal purpose, for fuel wood demand and for house building, and urbanization. Their major underlying cause was swift population growth, which finally leads to urbanization and poverty. Besides, some part of the forest was highly destroyed by Mytsebri-Adi Arkay-Zarima Asphalt Road Construction Project which lasted more than 6 years.  With regard to the Myteklit Forest management practice, some of the wereda concerned bodies have made some efforts to manage the forest to keep it safe from danger by sometimes assigning forest guards and help control the forest. However, at large extent, the efforts exerted to manage the forest was very limited in reforesting the damaged forest cover by the road project through forest development programs.  In addition, the government and local development agents could not consider the dissemination and production of fuel, efficient improved fuel wood and charcoal stoves which were able to reduce the biomass energy consumption by half compared to traditional open fires.  Another very weak sign of the disregarding to the forest management is the decision of the wereda to deforest the study area in to house building new settlement for people of the town and the villages around it. These and other poor consideration and devaluing of the forest actually originate from lack of enough awareness and low attitude on the part of the community and the concerned organs in the wereda.  Finally comes the main impacts of deforestation at local level for the time being and at global level at the end. From the data analyses and findings, it is possible to understand

40

that the higher the deforestation rates there are, the hotter, the less water and the more drought seasons there will be.

41

5.3 RECOMENDATIOMS

 In order to reduce the forest degradation and the excess demand for fuel wood and charcoal production, the forest users should access to using improved cooking and baking stoves.  The deforestation due to population growth should be solved by increasing land productivity either by utilization of improved agricultural inputs or by introduction of land improving technologies, or both helps solve both poverty and deforestation problem.  To renew the deforested areas due to various purposes or reasons, strong actions should be swiftly called for the rehabilitation or afforesting programs as soon as possible.  Above all, changing attitude of local community and staff of the institution with regard to priceless advantages of forest conservation by strengthening and establishing management system in which transparency in using and managing forest resources prevails could be helpful in lessening probability as well as deforestation.  To ensure the sustainability of the forests, the government bodies really must park the forest area being protected permanently by the scouts or forest guards.  Provision of either alternative income generating activities that are profitable than forest product sell or facilitating mechanisms which help both generate income and conserve forest resources sustainably is recommendable and poverty-effective.  To alleviate problems as regards law enforcement, legal actions should be taken on illegal users and public awareness strategy should be grounded in credible, up-to-date and based on relevant information.  Since urbanization is another major factor for destroying forests intentionally, the concerned body really must arrange other better or barren areas for new house building allocation instead of randomly depleting invaluable trees of life of the generation.

42

REFERENCES

Abay Terefe (2013). ‗Factors Affecting Forest User‘s Participation in Participatory Forest Management; Evidence from Alamata Community Forest, Tigray; Ethiopia‘. Published MA thesis, Mekele Universtity.

Adam, D. (2008). "Global deforestation figures questioned". The Guardian.

Anon, N.. (1994b). Sciennce and Technolgy:UK. Retrieved on October 23, 2019, from www.fao.org.>TMPR>Evaluation95.

Anon, N. (2010). Record from Africa Grass Guide: Documnt Reference. HebrewUniversity of Jerusalem.

Asdrasko, K. (1990). Climate Change and Global Forests: Current knowldge of political effects: sage publications.

Bard KA, Coltorti M, Diblasi MC, Dramis F, Fattovich R. (2000). The Environmental History of Tigray (Northern Ethiopia) in the Middle and Late Holocene: A Preliminary Outline. African Archaeological Review, 17 (2): 65-86.

Bedru. B. (2007). ‗Economic valuation and management of common-pool resources‘: the case of enclosures in the highlands of Tigray, Northern Ethiopia. Doctoral dissertation.

Berhanu, E. (1999). Wood Market Survey I. Integrated Forest Management Project Adaba- Dodola (IFMP), Dodola. 16 pp.

Bess, M. (1998). ―Mirte Stoves in Ethiopia‖. Energy for Sustainable Development (ESD), UK.

