A STUDY OF FOREST BASED ALTERNATIVE LIVELIHOODS FOR LOCAL COMMUNITIES AROUND MALOSA FOREST RESERVE

Levis K. Eneya. Prof. JDK Saka Chancellor College. Natural Resources and Environment Centre. P.O. Box 280, Zomba Tel: 01 524 222, Fax: 01 524 046, email: [email protected]

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

A study was conducted to identify and promote forest based alternative livelihoods for local community around Malosa Forest Reserve. Specifically the objectives were three-fold: firstly to determine the extent of access by local communities to forestry resources in the reserve: secondly to identify and promote sustainable exploitation of non-wood products from the reserve and finally, to determine alternative livelihoods for the local communities in the absence of the woody resources. A questionnaire was administered to seven villages around the reserve at an average of 2 people per village.

Results indicate that the communities have access to the forestry resources in the Malosa Forestry Reserve. However, there is a difference in the type of forestry resources accessed. On wood products. 9.6.0% indicated that they depend on the forest for firewood for both cooking and sale. About 10% indicated that they depend on the forest for poles and charcoal. On non- wood products, about 51.4% indicated that they collect fruits. 53.7% mushroom, while about 5% indicated other non-wood products such as cane and bush meat. The only significant forest based sources of livelihood identified were fruits (mainly Uapaca Kirkiana) and mushroom. Asked to rank the most important non-wood product they get from the forest, respondents indicated water (source of rivers) as number one product. The study did not identify significant access of bush meat and cane as expected. Respondents indicated that these are no longer accessible due to deforestation and overexploitation. Thus following livelihood strategies are being recommended: fruit processing, irrigation agriculture, woodlots, bee keeping and small-scale businesses.

1 INTRODUCTION

Malawi has 69 Forest Reserves covering a total area of about 7,905 square kilometers. Besides conserving the environment and biodiversity, and providing energy in terms of fuel wood, they are a rich source of many non-wood products including grass for thatching, medicinal plants, mushrooms, indigenous frits and meat, honey, insects, vegetables and other foods. The reserves are under threat of degradation due to unsustainable cutting down of trees for charcoal and firewood largely by local communities who rely on them for survival. The present study concerned the identification of forest based livelihoods alternative besides charcoal for local communities around Malosa forestry reserve.

The Malosa Forestry Reserve, located north east of Zomba district is one of the forest reserves under threat of degradation due to fuel wood and charcoal production activities by local communities. Since most of the services provided by the reserve do not have direct monetary values, communities around the forest tend to prefer those services that can immediately be transformed into immediate financial values. As such, there is pressure in the woody resources in the reserve, mainly for firewood and charcoal, which is done at the expense of the other equally or more important non-woody products such as mushrooms, indigenous fruits, termites and game meat. This could be due to inadequate knowledge and information on the part of local communities, weak sanctions and absence of local environment in managing the reserves (GoM, 2000). In Zomba municipality, it is generally believed that high quality charcoal from indigenous trees come from Malosa area. In fact, according to some charcoal vendors, customers are easily coerced if they are told that the charcoal id from Malosa (Chasawawa D. per comm.). The Forest Department acknowledges the problem and has instituted efforts to curb the situation through patrol and encouraging co-management. However, their efforts have registered limited successes due to people’s negative attitude and understanding who threaten to kill forest guards as they view them as enemies rather that management partners.

The general objective of the study was to identify and promote forest based alternative livelihoods for local communities around the Malosa Forest Reserve. Specifically the objectives were three-fold:

2 a. to determine the extent of access by local communities to forestry resources in the Malosa Forestry Reserve. b. to identify and promote sustainable exploitation of non- wood products from Malosa Forest Reserve, and c. to determine alternatively livelihood strategies for communities following declining of woody trees in the forest reserve.

The underlying hypothesis of the reserve was that the pressure on the woody resources of the forest is largely due to local communities’ inadequate knowledge and information about the potential of non-wood resources and lack of alternative livelihoods.

