Summary of participatory appraisal data at Kebele and Got level. Wageningen. December 2004. The project is implemented with financial contributions from the ...
Non Timber Forest Products Research and Development Project in S-W Ethiopia
STUDENT RESEARCH SERIES No. 1
Baseline description of project area: Summary of participatory appraisal data at Kebele and Got level
Wageningen
December 2004
The project is implemented with financial contributions from the European Union’s Tropical Forests Budget Line and with additional funding from the Embassies of Norway and Canada in Ethiopia. The authors are solely responsible for the opinions expressed in this document, and they do not necessarily reflect those of the donor organizations
PREFACE This study was produced through the collaboration of Wageningen University and the Non-Timber Forest Products Research and Development Project in South-west Ethiopia. The following students were involved in the production of this study concerning the baseline assessments in the project area: Jonah van Beijnen Ivo Mostertman Greetje Renkema Jenneke van Vliet The Project is very grateful to the students from Wageningen University and their staff supervisors for their involvement in this study which is assisting the project in achieving its goals of reducing poverty and implementing sustainable management of the forests of southwest Ethiopia. The Project hopes that the students involved in this study will have gained from this experience and that it will assist their progress toward their career goals. Prof. Adrian Wood Project Manager.
Contents Executive summary 1. Introduction 1.1 Background and objective of report 1.2 Structure of report
5 5 6
2. General description of the project area
6
3. Description of project areas in Sheka and Kefa zones 3.1 Introduction 3.2 Resource base 3.3 Livelihood strategies 3.4 Socio-economic stratification 3.5 Local institutional arrangements for forest management 3.6 Potentials and constrains for NTFP development
10 10 10 12
4. Description of the project areas in Bench-Maji zone 4.1 Introduction 4.2 Resource base 4.3 Livelihood strategies 4.4 Socio-economic stratification 4.5 Local institutional arrangements for forest management 4.6 Potentials and constrains for NTFP development
20 22 26 26 27 29 36 39
5. Comparison between the two areas 5.1 Differentiation in project areas 5.2 Potentials for stimulating NTFP use and management in the different areas
43
Appendices Appendix 1 Overview of the NTFP resources in the Kebeles Appendix 2 Overview of the homestead products in the Kebeles
44 44 45
1
Executive summary
2
1. Introduction 1.1 Background and objective of report The south-west highlands of Ethiopia are one of the main forest areas in Ethiopia. These forests form an important source for several rivers draining the surrounding (semi)arid lowlands. They also form an important source of several non-timber forest products (NTFPs), such as wild coffee (Coffea arabica), different spices and honey. Recently concern has been voiced over the degradation of the remaining forests in this region, this as a result of an increasing pressure due to immigration and expanding commercial commercial cultivation, which causes a conversion of forests into agricultural land. Beside this, changed governmental strategies to develop the region led to agricultural investments and selective timber felling. This process of deforestation has not only caused concern about the loss of forest resources, but also about its impact on the local communities. Due to the poor socioeconomic conditions many people still (partly) depend on forest resources in their daily livelihoods, and the deforestation may therefore negatively affect the local livelihoods. In order to rectify these negative developments, in 2003 the EU decided to fund a new project on Poverty alleviation through NTFP Research and Development in SouthWest Ethiopia. The aim of this project is to search for opportunities to create the conditions for sustainable development of the rural poor through improving the use and management of non-timber forest products. The project has as goal to stimulate local institution building, as well as capacity building of interested community members, both men and women, in respect to improved NTFP-use and sustainable natural resource management. At the start of the project, the project ream, with support from other collaborating local institutions and implementing partners, conducted a two stage PRA (Participatory Rural Assessment) study about the NTFP products in relation with the livelihoods of the local communities. The aim of these studies was to familiarize the project staff with the research area and local community organizations, as well as to produce a baseline overview which could be used as a basis for the designing and implementing of poverty reduction strategies in the project area. The outcome of the studies have been reported in two internal project documents: PRA study findings at Kebele Level (Part-I) and at the lower administrative Got level (Part-II). These documents provide a detailed overview of the project area, but due to their detail the data from the various communities are not easily comparable. This report consolidates the data of the rural assessments and provide a systematic summary of the collected information and thus serve as a comprehensive baseline description of the project area. This baseline description will consist of a comparative assessment of the resource base, livelihood conditions and institutional arrangements regarding natural resource use and management in the different intervention areas, as well as a summary of the main potentials and constraints for NTFP development in the various zones.