Barnes, D.F., Krutilla, K. and Hyde W. (2002). ―The Urban Energy Transition— Energy, Poverty, and the Environment: Two Decades of Research.‖ Forthcoming book volume.

Barnes, D.F., Krutilla, K. and Hyde W. (2004). The Urban Household Energy Transition: Energy, Poverty, and the Environment in the Developing World. World Bank.

Betru Nedessa (2003). Soil and Water Conservation Program in the Amhara National Regional State. In: A.Tillahun (ed). Natural Resources Degradation and Environmental Concerns

43

in the Amhara National Regional State: Impact on Food Security. Proceedings of the Natural Resources Management Conference, July 24-26,2002, Bahir Dar, Ethiopia.

Brown, Lester and Plan B.( 2006). Rescuing a Planet under Stress and a Civilization in Trouble: Norton, New York, p.60-61.

Casse, T., & Milhøj, A. (2013). While waiting for the answer: A critical review of meta-studies of tropical forest management. Journal of Environmental Management, 131, 334–342.

Chaffey, D.R. (1978). Southwest Ethiopia Forest Inventory Project. A Glossary of Vernacular Names of Plants in Southwest Ethiopia with Special Reference to Forest Trees. Ministry of Overseas Development, Land Resources Development Center. Project Report 26: 1-75.

Chomitz, K. M., etal. (2007). Overview At Loggerheads? Agricultural Expansion, Poverty Reduction, and Environment in the Tropical Forests. Washington DC: The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank.

Demel Teketay (2001). Research Strategy of Forest Genetic Resources Conservation and Utilization in Ethiopia. Institute of Biodiversity Conservation and Research, Addis Abeba.

Darbyshire I, Lamb Hand Mohammed Umer (2003).Forest clearance and re-growth in northern Ethiopia during the last 3000 years. Holocene 13(4): 537–546.

Dregne, G. (1983). Desertification Hazard Assessment. Retrived on December 09, 2019, from http://www.oas.org/dsd/publications/Unit

Ethiopian Energy Studies and Research Center. (EESRC), 1995. Commercial production of Lakech stove. Review paper. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

FAO (1981). Forest resources of Tropical Africa. FAO/UNEP. Rome.

FAO (2005). Economic and Social Significance of Forests For Africa's Sustainable Development Accra, Ghana Volume25, Issue [email protected] http://www.fao.org/africa/publications/nature-and-faune-magazine

FAO. (2007). State of the World’s Forests Report.

44

FAO (2008). Forests are much more than timber and much more than carbon ―A narrow focus on The role of forests as carbon sinks at the expense of the other forest values would be unsustainable.― Strategic framework for forests and climate change. Working with countries to tackle climate change through sustainable forest management Collaborative Partnership on Forests, 2008.

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

FAO/UN (2010). Successes and Challenges in Ecological Agriculture: Experiences from Tigray, Ethiopia.

FAO (2011).Tropical Deforestation: Causes, Consequences and Some Land Use Alternatives2Rondônia,BrazilUNEPFeb52007.http://na.unep.net/digital_atlas2/webatlas.p hp?id=29 09/02/2011.

FAO. (2015). Forest Resources Assessment 2015: Terms and Definitions. FAO Report.

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

Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia (2011). Federal Report: Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

Forum for Environment (2009) Ethiopian Forestry at crossroads: The need for strengthened institutional set up, Policy Brief. pp 11.

Gebremedhin, T. (2002). Biomass estimation of herbaceous and woody vegetation in closed areas of Northern Ethiopia. First draft, Mekelle, Ethiopia.

Gebremedhin, Y. (2004). ‗Thesis on Community Participation and Sustainable Soil and Water Conservation Management the Case of Zala-Daget Project‘: Dogu‟a Tembien Woreda – Tigray Highlands.

Geist, H. and Lambin, E. (2001) What Drives Tropical Deforestation? A Meta-Analysis of Proximate and Underlying Causes of Deforestation based on Sub national case study evidence LUCC Report Series No. 4 CIACO Louvain-la-Neuve © LUCC International Project Office.