During the study the following assumptions were made:  that a stock of non-wood forest products such as mushrooms, small mammals, wild fruits, etc. is available for human consumption and can be sold to raise household income  that communities recognize that trees are being lost and  that local communities are willing to participate in the study

LITERATURE REVIEW

Malawi’s forestry resources include reserves, national parks game reserves, plantations and forest on customary land. The first three resources are generally not exploited although they are exposed to illegal exploitation and encroachment. These are set aside to conserve the environment and biodiversity and to provide refuge for wildlife (GoM, 1998). The forestry resources are dwindling and being exploited unsustainably largely by the poor (3GOM, 2002) who rely on them for survival. This is particularly true with regard to fuel wood energy and agriculture. Despite national action programmes in forest conservation, there has been an estimated 56.8% decline in total forest cover in the 25 years preceding 1998 (1GoM, 2002). At present, only about 28% is under forest cover of which 21% comprise forest reserves, national parks and wildlife reserves or conservation areas, and 7% is under customary land (GoM,

3 2001). Deforestation rate is estimated at 2.8% an increase from 2.4% in 1992. This is the highest rate in the SADC region.

Until 1997, expansion of forestry sector had been restricted by management practices, which excluded the involvement of the communities around these protected areas. The National Forest Policy of Malawi (1996) and the Forestry Act (1997) aim at promoting the participation of rural communities in sustainable management of both planted and natural forests within their neighbourhoods thereby making forest resources available to them on a sustainable basis. Although local communities awareness of environmental issues and community based natural resources management (CBNRM) has increased due to these enactments (3GoM, 2002), Malawi continues to witness wanton cutting-down of trees for conversion into agricultural land firewood and charcoal production resulting in deforestation soil erosion, river sedimentation and environmental degradation in general (bGoM, 2000). Consequently, forest cover has declined by 19% over the last 25 years and expected to continue since demand for wood exceeds production by 33%. Therefore, the Malawi Poverty Reduction Strategy paper (MPRSP) has identified forestry as one of the priority areas for natural resources management.

In Malawi, most of the reserves located on mountains and escarpments were created primarily for watershed protection, while those located on how areas were established to supply wood fuel to urban areas. Further, the reserves provide environmental services such as soil conservation, mitigation of soil erosion by wind and water, maintenance of biodiversity and recreation. Forest reserves are also a rich source of many non-wood products including grass for thatching, medicinal plants, game fruits and meat, honey insects, vegetables and other foods. Most of these non-wood products are consumed to traded locally by households living in the neighborhoods of the forest reserves and some such as dried mushrooms and baskets – are marketed more widely. Further certain non-wood products such as cane chairs made from bamboo and vines have potential international markets (aGoM, 2000). One way of empowering local communities to participate in effective co-management of forests is to endeavour to increase their capacity to access and utilize non-woody products from forests and engage in alternative livelihood strategies.

4 The National Environmental Action Plan 2002 outlines a number of actions for reducing further degradation of forestry resources one of which being enhancing awareness campaigns for sustainable conservation and utilization of forestry resources and promoting alternative livelihoods. Hence the present study aims at identifying and promoting forest based alternative livelihoods for local communities around forest reserves with Malosa as a case study.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

With assistance from Zomba district forestry office seven villages around the Malosa Forestry Reserve were selected using stratified random sampling. These are Somba, Mtambo, Sululu, Machemba, Jauma, Masinde and Mpama. The selection criteria for the strata included proximity to the reserve and dwindling forest cover.

A questionnaire was then administered to 177 individuals at an average of 26 people per village, about 58% of which being women/girls since they are the ones who usually go in the forest to collect firewood, fruits, mushrooms and other edible products. Questions covered areas such as access to forestry resources and problems people face in this regard; list of non-wood products from the forest; and alternative strategies for survival in light of dwindling woody trees as shown in Appendix 1.

Data was analysed using SPSS to obtain frequencies. The preliminary results were then presented to and discussed with representatives from each of the seven study sites in order to refine and explain them.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Wood and non-wood products accessed by local communities It was found that a number of forest products are accessible from the Malosa Forest Reserve as shown in Table 1.

5 Table 1: Forest products accessed from Malosa Forest Reserve

Product Respondents (%) Firewood 96.0 Charcoal 11.3 Poles 10.7 Mushroom 53.7 Fruits 51.4 Cane 5.1 Water/ streams 50.3 Thatching grass 30.5 Medicine 28.8 Bush meat 4.5

As can be seen from Table 1, the most important wood product obtained is firewood. According to the results there is limited access of wood resources in terms of charcoal and poles, despite the fact that there is flourishing charcoal business in the area (see figure 1) mostly from mbawa, ntwana, muwanga and masuku trees, according to some charcoal sellers. This is not surprising because when asked what woody products they are not allowed to cut fresh trees for charcoal, poles or firewood, Generally, the communities understand why the forestry staff stop them because 94.3% indicated that it is right for government to stop the in order to conserve the forest, which in turn conserve water, prevent soil erosion, help in rainfall formation and is a source of their livelihood. However visits to some sites showed that fresh trees are being cut for charcoal and poles and that some villages have encroached and opened gardens in the forest. Some bags of charcoal could be seen in some homes ready for sale along the Zomba-Lilongwe road.