3
1.2 Structure of the report In the first chapter background information about the NTFP project in south-western Ethiopia is given. Chapter 2 gives a short description of the region in which the project is working and shortly describes the two main project areas located in the high and mid region areas respectively. Next, Chapters 3 and 4 provide a systematic overview at both sub-district (Kebele) and community (Got) level of the characteristics regarding the resource base, livelihood strategies, forest management, and institutional arrangements. Chapter 3 describes the project area located in the upper regions, while chapter 4 reports the characteristics of the project area in the lower part of the project region. In Chapter 5 both areas compared.
4
2. General description of the project area The project area is located in South-Western Ethiopia. It is bounded from the south and west by Sudan, in the north and northwest by Oromia Regional State, and in the west and southeast by the SNNP Regional State. The project region covers three administrative zones; Bench Maji, Kefa and Sheka Zones (fig. 2.1). The project region is part of the south west Ethiopian Highlands, with an average altitude of 1500 m. The highest altitude, which is about 2200 meters in Masha Woreda, declines toward the south to the Sudan border. The region includes the upper catchments of several important rivers, such as the Baro, the Akobo and the Omo. The rainfall is high ( …mm/year); it is distributed in a bimodal rainfall pattern, the wet season being between April/May and October/November. Temperature ranges from 12 degrees (in cold season) to 40 degrees (in dry season) the average being around 25 degrees. A large amount of the region is still covered with its natural vegetation consisting of tropical montane humid forest; some of these forests are in different degrees of degradation. The population in the project region consists of several ethnic groups who have lived here for centuries, as well as immigrants, mostly from Oromia and Amhara regions. Bench Maji Zone has a relatively low population density of 22 persons/km2, whereas Kefa and Sheka Zone have a much higher density of approximately 77/km2. The number of households is approximately 190.000, with an average household size of 5.7 persons. Based on 2003 CSA statistics, about 49% of the population is male and 51% is female. About 92% of the population is living in rural areas around the dense natural forests, while the rest (8%) lives in small urban centers. Within the region the project selected two zones to work in, i.e. the Kefa and Sheka zones located in the high mountains, and the Bench-Maji zone located in the midmountain region. Within the upper mountain region 7 sub-districts (Kebele’s) located in four districts (Woreda’s) were selected as the location for project activities, and in the mid-mountain region 4 Kebele’s located in two Woreda’s ((Figure 2.2). In order to obtain information on the socio-economic and land-use conditions in each Kebele a Rapid Rural Appraisal was carried out. The collected data were subsequently further refined through an additional Rapid Appraisal at the level of individual communities (Got’s).
5
Figure 2.1: Map of the project area
Figure 2.2. Map with location of Kebeles
6
Table 2.1: The selected Woredas, Kebeles and Gots
Zone
Woreda
Kefa
Gesha
Masha Sheka
Kebele
Selected Got for subsequent studies
Anderacha Wachito Yeri Beto Uwa
Chata Noka Mechisa Yigo No.1&2 Cheri
Gadda Anderacha
Sheko
Chegecha Yokichichi Shimi Shayita
Bench – Maji
Janchuta
Yaga Uti Mehal-shimi Mejengars from different Gots Weruka No further study conducted Bayibesinta
Bench Fanika
Zanika
7
3. Description of the project areas in Sheka and Kefa zones 3.1 Introduction This chapter gives a description of the land-use and socio-economic conditions in the high mountain project area located in the Sheka zone (Masha and Anderacha Woredas) and Kefa zone (Gesha Woreda). In this project area the altitude ranges from 1700 – 2600 m: Masha and Gesha Woreda are located in the higher parts and Anderacha Woreda in the lower part. Anderacha Woreda is more or less a transitional zone between the higher and lower regions of south-west Ethiopia. Information on the demographic conditions in the selected project areas is summarized in Table 3.1. Table 3.1: Demographic information on Woredas, Kebeles and Gots.