45

Geist, H. & Lambin, E., 2002. Proximate Causes and Underlying Driving Forces of Tropical Deforestation. BioScience, 52(2):143-150. 2002.

Gupta, et al. (2005). Hazardous Effect of Organophosephate Cmpound. Retrived on December 17, 2019, from http://flybase.org>reports>FBrfo181775

Hansen, B. E. (2014). Econometrics.Wisconsin, USA: University of Wisconsin.

Hobbs, R.J. and Harris, J.A. (2001). Restoration ecology: repairing the earth‘s ecosystems in the new millennium. Restoration Ecology 9: 239–246.

Jonathan, A. F., Ruth, D., Gregory P. A. and Carol B. ( 2005). "Global Consequences of Land Use" Science 309:5734 570574.

KLHK. (2016). Statistik Kementerian Lingkungan Hidup dan Kehutanan 2015. Jakarta, Indonesia Ministry of Environment and Forestry.

Kobbail, k. (2011). ‗Local People Attitudes towards Community Forestry Practices: A Case Study of Kosti Province-Central Sudan‘, MA thesis Department of Social Forestry, College of Forestry and Range Science.

Kooten, G. C. van, & Bulte, E. H. (2000). The economics of nature : managing biological assets. 5, London, UK: Blackwell Publishers.

Maddox, G.H.( 2006). Sub-Saharan Africa: An environmental history. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC- CLIO.

Mastewal, Y. (2010). ‗How Informal Institutions Strengthen Sustainable Management of Common Pool Resources in Tigray, Ethiopia?‘ A Thesis Doctoral dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements in Agricultural Sciences University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences, Vienna Centre for Development Research.

Mekuria Argaw, (2005). ‗Forest Conversion – Soil Degradation - Farmers‘ Perception Nexus:‘ Implications for Sustaiable Land use in the SW of Ethiopia. Ecology and Development Seies 26, Curvillier Verlag, Gottingen.

46

Melaku Bekele .(1992). Forest history of Ethiopia from early times to 1974. M.Sc. thesis, University College of North Wales, Bangor, Gwynedd.

Million, B. (2011). Forest Plantations and Woodlots in Ethiopia. A platform for stakeholders in African forestry, volume one issued 12, 2012.

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.

Myers, N. (1991). Tropical forests: Present status and future outlook. Climatic Change, 19(1), 3– 32.

NIMOS, SBB, and UNIQUE (2017). Multi-Perspective Analysis of Drivers of Deforestation. Retrived on 25th December, 2019, fromhttps://info.undp.org.pdc>sur

Phillipson, DW (1990). Aksum in Africa. Journal of Ethiopian Studies 23: 55-60.

Rademaekers, et. als., (2010). ‗Study on the evolution of some deforestation drivers and their potential impacts on the costs of an avoiding deforestation scheme‘. Prepared for the European Commission by ECORYS and IIASA. Rotterdam, Netherlands.

Reusing M (1998). Monitoring of Natural High Forests in Ethiopia. GTZ and MoANR, Addis Ababa. P. 228.

Russ, GW. (1945.) Report on Ethiopian Forests. Compiled by Woldemichael Kelecha, Forestry and Wildlife Development Authority, Addis Ababa.

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).

Tola, G.(2005). ‗Prospects of Sustainable Natural Resource Management and Livelihood development in wondo genet area, southern Ethiopia.‘ MA Thesis Addis Ababa university school of graduate studies regional and local development studies.

47

Tsegaye Tadesse (2007). An overview of the forest ecosystems of Ethiopia: Functions, trends and future directions. In: Seyoum and De Stoop (eds) Environment for survival. Taking Stock of Ethiopia‘s Environment. Green Forum, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

UNFCCC. (2001). The Marrakesh Accords & the Marrakesh Declaration. Refocus, 3(1), 20–23.