Fig. 1 Charcoal Business at Somba Village along the Zomba-Liwonde Road

6 During focus group discussions, it came to light that most of those involved in charcoal business are from other areas, mostly Blantyre, who come and camp or temporarily marry in the area to do the illegal business. Some of the reasons advanced for encroaching are lack of land for farming and searching for fertile land. However, these can be substantiated by a study targeting charcoal producers and encroachers, assuming they will be willing to take part in the study, which was not the case in this study. Asked to rank the resources, 98.9% indicated water as the most important resources that they get. This could be because the people realize the important role water plays in one’s life and also because each of the study sites has a nearby stream coming from the forest.

Frequency of accessing forest products Asked how often they collect forest products, 50.6% indicated they collect daily, 40.6% once a week and 8.8% collect twice a week. This shows that the communities largely depend on the forest for their survival. Unless there are alternative sources of livelihoods, the communities will continue exploiting the forest for the resources most of which are becoming scarce. The major problem most respondents (97.2%) face in collecting the forest products is the long distance they travel to find them. This takes a lot of their productive time besides being a tiresome venture. Therefore, the need for alternative sources of livelihoods cannot be overemphasized.

Alternative livelihoods Apart from mushroom and masuku (Uapaca Kirkiana) fruits, which are both seasonal the study did not find significant forest based alternative livelihoods. When sold a plate-full of mushroom (about 0.5Kg) and masuku fruits (about 1kg) costs MK120 and MK20 respectively. However, since these products are seasonal, their economic value and long-term benefits are yet to be appreciated by most of the communities. Hence, some communities prefer cutting the fruit trees for charcoal, which translate to immediate financial gains at the expense of the long-term financial and environmental benefits. One way to reverse this trend is to empower the communities in value addition of these forest products and help them compare the financial gains from one tree to those they would get if they were to cut down the tree for charcoal. According to some charcoal producers an average tree translates to 2.5 bags of charcoal each costing MK250. This means that the total financial gains from selling charcoal and firewood from such a tree

7 would be about MK1000.00. Obviously this is little money compared to the long-term financial and environmental benefits that would be obtained if this tree were not cut.

Apart from the forest-based livelihoods above, some forest-related livelihoods are possible in the area. Table 2 shows alternative livelihoods which people are already undertaking.

Table 2: Alternative Livelihoods by communities around Malosa forest

Alternative Livelihoods Percentage of respondents Woodlots 27.7 Simple Irrigation 21.5 Bee farming 6.2 Small scale businesses 2.8 None 41.8

The results in Table 2 mean that about 42% of the people do not have alternative means for survival. These could be those that turn to the forest for their livelihoods almost on a daily basis. The 21.5% involved in small in small-scale irrigation agriculture is on the lower side considering that the area has a number of streams which could be used for irrigation. The people realize that the area has this potential, however 97.4% content that lack of farm inputs deters them from embarking on small-scale irrigation agriculture. However villages such as Somba, Jauma and Machemba are running successful small-scale irrigation with limited resources as seen in figure 2.

8 .

Fig. 2: Simple irrigation at Machemba village

The other villagers can be encouraged to emulate this example. However, even if all turned to irrigation agriculture, there would be inadequate land close to the streams. Therefore, alternatives such as bee farming (see Figure 3) are important and must be encouraged. The 6.2% who are using this strategy all came from Mtambo village. This could be because the forest is almost intact in this area unlike the almost bare areas closer to the other villages. Also, some villagers may not be adopting this strategy because of its cost and risk ( in terms of theft) implications.

9 Fig. 3: Bee farming at Mtambo village

The woodlots that people are planting in the area are mostly of eucalyptus species, which supply them with poles and firewood. However, there is need to include indigenous species in order not to disturb the ecology of the area.