Woreda Gesha
Kebele Anderacha Wachito Yeri Masha Beto Uwa Gadda Anderacha Chegecha Yokichichi
Ha 5747 4091 3853 3500 ? 4355 2749
Population 3339 2948 835 1292 ? 1318 874
# Gots 4 9 4 4 ? 4 4
Got Chata Noka Mechisa Yigo no.1&2 Cheri Yaga Uti
Population 978 400 180 705 ? 378 161
3.2 Resource base All Woredas are situated in the same agro-ecological zone (Dega zone). A large amount of the area is still covered with its natural vegetation, a tropical montane humid forest. Nevertheless, there are within the area several degrees of degradation. The main causes of degradation are the increasing population pressure, the ongoing degradation and accelerated expansion of agricultural lands, the construction of new access roads, the recent fall in coffee prices, the non-sustainable use of NTFPs, and the coming of big agro-industrial investors. Beside a severe pressure on the remaining forests in the area, these causes have also created a strong decline in the livelihood conditions of the population. The major land use/ land cover types are natural high forest, bamboo forest, grazing lands, farmlands and settlement areas. Most of the areas above 2400 meter are covered by pure stands of bamboo with only some scattered trees. The natural high forests cover the steep slope areas and river valleys within all altitudinal ranges below the bamboo zone. Flat to moderately slope areas are converted to grazing land, agricultural lands and home gardens (see tables 3.2 and 3.3 and Fig. 3.1 for contribution of the different land uses to livelihoods in each Kebele). The forest vegetation is rich in NTFPs, including wild coffee (which is probably introduced from the forests in the lower parts of Oromia), climbers/ lianas, bamboos, tree ferns, palm tree, medicinal plants, honey, and spices like Korerima (Ethiopian 8
cardamom), and timiz (long pepper). Furthermore the forest is used for the collection of fire wood, construction materials, and is home to wild animals. The distribution of some of these resources is localized, like wild coffee, Korerima, bamboo, and palm tree, while others are found everywhere.
Table 3.2: Land use conditions in different Kebeles.
Land use Natural forests Annual crops Perennial crops Grazing land Other uses Total
Chegecha Kebele 3166 248 67 135 739 4355
Uwa Kebele 2318 178 115 01 890 3500
Area in hectares Yokichichi Beto Kebele Kebele 1234 1880 300 237 500 186 196 185 510 1365 2749 3853
Anderacha Kebele 3458 400 389 100 1400 5747
Wachito Kebele 2721 0 0 0 13702 4091
Anderacha Kebele 60.2 7 6.8 1.7 24.3 100
Wachito Kebele 67 0 0 0 332 100
Table 3.3: Distribution of land use in different Kebeles.
Land use Natural forests Annual crops Perennial crops Grazing land Other uses Total
1 2
Chegecha Kebele 72.7 5.8 1.5 3.1 16.9 100
Uwa Kebele 66 5 3 01 26 100
Relative area (in %) Yokichichi Beto Kebele Kebele 45 48.8 11 6.2 18 4.8 7 4.8 19 35.5 100 100
There are grazing lands in Uwa Kebele, only no statistics available This includes also annual crops, perennial crops, grazing land, and infrastructure
9
Contribution of land use options (%) 100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
Other uses Grazing land Perennial crops Annual crops Natural forests
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0% Chegecha Kebele
Uwa Kebele
Yokichichi Kebele
Beto Kebele
Anderacha Kebele
Wachito Kebele
Fig 3.1: Relative importance of different land use types in different Kebeles
3.3 Livelihood strategies In this paragraph the role of different resources in the local livelihoods is described. Attention is given both to the overall contribution of different resources to local livelihoods and to the importance of NTFP in cultivation and marketing. NTFP and crop resources and their contribution to local livelihoods There are many factors, which determine access to use the resources. Proximity to the resource is one of the most determinant factors. For instance, Kibi Got is the only one within its Kebele which is highly involved in honey production and Korerima collection. This Got is located very close to the forest resources. Awareness of the benefits, long experience of production system and knowledge of the exact location of the resources also determine this variation in NTFP production/use. Within the overall region, the rural livelihoods depend almost exclusively on forest product collection and agriculture. Table 4.3 and Figure 3.2 give an overview of the different crops and NTFPs and their contribution to the livelihood of the people in the different Kebeles3.