UNDP. (2012). Ethiopia, United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20) : National Report of Ethiopia Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia Environmental Protection Authority.

UNRISD. 1994. Environmental Degradation and Social Integration . UNRISD Briefing Paper No. 3, World Summit For Social Development . United Nations Research Institute For Social Development .

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.

Yemiru, T. (2011). Participatory Forest Management for Sustainable Livelihoods in the Bale Mountains, Southern Ethiopia Faculty of Forestry Department of Forest Products Uppsala Doctoral Thesis Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences.

Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research : design and methods / Robert K. Yin. Applied social research methods series: 5.

48

Appendix A: Determinants of deforestation

Questionnaires to the concerned respondents

General Instruction Dear participants! The purpose of this questionnaire is to collect information to investigate the the major determining factors of deforestation and local forest management in Adi Arkay Woreda, Myteklit Forest in particular. Please try to strictly read the questions before giving your responses. Thus, for the closed ended questions given, please choose the answer that best reflects your views from the given alternatives.

Note that you are not required to mention your name. Your responses will be kept confidential and anonymous. Thank you for your cooperation.

Part I. Personal profiles Give appropriate information on your personal background. 1. Sex: a) male b) female 2. Age: a) less than 20 years b) 20 to 30 years c) greater than 30 years 3. Educational Qualification: a) B Sc. /B Ed. and above b) Diploma c) 12 + TTI d) others, please specify ______4. Work experience: a) less than 5 years b) 6 to 20 years c) greater than 20 years 5. Kebele: Adi Arkay Town______Adi Aregay ______

49

Part II. Determinants of Deforestation Respond to questions below by using the following rating scale: 1 = never (N), 2 = sometimes(S) and 3 =always (A) TYPES Root N/ S/ A/ OFMajor factors Direct determinants of deforestation 1 2 3 Determinants 1.Farming 2. Fuel wood extraction 3.Charcoal production 4. Construction and timber wood extraction

5. Livestock grazing

6. Roads and infrastructure Direct

7. Fires/human caused

Anthropogenic

8. Wild Fire

9. Climate change/Droughts

10. Flooding

Natural Indirect determinants of deforestation Economic 11. Urbanization 12 Unemployment Social 13.Poverty 14. Livelihoods 15. Awareness/Education

Institutional 16. Law enforcement Indirect Demographic 17. Population growth 18. Migration 19. Resettlement Cultural 20.Attitudes

Forest Management 21. The guard‘s Forest patrolling

Activities 22. The experts‘ forest Supervision

23. Warning or punishment given for illegal tree cutters

50

Appendix B

The interview guide set for professionals and different households

General Instruction Dear Teacherprofessionals and households! The purpose of this interview is to collect information to investigate the determining factors and deforestation and practices on forest management to reduce deforestation in the study area in Adi Arkay wereda. Please note that your participation and genuine response in this interview is extremely useful.

Note that you are not required to mention your name. Your responses will be kept confidential and anonymous. Thank you for your cooperation.

Part I. Personal profiles Give appropriate information on your personal background. 1. Sex: a) male b) female 2. Age: a) less than 20 years b) 20 to 30 years c) greater than 30 years 3. Educational Qualification: a) B Sc. /B Ed. and above b) Diploma c) 12 + TTI d) others, please specify ______4. Work experience: a) less than 5 years b) 6 to 20 years c) greater than 20 years

5. Kebele: Adi Arkay Town______Adi Aregay ______

Part II. Indepth Interview Questions

1. What are the major determining factors of deforestation in Adi Arkay , particularly in Myteklit Forest? 2. What does the Myteklit Forest Management practice by the concerned bodies look like at the moment? 3. What do you think about the impacts of deforestation on the Myteklit Forest Management?