As can be seen from Table 2, small-scale businesses are not well developed in the area. This is mainly due to the lack of credit schemes to start businesses. About 60% of respondents indicated that they need loans to start businesses in order to reduce pressure on the forest.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The Malosa forest reserve plays an important role for the people around it, who derive most of their livelihoods from it. It is a source of firewood mushroom fruits (mainly masuku) and streams. Simple comparison of the long term benefits got from wood and non wood products shows that it is better to exploit the later in a sustainable manner. In addition there is need to

10  encourage communities to embark on irrigation agriculture as there are a number of streams in the area  empower the communities financially to start small scale businesses  process fruits and mushroom in order to add value  encourage each family to have woodlots  encourage those who can and are willing to embark on bee keeping

DISSEMINATION OF THE RESEARCH RESULTS

Presentation of the preliminary results to and discussions with representatives from each of the seven study sites towards the end of the study constituted an important vehicle for disseminating results of the study to the local communities. Further, hard bound copies of this report will be deposited in libraries of schools in the study area. Chancellor college. FRIM. Zomba Forestry Office and National Research Council of Malawi. A paper titled “A study of forest based alternative livelihoods for local communities around Malosa forest reserve” has been prepared for presentation at the Annual Research Conference organized by the National Research Council of Malawi at Kalikuti Hotel, Lilongwe from 16th to 17th June 2005. In addition at least one more paper will be written for publication in the Malawi Journal of Science and Technology.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This Study would not have been completed without financial and technical assistance from the National Research Council of Malawi. The monitoring and evaluation team came in time and provided valuable advice on data verification. Our thanks also go Messrs Chekani, Namukhoyo and Palaleya of Zomba District Forestry Office for assisting in the planning and apart of data collection. Finally, we would like to thank the communities around Malosa Forest Reserve for their cooperation during the study.

11 REFERENCES

Government of Malawi (2002). Malawi Government Report to the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD). Government of Malawi (2002) National Environmental Action Plan. Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Affairs, Lilongwe. Government of Malawi (2002). Malawi Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper. Ministry of Finance and Economic Development, Lilongwe. Government of Malawi (2001). State of Environment Report 2001. Ministry of National Resources and Environmental Affairs, Lilongwe. Government of Malawi (2000). Malawi’s National Forestry Programme, Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Affairs, Lilongwe. bGovernment of Malawi (2000) Issues on Desertification in Malawi, Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Affairs, Lilongwe. Government of Malawi (1997) Forestry Act 1997, Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Affairs, Lilongwe. Government of Malawi (1996) National Forestry Policy, Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Affairs, Lilongwe.

12 Appendix 1: Study Questionnaire

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR A STUDY ON FOREST BASED ALTERNATIVE LIVELIHOODS FOR LOCAL COMMUNITIES AROUND MALOSA FORESTRY RESERVE

Village ……………………………………….. Sex of respondent …………………………………….. Age of respondent ……………………………………..

1. What useful forest products do you gather now from the Malosa Forest Reserve?

Wood Products: …………………… …………………… ……………………… ……………………………… ……………………

Non-wood product ……………………… …………………… ………………. ……………………… …………………. …………………….

2. Which products are you not allowed to collect from the forest? Who stops you and why?

Products …………………………………. ………………………………………….

Who bars you? ……………………………………………….. 3. ……………………. From collecting the products in (2)? Give reasons ………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………

4. ………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………

13 5. What useful non-wood forest products were you gathering in the post but are no longer available? …………….. ……………….. …………… ……………….

……………. ……………….. ………… ……………….. 6. What are the reasons for disappearance of the non-wood forest products in (5)? ……………… …………….. ………………….. …………………….

……………… ……………. ………………….. …………………….

7. What do you think should be done to make sure that such non-wood products are available for continuous exploitation without depleting them? ………………………………………………………………………………………………

8. Which forest products do you sell (or were you selling) and approximately how much? (e.g. mushroom = MK100/bunch).

…………………………. ………………………… …………………….

………………………… ………………………… ……………………..

9. What problems do you face in accessing the forest products in (1) ………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

10. What solutions would you propose to minimize these problems? ………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

14 11. Which of the following products from Malosa forest are more important to you?

Mushroom Indigenous Insects (C) Animals Source of Medicinal (A) fruits (B) e,g, mice Rivers(E) plants (F) (D) Firewood (P) Charcoal (Q) Poles (R)

Grass for thatching (S) Medicinal plants (T)

TOTALS

12. In the absence of the forest products mentioned in (1) and (5) what………………………………………………………. Survival?

…………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………

15