3
Due to limited information the data do not include information from Wachito Yeri Kebele and Gadda Kebele
10
NTFPs play a very important roles in the local livelihoods. The benefits of NTFPs are multiple: firewood, lianas, wood for beehive making, bee hive placing (honey production site), habitat for wildlife (such as wild pig, bush buck), construction materials (poles for house and fence construction), collection of splices (piper capons). NTFPs extraction is a mostly subsistence-oriented activity that is complementary to farming. The forests are also important for providing ecological stability in the form of regulation of hydrological conditions and protection against surface run-off and erosion, and maintenance of micro-climatic conditions (shade). In the region more than a quarter to the farmers’ livelihoods depends on NTFPs. The lion share is provided by honey, while others contribute around ten percent altogether. Although the majority of local people were of the opinion that honey has the highest contribution to their livelihood, some argued that enset is more important. This crop is used for many purposes: food, fiber production, bedding and cash earning.
Table 3.4: Resources and their relative contribution to local livelihoods in the different Kebeles.
Livelihood resource
Enset (false banana) Livestock production Honey production Maize Farm implement & Tree fern Vegetables Lianas, climbers Pulse crops (beans and peas) Haricot bean Wild coffee Teff Wheat, Barley Korerima Pottery work Sugarcane Chat and Gesho Palm Banana Timiz Total
Relative contribution of different resources (%) Chegecha Uwa Yokichichi Beto Anderacha Kebele Kebele Kebele Kebele Kebele 24 19 33 18 27 15 13 21 14 24 12 16 16 27 18 11 9 9 0 5 7 0 0 0 0 6 4 0 0 0 5 3 3 6 2 5 11 0 9 5 4 2 0 0 0 4 6 6 4 10 3 8 3 0 6 2 7 5 0 3 2 2 2 4 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 100 100 100 100 100
11
Relative contribution of different livelihood sources within different kebeles 100%
90% Timiz Banana Palm Chat and Gesho Sugarcane Pottery work Cardamom Wheat, Barley Teff Wild coffee Haricot bean Pulse crops (beans and peas) Lianas, climbers Vegetables Farm implement & Tree fern Maize Honey production Livestock production Enset (flase banana)
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0% Chegecha Kebele
Uwa kebele
Yokichichi kebele
Beto Kebele
Anderacha kebele
Fig 3.2: Relative importance of different resources in different Kebeles.