51

Appendix C

Forest Observation Checklist

 Date of observation:…………………………  place of observation:…………………………  Duration of observation: ……………………….. Rating scales: Low=1, Medium=2, and High=3 Item No Forest Observation Checklists low medium high Type 1 Expansion of smallholder traditional agriculture in forest

areas driven by population growth of communities around forests 2 Population growth due to government settlment programs relocating people to forest areas 3 Increased extraction of wood and other forest products following massive population growth and the resultant high domestic energy demand 4 Forest fires related to raising livestock (pasture improvement activites) and making charcoal , due to poor incentives to Factors of deforestation of Factors local communities for sustainable forest use and weak forest protection 5 The extent to which Forest guards patrol the forest

6 The frequency that forest management officers supervise the

forest area 7 The extent to which illegal users of the forest are warned or

punished properly

Practices of of Practices Mgt Forest

8 Increasing Climate /atmospheric change in the surrounding 9 The rise of high temperature in the the surrounding

Continuous Drought and water shortage in the surrounding

10

Impacts of of Impacts Deforestation

General comments------……………………………………………………….  Name of observer:………………………  Signiture:………………………………. .Date :………………………………….

52

ቅጽ ሀ ፡ የደን መጨፍጨፍ ወሳኞች

ሇሚመሇከታቸው መሌስ ሰጭዎች የጽሐፍ መጠይቆች

አጠቃሊይ መመሪያ

ውድ ተሳታፊዎች!

የዚህ ጽሐፍ መጠይቅ ዓሊማ በአዲ አርቃይ ወረዳ ፣በተሇይ የሜቴክሉት ደን ጭፍጨፋ መንስኤዎችን እንዲሁም በደን ጥበቃ ሊይ ያሇቸውን ተጽዕኖ በተመሇከተ መረጃን ሇመሰብሰብ ነው፡፡ ምሊሾችዎን ከመስጠትዎ በፊት እባክዎ ጥያቄዎቹን በጥሌቀት ሇማንበብ ይሞክሩ። ስሇዚህ ሇተሰጡት ጥያቄዎች ፣ እባክዎን ከተሰጡት አማራጮች መካከሌ የእርስዎን አመሇካከት የሚያንፀባርቅ መሌስ ይምረጡ ፡፡

ስምዎን መጥቀስ እንደማያስፈሌግዎ ሌብ ይበለ። ምሊሾችዎ በሚስጥር ይይዛለ ፡፡ ሇትብብርዎ እናመሰግናሇን.

ክፍሌ I፡ የግሌ መገሇጫዎች

በግሌ ዳራዎ ሊይ ተገቢውን መረጃ የያዘውን ፊደሌ ይምረጡ፡፡

1. ጾታ፡ ሀ) ወንድ ሇ) ሴት

2. ዕድሜ: ሀ) ከ 20 ዓመት በታች ሇ) ከ 20 እስከ 30 ዓመት ሏ) ከ 30 ዓመት በሊይ

3. የትምህርት ደረጃ: ሀ) B. Sc. / B. Ed. እና ከዚያ በሊይ ሇ) ዲፕልማ ሏ) 12 + TTI መ) ላልች ፣

እባክዎን ይግሇጹ ______

4. የሥራ ሌምድ፡ ሀ) ከ 5 ዓመት በታች ሇ) ከ 6 እስከ 20 ዓመት ሏ) ከ 20 ዓመት በሊይ

5. ቀበላ ፡ አዲ አርቃይ ከተማ______አዲ አረጋይ ቀ/ገ/ማህበር______

53

ክፍሌ II የደን ጭፍጨፋ ወሳኞች

የሚከተለትን የደረጃ መሇኪያዎች በመጠቀም ከዚህ በታች ሊለት ጥያቄዎች ይህን ምሌክት ( √) በመጠቀም መሌስ ይስጡ

1 = በጭራሽ (ጭ) ፣ 2 = አንዳንድ ጊዜ (አ) እና 3 = ሁሌጊዜ (ሁ)

ዋና ዋና ምክንያቶች የደን ጭፍጨፋ ቀጥተኛ ወሳኞች ጭ/ አ/ ሁ/ /Root factors /Direct determinants of deforestation 1 2 3 1. ሇእርሻ ስራ /Farming

