In Nou Forest, Mbulu District, Tanzania

International Journal of Modern Social Sciences, 2016, 5(2): 75-88 International Journal of Modern Social Sciences ISSN: 2169-9917 Journal homepage: www.ModernScientificPress.com/Journals/IJMSS.aspx Florida, USA Article

Assessment of Implementation of Joint Forest Management (JFM) in Nou Forest, Mbulu District, Tanzania

Ahmad Kanyama1,* and John G. Kacheche2

1Department of Geography and Environmental Studies, University of Dodoma, P.O. Box 395, Dodoma 2 Department of Land and Natural Resources, P.O.Box 16, Msalala, Shinyanga

* Author to whom correspondence should be addressed; E-Mail: [email protected]

Article history: Received 16 January 2016, Received in revised form 25 March 2016, Accepted 28 April 2016, Published 10 May 2016.

Abstract: This paper assesses the performance of Joint forest management (JFM) in the implementation of Nou Forest project. The objective of this paper is four fold: (i) to identify changes of the quality of Nou Forest since establishment of JFM in 2001 (ii) to establish how the community and other stakeholders participate in JFM (iii) to establish the livelihoods benefit for villagers under JFM (iv) to identify the constraints in the JFM project. Results of this study have shown that villagers around Nou Forest have benefited from the forest in the form improved availability of water due to the increase of rain, increased firewood availability, increase of pasture, availability of medicinal plants and establishment of economic activities such as raffia weaving and beekeeping. However, JFM activities in Nou forest project are constrained by weak government financial support, corruption, inadequate management of revenue, unhappy villagers for restrictions to access forest resources, poor participation and coordination of stakeholders in the management of Nou Forest project. This paper concludes that people living adjacent to Nou forest can be the most effective managers of forest resources, but for this to occur, all stakeholders should be part of decision-making process in all stages and aspects of forest management from planning to implementation.

Keywords: Joint forest management (JFM), Nou forest, Mbulu district.

Int. J. Modern Soc. Sci., 2016, 5(2) : 75-88 76

1. Introduction

Tanzania has about 33 million hectares of forest land, of which 57% (around 19 million hectares) is largely unprotected and lies outside government forest reserves (URT, 2003). Government’s capacity to protect forests has been progressively deteriorating because of declining budgets and human resources (Kajembe and Mgoo, 1999; Luoga et al., 2006). With increased population and development needs, the situation tends to become worse, as people tend to exploit the forests beyond the management objectives. Major threats to Tanzanian forests include; rampant pit sawing, wild honey harvesting using fire, firewood and charcoal harvesting, harvesting for building materials, annual fires, settlements and cultivation (URT, 1998). Following the new forest policy of 1998, Participatory forest Management, (PFM) emerged as a form of forest management. According to URT (2003), The policy objectives of PFM are to improve forest quality through sustainable management practices, to improve livelihoods through increased forest revenues and secure supply of subsistence forest products and to improved forest governance at village and district levels through effective and accountable natural resource management institutions(Blomley and Idd 2009). PFM also encompasses a wide range of different co- management arrangements with different levels of control from relatively conservative “benefit sharing” to genuine “community-based natural resource management” where local communities have full control over management of the resource and the allocation of costs and benefits (Hall et al., 2009). Joint Forest Management (JFM) under the umbrella of Participatory Forest Management (PFM) emerged in 1998 in Tanzania (URT, 1998) and was introduced in Nou Forest in 2001 (URT, 2004). JFM, a relatively new approach in forest management in Tanzania advocates the role of forests to the livelihood of rural people as a way both protecting Tanzania’s forest and reducing rural poverty (Dubois, 1999). JFM develops strong partnerships between forest villages and the government’s Forestry Department (URT, 1998). Partnership is based around jointly defined roles and responsibilities regarding forest use, protection and development (Blomley and Iddi, 2009). Under JFM, the user (local communities) and the owner (government) manage the forest resource together. The two parties share the objectives of forest protection and sustainable forest-based livelihoods. Both parties share the costs and benefits of JFM between them (URT, 2007). JFM as a bottom up approach in forest management with strategies of involving communities and other stakeholders in forest management is based on understanding that Local communities have a significant role in improving forest management and their participation can therefore contribute significantly to effective management of these resources (URT, 1998). In Nou Forest, the JFM project is run in partnership with community village governments, village natural resource committees and communities (Lemenih and Bekele, 2007). The objective of this article is four fold: (i) to identify

