USE AND MANAGEMENT OF PROTECTED AREAS IN ETHIOPIA: MULTIPLE STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS OF SUSTAINABLE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AT AWASH NATIONAL PARK By Solomon Abebe Belay Submitted in accordance with the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (Environmental Science) University of South Africa (UNISA) Supervisor: Dr Aklilu Amsalu (April 2014) i Awash Narional Park Declaration I, Solomon Abebe Belay, declare that “Use and Management of Protected Areas in Ethiopia: Multiple Stackholders Analysis of Sustainable Resource Management at Awash National Park” is my own work and that all the sources that I have used or quoted have been indicated and acknowledged by means of complete references.. _________________________ _____________________ Belay A Solomon Date ii Acknowledgment I wish to acknowledge the following for their invaluable contribution towards my success in the production of this thesis. My heartfelt gratitude goes to Dr Aklilu Amsalu, my supervisor for his support and dedication in guiding me throughout the entire period. This thesis would not have reaches completion without the endless support, advice and encouragement of Dr. Eyualem Abebe and his family. Most importantly I would like to thank all my family and friends especially my children Robel and Saron, who missed out the most during my study leave. I would like to thank the Ethiopian Wildlife Conservation Authority for allowing me to work and move freely in the Park. A very special thanks goes to staff members of Awash National Park for their technical support during data gathering and for providing me with information I requested. I am also indebted to the field work enumerators, GIS expertise, the research participants and the resource persons. I thank Jigjiga University (JJU) for their financial support and study leave. All staff members of University of South Africa whom I communicated with and those in Akaki Campus, Addis Ababa, showed dedication in their response to my incessant requests and questions; their support is gratefully acknowledged. Last but not least, I thank my friends Desalegn Ayal and Demesse Meshesha for their encouragement and support. iii Abstract In response to recent decentralization in Ethiopia, we investigated the status of and pressure exerted on Awash National Park (ANP), vis-a- vis Park resources, observed land use and land cover changes, causes of park-related conflicts, use and management role of stakeholders at federal, regional and local level and the impact of policy on sustainable resources conservation through a comparative framework of before (pre-1995) and after decentralization (post-1995). We used a combination of two black and white aerial photographs of 1975 and 1986, a satellite image of 2006, field observation, information from local communities and Geographic Information System (GIS) to generate the land use and land cover profile. We selected a total of 210 respondents by stratified random sampling, and group discussion participants and key informants using the purposive sampling technique. Direct observed participation of stakeholders, household questionnaire, and interview with key informants and focus group discussions were used to collect data. Our results showed a declining scattered bushland by a rate of 20.61km2 per year between 1972 and 1986. On the other hand, Shrub encroachment increased by 32.2 % between 1972 and 1986 and by 10.3 % (77.4 km2) during the entire study period. Grassland was the largest cover type in the area between 1986 and 2006 and expanded by 14.2 % (106.4 km2) between 1972 and 1986. The majority of respondents highlighted that the most important drivers of the observed LULC changes pre-1995 were the combined effects of the land reform policy and changes in Park boundary (size of the Park). Population growth was reported to be the main driving factor for LULC change pre-and post-1995. The continuing existence of the area as a national Park receives unreserved support from most pastoral and agro-pastoral communities. From the data we conclude that overall, decentralization in Ethiopia was not effective in terms of improving the status of Awash National Park. We recommend action should be taken in terms of reducing human and livestock pressure and to prevent and solve interest-based conflicts between stakeholder Key terms: iv Awash National Park, Decentralization, Ethiopia, Ethnic conflict, land use change, National parks, Pastoralist, Resource use and management, Stakeholders analysis, Sustainable resource. v Table of Contents Declaration ...................................................................................................................................................... ii Acknowledgment ........................................................................................................................................... iii Abstract .......................................................................................................................................................... iv List of Table .................................................................................................................................................... ix List of Figures .................................................................................................................................................. x List of Appendences ........................................................................................................................................ x List of Abbreviations ..................................................................................................................................... xii CHAPTER ONE ................................................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 1 1.1.1 Background .................................................................................................................................... 3 1.2 Objectives of the Study ......................................................................................................................... 16 1.3 Research Questions .............................................................................................................................. 17 1.4 Significance of the Study ....................................................................................................................... 18 1.5 Rationale ............................................................................................................................................... 19 CHAPTER TWO .............................................................................................................................................. 19 Theoretical Context and Understanding ....................................................................................................... 19 2.1 Theoretical Context ............................................................................................................................... 19 2.1.1 The concept of Sustainable Resource Management ................................................................... 20 2.1.2 Political Ecology Approach ........................................................................................................... 21 2.1.3 Stakeholders Approach ................................................................................................................ 23 CHAPTER THREE ............................................................................................................................................ 25 Methodology ................................................................................................................................................. 25 3.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 25 3.2 The study area ....................................................................................................................................... 26 3.3.1 Location ........................................................................................................................................ 26 3.3.2. Biophysical resources .................................................................................................................. 26 3.3.3 Human Population and Livestock ................................................................................................ 31 3.3.4 Sources of family income ............................................................................................................. 35 3.3.5 Infrastructure ............................................................................................................................... 36 vi ` 3.6 Uniqueness of ANP.................................................................................................................. 37 3.3.7 Other Conservation areas ............................................................................................................ 37 3.5 Materials and Methods ......................................................................................................................... 38 3.5.1 Land use and land cover change .................................................................................................