2. የማገዶ እንጨቶችን መጠቀሚያ / Fire wood use

3. የከሰሌ ምርት /Charcoal production ሰብአዊ 4. የግንባታ እና የእንጨት ጣውሊ ማውጣት /Construction and timber wood extraction

5. የከብት ግጦሽ /Livestock grazing /Anthropogenic /Anthropogenic 6. መንገዶች እና መሠረተ ሌማት/Roads and infrastructure

7. የእሳት ቃጠል / በሰው ሌጆች አማካኝነት ድርጊቶች /Fires/ human caused

8. ሰደድ እሳት /Wild Fire

9. የአየር ንብረት ሇውጥ/ድርቅ/Climate change/Droughts

10. ጎርፍ /Flooding

ተፈጥሮአዊ /Natural

የደን ጭፍጨፋ ኢ-ቀጥተኛ ወሳኞች /Indirect determinants of deforestation ኢኮኖሚያዊ/ 11. የከተማ ሌማት ሁኔታ /Urbanization Economic 12 ሥራ አጥነት /Unemployment ማህበራዊ /Social 13. ድህነት / Poverty 14. የኑሮ መተዳደሪያዎች /Livelihoods 15. የግንዛቤ / ትምህርት እጥረት /Awareness/Education ተቋማዊ 16. የሕግ አስከባሪነት /Law enforcement /Institutional ስነ-ሕዝብ 17. የህዝብ ብዛት እድገት /Population growth /Demographic 18. ፍሌሰት/Migration 19. ሰፈራ /Resettlement

54

ባህሊዊ /Cultural 20. አመሇካከት /Attitudes

የደን ጥበቃ 21. የደን ጥበቃው አጠባበቅ ተግባራት 22. የባሇሙያተኞች የደን ቄጥጥር 23. ሇህገ ወጥ የደን ተጠቃሚዎች ማስጠንቀቂያ ወይም ቅጣት አሰጣጥ ሁኔታ

55

ቅጽ ለ

ቃለ መጠይቅ ለ ባለሙያዎች እና ለተለያዩ ቤተሰቦች

አጠቃሊይ መመሪያ

ውድ ባሇሙያዎች እና ቤተሰቦች!

የዚህ ቃሇ-መጠይቅ ዓሊማ በአዲ አርቃይ ወረዳ ውስጥ፣በተሇይ በሜቴክሉት ደን ውስጥ የደኑ ጭፍጨፋ መንስኤዎችን እና የደኑ ጥበቃ ወይም አያያዝ ተሞክሮዎችን በተመሇከተ መረጃን ሇመሰብሰብ ነው ፡፡ በዚህ ቃሇ መጠይቅ ውስጥ ያሇዎት ተሳትፎ እና እውነተኛ ምሊሽ እጅግ በጣም ጠቃሚ መሆኑን እባክዎ ሌብ ይበለ ፡፡

ስምዎን መጥቀስ እንደማያስፈሌግዎ ሌብ ይበለ። ምሊሾችዎ በሚስጥር ይይዛሌ፡፡ ሇትብብርዎ እናመሰግናሇን.

ክፍሌ I: የግሌ መገሇጫዎች

በግሌ ዳራዎ ሊይ ተገቢውን መረጃ ይስጡ ፡፡

1. ጾታ፡ ሀ) ወንድ ሇ) ሴት

2. ዕድሜ: ሀ) ከ 20 ዓመት በታች ሇ) ከ 20 እስከ 30 ዓመት ሏ) ከ 30 ዓመት በሊይ

3. የትምህርት ደረጃ: ሀ) B. Sc. / B. Ed. እና ከዚያ በሊይ ሇ) ዲፕልማ ሏ) 12 + TTI መ) ላልች ፣

እባክዎን ይግሇጹ ______

4. የሥራ ሌምድ: ሀ) ከ 5 ዓመት በታች ሇ) ከ 6 እስከ 20 ዓመት ሏ) ከ 20 ዓመት በሊይ

5. ቀበላ፡ አዲ አርቃይ ከተማ______አዲ አረጋይ ቀ/ገ/ማህበር______

ክፍሌ II ጥሌቅ ቃሇመጠይቆች

1. በአዲ አርቃይ በተሇይም በማይቴክሉት ደን ውስጥ የደን ጭፍጨፋ ዋና ዋና ምክንያቶች ምንድን ናቸው?