Copyright © 2016 by Modern Scientific Press Company, Florida, USA Int. J. Modern Soc. Sci., 2016, 5(2) : 75-88 77 changes of the quality of Nou Forest since establishment of JFM in 2001 (ii) to establish how the community and other stakeholders participate in JFM (iii) to establish the livelihoods benefit for villagers under JFM (iv) to identify the constraints in the JFM project.

2. Study Area

Like other forests reserves in Tanzania, Nou Forest has been experiencing severe deforestation and forest degradation before the establishment of JFM (Luoga et al., 2005). The forest is located in Mbulu and Babati districts in Manyara region, 8 km from Mbulu town, and 30 km from Babati town. The reserve covers the southern part of the Mbulu highland plateau from an altitude of 1800 to 2416 m, with most of the reserve above 2150 m (Pereira, 1958.). The Mbulu district lies between latitudes 3° and 4° south of the equator and the longitudes 34° and 35° East of Greenwich. The altitude of the district ranges from 1000 meters to 2400 meters in the Eastern part of the Mbulu highlands (Mbulu District Council, 2007). The location is situated 220 kilometers north (15°) of the approximate center of Tanzania and 516 kilometers north west (306°) of the main commercial city center of Dar es Salaam and 8 km and 30 km from Mbulu and Babati towns respectively. The reserve covers the southern part of the Mbulu highland plateau from an altitude of 1800 to 2416 m, with most of the reserve above 2150m (Pereira, 1958.). Four villages were purposefully selected for this study because of their adjacent location to the Nou forest which is under Joint forest management. The villages are Boboa, Yaeda Ampa, Mongahay and Arri which belong to Mbulu District. The forest area is characterized by oceanic rainfall with continental temperatures. Rainfall distribution varies from high precipitation to lower precipitation depend on altitude of an area (Mung’ong’o and Jengo, 1991). Estimated rainfall is 700 mm/year on drier western slopes and 1500 mm/year on higher eastern slopes with marked mist effect at higher altitudes. Nou forest area has a biannual rainfall model having a short and long season (Ruffu and Sigwa, 1990). Shorter rains fall mostly in October to December and the long rains in February to May (Mung’ong’o and Jengo, 1991).

3. Methodology

Data collection methods included literature review, household questionnaire survey, key informants interviews and participant observations. Questionnaires and interviews were used to obtain both qualitative and quantitative data. Pre-testing of questionnaire was carried out before being administered to sampled households. The study area had total number of 1176 household and a sample size of 100 households (about 10%) sufficed for the questionnaire survey ( see also, Chisnall, 1986) — 30 households in Yaeda Ampa, 25 households in Arri, 20 households in Boboa and 25 households in Mongahay. Interviews were conducted with key informants involving one village executive officer for

Copyright © 2016 by Modern Scientific Press Company, Florida, USA Int. J. Modern Soc. Sci., 2016, 5(2) : 75-88 78 each village and respective village environmental committees. Other key informants involved were the District Forest Officer (DFO), the District Catchment Forest manager (DCFM) and staff of an NGO, FARM AFRICA. Focus Group Discussion were carried out involving 10 community members with equal representation of five men and five women in each village. Participant observation involved wandering around the Nou forest area and adjacent villages observing activities carried out in the forest and taking photographs. Through observation, it was possible to see the different activities carried out in Nou forest and how they impacted on the quality of the Nou forest. Documentary review from various documents such as books, journals, review articles, and official reports from published and unpublished documents was done for collection of secondary data. Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS version 16.0) tool was used to compute mean, display frequency distribution and percentage and for drawing histograms. Cross tabulation was used to obtain the relationship between variables and qualitative data was analysed using structural-functional and content analysis.

4. Results and Discussion

4.1. JFM and Improved Quality of the Forest Environment

Results show that since the Nou forest reserve was put under JFM in 2001, there has been improved condition of the forestry. Of the 100 respondents in the study area, 90% felt that the condition of the forest was getting better as a result of improved management (see Figure 1).

Forest quality Improvement

3% Improved No improvement Normal 90%

Figure 1: The Quality of Forest after JFM-households views (Source: Field Data, 2012).

As households respondents felt that the condition of the forest had improved, participant observation also showed that the forest was endowed with plenty of firewoods and grasses which were considered necessary by the villagers. On the whole, results show that the quality of the forest environment had improved over the years since JFM was established. In a Focus Group Discussion in Arri village, all members unanimously felt that the forest in their area had grown thicker. Likewise, in a focus group discussion with Boboa villagers, it was felt that streams of water which had dried out were now having flowing water throughout the year because of improved forest condition. Because of this, some villagers had started farming onions irrigated by water from the rivers/streams. Similarly, in a FGD, a farmer in Mongahay village remarked that: “there are positive micro-climate changes in our villages as thriving forest brings in a large cloud cover, which results in much rain — before JFM rainfall was scarce and shortage of water was out of control, but now the amount water has increased.’’ Likewise, a member in a FGD in Yaeda Ampa village stated that: “Our environment is now beautiful as we have plenty of rain, number of wild animals has increased and we are guaranteed adequate and clean water. All this is due to the improved condition of our forest.”

4.2. Governance of Nou Forest under Joint Forest Management under JFM

4.2.1. Community involvement

Under JFM, unlawful encroachment in the forest has been minimised by demarcation of boundaries separating the forest and built up areas of the villages. This was carried out by the villagers themselves — as one member of the FGD in Yaeda Ampa village observed: “We have created boundaries which separate the villages and the forest on our own”. Similarly, in an interview with the Village Environmental Commitee (VEC) in Yaeda Ampa village it was elaborated that: “We have built a road as a forest boundary so that no one can perform human activities beyond the boundary in the forest and we can also easily control forest fire outbreak”. According to Villages Environmental Committees, participation of the local community in the management of the forest has reduced significantly cases of fire outbreak in the forest, control of grazing has been enhanced and illegal harvesting of trees has been reduced significantly. In a focus group discussion in Yaeda Ampa village members, stressed that: “Nowadays there are no big motor vehicles seen coming from the forest with timber contrary to pre- JFM period where lots of vehicles were regularly seen coming from the forest filled up with timber”.

Through JFM, communities around Nou Forest guard the forest and have been granted mandate to impose and collect fines on illegal forest users. The villagers were allowed to retain part of revenue generated through the fines because of their participation in guiding the forest. As shown in (Table 1), 81 percent of respondents felt that the revenue obtained from the forest resources in the form of fines from people who misused forest resources was being shared equally between the central government and the villages. Interviews with village environmental committees (VECs), showed that up to 25% of the revenue retained by the villages was spent to pay people who guided the forest.

Table 1: Distribution of Revenue collected from fines Name of village Are revenue shared? Is revenue shared with Central Total (n=100) Government? (n=100) (% ) Yes No Don’t know Equally Not equally Not aware Number of respondents in Yaeda Ampa 24 2 4 24 1 5 30 Number of respondents in Mongahay 19 1 5 20 0 5 25 Number of respondents in 20 1 4 20 1 4 25 Arri Number of respondents in 18 0 2 17 1 2 20 Boboa Total (%) 81 4 15 81 3 16 100 Source: (Field data, 2012)

4.2.2. Education about forest management Provision of education about forest management has been part of JFM programme. According to an interview with Farm Africa, it conducts different training in a community adjacent to Nou forest catchment area about forest management in collaboration with Mbulu district office. This has included identification of ways to earn money from the forest by identifying economic activities that could use forest resources. According to Farm Africa, different training sessions in managing the forest were accompanied with showing cinemas on good practices of conserving the forest.