2. በሚመሇከታቸው አካሊት የማይቴክሉት ደን አያያዝ ወይም ጥበቃ ተሞክሮ በአሁኑ ጊዜ ምን ይመስሊሌ?

3. የደኑ መጨፍጨፍ በማይቴክሉት ደን አያያዝ ወይም ጥበቃ ሊይ ምን ምን ተጽእኖዎችን አስከትሎሌ ብሇው ያስባለ?

56

ቅጽ ሐ

የደን ምልከታ መስፈርቶች

 የታየበት ቀን: - ......  የታየበት ቦታ: - ...... የታየበት የጊዜ ርዝመት ………………………

መመሪያ፡ የሚከተለትን የደረጃ መሇኪያዎች በመጠቀም ከዚህ በታች ሊለት የደን ምሌከታ መስፈርቶች

ይህን ምሌክት ( √) በመጠቀም የግሌ ምሌከታዎን ያስቀምጡ፡፡

1 = ዝቅተኛ (ዝ) ፣ 2 = መካከሇኛ (መ) እና 3 = ከፍተኛ (ከ)

የምሌከ ተ/ ዝቅ መካከሇኛ ከፍተ ተኛ ኛ ታ ይዘ ት ቁ የደን ምሌከታ መስፈርቶች 1 2 3 1 በአከባቢው ህብረተሰብ ብዛት የነሳ አነስተኛ ባህሊዊ ግብርና

መስፋፋት፣

2 የህዝብ ብዛት እድገት መናር እና በመንግስት ሰፈራ መርሃግብሮች ምክንያት ሰዎችን ወደ ደን አካባቢዎች ማስፈር፣

3 ከፍተኛ የሕዝብ ብዛት እና ከፍተኛ የሀገር ውስጥ ፍሊጎት ጭፍጨፋ

ተከትል እንጨትና ላልች የደን ምርቶችን ማሳደግ፣ ምክንያቶች

የደን 4 የከብት እርባታ እንስሳትን ከማሳደግ አንጻር፣ የደን ማበረታቻዎች ማነስ እና ዘሊቂነት የላሇው የደን አጠቃቀም እና ደካማ የደን ጥበቃ የተነሳ ደኑ ሇከሰሌ ና ሇእሳት መዳረግ፣

5 የደን ጥበቃዎች ደኑን በበሊይነት የሚቆጣጠሩበት መጠን፣

6 የደን አያያዝ መኮንኖች የደኑን አካባቢ ይቆጣጠራለ፤

ጥበቃ 7

አያያዝ የደኑ ሕገ-ወጥ ተጠቃሚዎችን በትክክሌ በተገቢው ሁኔታ

ሲያስጠነቀቁ ወይም ሲቀጡ መታየት፣

የደን ወይም ተሞክሮ 8 የደን መጨፍጨፍ ተጽዕኖ በአካባቢው የአየር ንብረት / የከባቢ

አየር ሇውጥ መጨመር ማስከተለ፣ 9 በአካባቢው ያሇው የሙቀት መጠን መጨመር፣

10 በአካባቢው ያሇው ድርቅ እና የውሃ እጥረት፣

መጨፍጨፍ

11 በማይቴክሉት ደን አያያዝ ወይም ጥበቃ ሊይ ጉዳት ማድረስ ተጽዕኖዎች የደን መቻለ፣

57

አጠቃሊይ አስተያየቶች

……………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………......

 የተመሌካች ስም፡ ………………………  ፊርማ ፡…………………………………  .ቀን: ......

58