4.3. Utilization of Nou Forest Resources for the Livelihood of Local Community

Through JFM, villages around Nou forest have been granted limited access to utilize the forest environment resources. In the focus group discussion with villagers in Mongahay village, one member emphasized that: “People have been permitted more access to Nou Forest and using its environment resources much more after the establishment of JFM”.

In the same FGD, members elaborated that forest resources and services that had been allowed ‘limited’ use included fetching water, honey gathering, collection of firewood, medicinal plants and grazing. Results of household interview on benefits from the forest after the establishment of JFM showed that 87% of 100 respondents felt that they obtain fodder, fuelwood and non-timber products, e.g., honey, fish, water, medicine, vegetables, and raffia products (see Table 2).

Table 2: Forest utilization during JFM Name of the Number of respondents and Benefits from forest under JFM village their percentage within the Access to fodder, fuelwood and study village Insignificant non-timber forest benefit products(NTFP) Yaeda Ampa Number of respondents (n=30) 3 27 % within the study village 10.0% 90.0% Mongahay Number of respondents (n=25) 3 22 % within the study village 12.0% 88.0% Arri Number of respondents (n=25) 2 23 % within the study village 8.0% 92.0% Boboa Number of respondents (n=20) 5 15 % within the study village 25.0% 75.0% Total Number of respondents 13 87 (n=100) % within the study village 13.0% 87.0% Source: (Field data, 2012)

4.3.1. Revenue generation from forest resources As table (Table 2) shows, households obtain fodder, fuel and non-timber forest products as a way of livelihood support. Non timber forest products are a result of activities e.g., improved beekeeping, fish pond development, creation of vegetable gardening, tree nursery creation, mushroom growing and weaving raffia grass product — all these were established under JFM and the support of Farm Africa. During interview with focus group at Mongahay village, members as a whole felt that: “We are happy with our forest after the start of NOU-JFM project because we get our local medicine, grazing area, fuelwood and other non-timber forest products”. In an interview, a VEO in Mongahay village observed that: “Under JFM we have established fish ponds and we have improved beekeeping. Under JFM the quality of honey has improved and we are witnessing increased revenue generation from beekeeping project.”

Figure 2. Villagers in their tree nursery in Arri village (Source: Field data 5/05/2012)

Figure 3: Beekeeping in Yaeda Ampa village (Source: Field data 23/05/2012)

Growing of raffia grasses is one of the economic activities promoted by JFM in order to boost the livelihood of the local community. Raffia grasses are used for weaving baskets and mats. A VEO in Boboa village observed that: “ Weaving raffia baskets and mats and accompanying sales have motivated women to participate in forest activities in our village since it generates money to support their livelihood”

Figure 4: Raffia products- mats and baskets (Source: Field data 21/05/2012)

4.4. Weaknesses and Challenges of JFM Program in Nou Forest Catchment Area Lack of Government Financial Support

There is no adequate financial support from the government to support the Nou forest. In an interview, Mbulu District forest official (DFO), observed that that, “when we arrange visits to the forest we are usually not supported by our local government administration. We are always told that there is no vehicle, no fuel or no funds… so how can we reach the site to patrol the forest and adjacent communities?”. Likewise, inadequate logistic support to forest staff by the government was also observed by the District Catchment Forest Manager (DCFM) who felt that, “We do not reach forest sites area on time as requested by villagers for different reasons e.g., lack of transportation. This has created inadequate enforcement which has increased illegal tree felling for timber”.

4.4.1. Corruption Village environmental committees (VECs) which are responsible for patrolling the forest, have been seen receiving bribes to allow illegal forest activities which lead to deforestation and forest degradation in Nou Catchment Forest. In focus group discussion in Mongahay village, it was felt that, “Village environmental committees (VECs) were responsible for safeguarding the forest, yet through bribery they corporate with illegal timber harvesters and grazers leading to deforestation and forest degradation” As specified in the JFM scheme for Nou forest, revenue generated from fines for people caught unlawfully using the forest is crucial to support management of the forest. However, due to corruption

Copyright © 2016 by Modern Scientific Press Company, Florida, USA Int. J. Modern Soc. Sci., 2016, 5(2) : 75-88 84 very little revenue is collected from fines thus constraining management efforts. A VECs in Arri village observed that, “We depend solely on revenue from fines to carry out management activities for Nou Forest. But very few offenders pay fines for the project thus reducing the revenue necessary to pay for forest patrollers and for buying suitable gears, i.e., clothes and boots for patrolling”.

4.4.2. Poor management of revenue generated through fines Village Environmental committee receive money generated from fines, yet only few VECs have bank accounts. In a FGD with Yaeda Ampa villagers, it was agreed that the VEC had no bank account. However, in an interview with VECs in Yaeda Ampa village, the treasury thought that there was no revenue generated from fines, but the chairman of the VECs said there were three hundreds of thousands of Tanzanian shillings. On the other hand, a FGD with Boboa villagers showed that the village had bank account, but the account had no money and it was not known where the money generated from fines was kept or how it was spent.

4.4.3. Inadequacy to access to forest environmental resources In focus group discussion of Arri villagers, it was felt that, grazing was important for them because they had a lot of cattle, but they felt that the allowed limited grazing was inadequate for their livestock. They also felt that the restrictions to harvest wood for timber was making their welfare harder e.g., led to shortage of building materials like timber for building homes and for construction of public services like schools, hospitals, offices, and making furniture for public use.

4.4.4. Lack of stakeholders coordination Villagers in the study area felt that there was no clear coordination among the central stakeholders involved in the JFM of Nou forest. This concern emerged in a focus group discussion with Arri villagers who felt that: “We see staff members of Farm Africa regularly visiting the project and advising villagers what to do for activities which they themselves initiated. DCFM occasionally come to the project for purpose of catching illegal timber harvesters without involving villagers. We have also not seen DFO working together with officials of Farm Africa”.

4.5. Discussion

The study has shown that village communities around Nou Forest members is involved in the various activities of management of Nou Forest. These include demarcation of forest and village boundaries to prevent uncontrolled intrusion into the forest and controlling forest fire outbreak. About 90% of the interviewed people felt that the forest environment in Nou Forest has improved under the

Copyright © 2016 by Modern Scientific Press Company, Florida, USA Int. J. Modern Soc. Sci., 2016, 5(2) : 75-88 85 period of JFM in the form e.g., forest growing thicker, increasing rainfall and availability of water. According to the villagers, the improved environment of Nou Forest is due to surveillance efforts done by the villagers themselves to protect the forest. The study has also shown that through JFM, villagers have received education about forest conservation and identification of ways to earn revenue by tapping forest resources. Furthermore, under JFM, villagers have been granted limited user rights of forest resources such as fetching water, honey gathering, collection of firewood and medicinal plants and allowing limited grazing (See Table 2). In addition, villagers could generate some revenue through activities such as beekeeping, fish growing in ponds, tree nursery and weaving raffia grass products. Such achievements could be seen from the premise that through Joint Forest Management (JFM), local communities have a significant role in improving forest management and their participation can therefore contribute significantly to effective management of these resources (URT, 1998). Specifically, the fact that villagers in Nou Forest could generate revenue from Nou forest resources with activities , i.e., beekeeping, raffia grass weaving, vegetable gardening etc, hinges on the concept of JFM to improve rural livelihhods and thereby helping reduce poverty, while at the same time protecting the environment (Kajembe and Kessy, 2000). Despite the above limited achievement in Nou forest, there are some serious challenges that impede JFM for Nou forest project. As shown earlier, these include inadequate government financial support to JFM, corruption in the patrolling the Nou forest by Village committees, mismanagement of revenue generated from fines, restrictions to villagers to access forest resources adequately and inadequate involvement and coordination of stakeholders of JFM for Nou Forest. These weakness in the management of Nou Forest go against the concept of JFM with its underlying emphasis in partnership concerning forest use, protection and development. Under JFM, the user (local communities) and the owner (government manage the forest resouce together (URT, 1998). The two parties share the objectives of forest protection and sustainable forest based livelihoods. Both parties share the costs and benefits of JFM between them (URT, 2007). Joint Forest management (JFM) ‘‘allows’’ forest adjacent communities to use certain products, thus encouraging increased local policing functions and relieving burdens of state (Wily, 1998). Contrary to this, in a focus group discussion in Arri village it was felt that, “Government interests continue to be the protection or conservation of the forest as it puts restrictions, with plans aimed entirely at forest protection”. They further added that “We are only allowed to get dry fallen piece of trees, grazing only for short period of time. There is no permission to harvest trees even for construction of village services such as schools, clinics etc”. The discontentment of Arri villagers was similar to that of the VEC in Mongahay village that:

“Equitable sharing of costs and benefits of forest management with the government according to the objective of JFM is meaningless since the villagers do not see tangible benefits because harvesting of the forest is not allowed, yet there is management cost in the form of patrolling the forest”. Although, the objective of JFM is to strike a balance between forest conservation and improved livelihood in the communities around Nou Forest, above results show that, actual implementation of JFM is more inclined to conservation than promoting improved livelihood. Result also show that the government extends little financial support to JFM. These weaknesses as observed by a member in a Focus group at Arri village has prompted vices such as bribery among members of VEC during patrolling and misusing revenue generated from fines. It can be argued that the discontentment among the villagers about interventions made by JFM, make them feel that they do not own the forest management process of the Nou forest. As observed by Willy, (2001), communities can become effective institutions for sustainable forest resource management, but only if they are granted genuine proprietorship, that is the right to use forest resources, determine the modes of usage, benefit fully from their use, determine the distribution of such benefits and determine rules of access. Any policy which excludes these components will frustrate the goal of making communities effective institutions for forest resource management. Results have also shown inadequate coordination between stakeholders involved in the JFM in Nou forest i.e., the village community, DCFM, DFO and Farm Africa. Clearly, coordination in JFM is premised on the concept of partnership based around jointly defined roles and responsibilities regarding forest use, protection and development (Blomley and Iddi, 2009). Many factors appear to impede coordination in JFM. One of these according to Tom and Ramadhan (2004), is that despite the fact that district JFM plans and budgets are being developed by district council staff, the integration of JFM with other forest related activities within district plans remains very limited thus hampering transparency and efficiency.

5. Conclusion

Findings from this study indicate that JFM has potential to improve the livelihood of village communities around Nou Forest. The quality of the forest environment has improved after the establishment of JFM. Villagers have benefited from the forest in the form improved availability of water due to the increase of rain, increased firewood availability, increase of pasture, availability of medicinal plants and establishment of economic activities such as raffia weaving and beekeeping. However, JFM activities in Nou forest project are constrained by weak government financial support, corruption, inadequate management of revenue, unhappy villagers for restrictions to access forest resources, poor participation and coordination of stakeholders in the management of Nou Forest project. The improved quality of Nou forest through JFM is meant to promote biodiversity, improve ecology and

Copyright © 2016 by Modern Scientific Press Company, Florida, USA Int. J. Modern Soc. Sci., 2016, 5(2) : 75-88 87 enhance availability of various forest products and improve the economy of local community. People living adjacent to Nou forest can be the most effective managers of forest resources. For this to occur, it requires that all stakeholders should be part of decision-making process in all aspects of forest management from planning to implementation.

Acknowledgement

The authors would like to thank all those who rendered necessary information for this article. These include Mr. Makia, the Mbulu District Catchment Forest Manager (DCFM), Mr. Kirimba and Mr. Kimaro, Mbulu District Forest Officers (DFOs), staffs of Farm Africa (NGO), villagers and Village Environmental Committees (VECs) of Yaeda Ampa, Arri, Boboa and Mongahay.

References

Blomley, T. and Iddi, S. (2009). Participatory Forest Management in Tanzania: 1993-2009, Lessons learnt and experiences to date. Report submitted to the Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism, United Republic of Tanzania. pp. 69. Blomley.T, Pfliegner K., Isango, J., Zahabu E., Ahrends A., and Burgess.N. (2008). Seeing the wood for the trees: an assessment of the impact of participatory forest management on forest condition in Tanzania. Fauna & Flora International, Oryx, 42(3): 380-391. Chisnall, P. M. (1986). Marketing Research. Maidenhead, UK, McGraw-Hill. Dubois, O. (1999). Assessing Local Resilience and Getting Roles Right in Collaborative Forest Management: Some Current Issues and a Potential Tool, with Special Reference to Sub-Saharan Africa. Proceedings of an International Workshop on Pluralism and Sustainable Forestry and Rural Development, from 9 to 12 December 1997. Rome, Italy. pp. 49-83. Hall, J., Burgess, N. D., Lovett, J., Mbilinyi, B., & Gereau, R. E. (2009). Conservation implications of deforestation across an elevational gradient in the Eastern Arc Mountains, Tanzania. Biological Conservation, 142: 2510-2521. URT (United Republic of Tanzania) (2003). Framework for Participatory Forest Management. Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. URT (United Republic of Tanzania) (2007). Joint Forest Management Guidelines. Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism, Forest and Beekeeping Division, Government Press, Dar es salaam, Tanzania. Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. pp. 69. Kajembe, G.C. and Kessy, J.F. (2000). Joint Forest Management in Urumwa Forest Reserve, Tabora, Tanzania. A Process in the Making. In Forests, Chiefs and Peasants in Africa: Local Management

of Natural Resources in Tanzania, Zimbabwe and Mozambique; Virtanen, P. and Nummelin, M. (Eds). Silva Carelica, 34: 141-158. Kajembe, G.C. and Mgoo, J.S. (1999). Evaluation of Community Based Forest Management Approach in Babati District: A case of Duru-Haitemba Village Forest reserve. Orgut Consulting AB, Dar es salaam, Tanzania. Lemenih, M. and Bekele, M. (2007). Participatory Forest Management-Best Practices, Lessons Learnt and Challenges Encountered: The Ethiopian and Tanzanian Experiences. FARM-Africa/SOS Sahel: p. 13. Luoga, E.J., Witkowiski E.T.F. and Balkwill, K. (2005). Land Cover and Use Changes in Relation to the Institutional Framework and Tenure of Land and Resources in Eastern Tanzania Miombo Woodlands. Journal of Environment, Development and Sustainability .7: 71-93 Mbulu District Council (2007). Social Economic Profile in Mbulu District. Mung’ong’o, C.G. and Jengo, R.D. (1991). Babati District in Perspective: An Annotated Bibliography of Environmental Reports written on the District up to 1990: For the Land Management Programme (LAMP), Babati, April, 1991. Pereira, H.C. (1958). Reconnaissance report on proposals for tea planting in the Nou forest catchment area. Mimeograph. Muguga. Ruffu, C.K. and Sigwa, T. (1990). Trees and Shrubs of Babati District: A checklist for Forest, Tree and People Project under Community Forestry Sector, Ministry of Lands, Natural Resources and Tourism, Dar es Salaam. Tom, B and Ramadhani,H. (2004). Going to Scale with Participatory Forest Management: Early lessons from Tanzania. TNRF Occasional Paper No. 4 URT (2004). Joint Management Agreements for Nou Catchment Forest between the Forestry and Beekeeping Department and adjacent villages. Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism, Forest and Beekeeping Division. Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. URT (2003). Framework for Participatory Forest Management. Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. URT (1998). The National Forest Policy. Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism, Forest and Beekeeping Division, Government Press, Dar es salaam, Tanzania. Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. Wily, L. (2001). Forest management and democracy in east and southern Africa: lessons from Tanzania. Gatekeeper Series No. 95. London, IIED.