With regard to the NTFP production, processing and trading, there is no crop specialization. Many households combine various livelihood practices to obtain food, consumer goods and cash income without focusing on a single activity, crop, or even space. Benefits of bamboo and non bamboo forest products for the Cheri Got As will be elaborated in the discussion on socio-economic stratification, within the high mountain region there exist local variation in the importance of NTFPs for local livelihoods. This variation is clearly demonstrated by the fact that in the Kebele Gadda a special situation occurs due to the large share of bamboo products contributing to their livelihood. As demonstrated by the information from Cheri Got bamboo is used for house construction, beehive making, flooring, fencing (homesteads and private grazing areas), the bark for beehive covering, making different household equipment and utensils such as chairs, akunbal (used as cover
12
when baking enjera-the thin Ethiopian bread), dollo (container for holding water), drinking cups, baskets, etc. Marketing and cultivation of NTFP products Although an important part of the NTFP use concerns subsistence use, some NTFPs, notably coffee and honey, are also sold. The trade in NTFPs is still limited, because it is hindered by marketing problems, such as lack of information on potential markets and marketing channels, the fragmented nature of NTFP markets, the lack of sufficient volume and the unpredictability of production cycles resulting in irregular supplies. Some of the wild products face highly volatile markets and are subject to seasonal fluctuations as it is witnessed in the case of wild Korerima. Hence, this situation provides short-term opportunities or generates only marginal returns to those engaged in the harvesting and preparation of these products. The households are therefore not encouraged to improve the mode of production of these products. The perishable nature of many NTFPs, combined with the poor infrastructure and high transport costs in the area also hinder successful marketing of NTFPs. In several communities the collection of wild coffee in the forest is gradually replaced by cultivation of coffee in homestead. Also Korerima is sometimes cultivated in forest farm to be used for communal purposes; these plots are managed under supervision of the KEBELE administration. As can be observed in Yokichichi Kebele such cultivation areas are located relatively close to the main road, as that opens up the opportunity for these products to be marketed. As will be elaborated in the next section, the patterns of use and relative importance of NTFPs differ among different economic groups, households, and gender. The role of income generation from honey production, the collection of Korerima and wild coffee is particularly important for the livelihoods of poorer households. Poorer households have no access to skills like knowledge and capital to be able to benefit from the growing market opportunities of NTFPs. As a result control over these opportunities and over the resources are usually enjoyed by the better living standard group and most powerful town traders at the expense of poorer households. 3.4 Socio-economic stratification Within the local population variation in socio-economic status of different people exist. In the following the impacts of wealth differentiation and gender differentiation on the role of NTFP in local livelihoods will be summarized.
Wealth categories During the rural appraisal exercises a socio-economic classification was made of the people living in the various communities in order to distinguish the differences in wealth status and its relation to livelihood strategies. Using local criteria, the economical status of households was classified as being poor, medium, or rich. The
13
criteria used were number of beehives, agricultural land with enset, other cultivated annual crops, and number of livestock. Subsequently, participants emphasized that family size is another decisive factor for wealth status as large families are able to engage in more economic activities. In the Tables 3.5 to 3.10 the information on the distribution of wealth categories in the various studied communities is summarized. Also the nature of the main economic assets are indicated. For each community the following overview can be provided. Mechisa Got (Beto Kebele, Masha Woreda) In Mechisa the rich are most intensively engaged in honey production; this takes place in the natural forests under control of the traditional communal Kobo system. In this Got the poor are usually no beneficiaries of the Kobo system. The medium and the poor are engaged mainly in the production of enset and other annual crops, honey and livestock keeping. Relatively, they are more involved in collecting wild coffee, Korerima, climbers, and palm than richer people.
Table 3.5: Wealth categories and involvement in economic activities in the Mechisa Got
Economic Class Rich
17
Number beehives 100
Medium
34
70
Poor
49
40
Economical assets of Enset (hectare) Annual crops Livestock (hectare) 0.5 2 2 oxen 13 livestock 0.25 1.5 1 ox 0 livestock 0.2 0.5 0.5 ox 3.5 livestock
Yigo Got (Uwa Kebele, Masha Woreda) In Yigo Got the poor class does not have livestock assets (no ox, no cattle, no sheep and even no hen) and very little land. They lease their land to the rich economic group for one production season to share the product later. NTFPs are very important for them; they collect Korerima either for household consumption or sale, and are involved in game hunting. Honey production provides a major contribution to their livelihoods. The medium and rich households own not only more land, but also more livestock to work those lands. In addition, honey production also forms an important livelihood activity.
14
Table 3.6: Wealth categories and involvement in economic activities in the Yigo Got
Economic Class Rich
10 %
Number beehives 150
Medium 49 %
120
31 %
100
Poor
Economical assets of Enset (hectare) Annual crops livestock (hectare) 0.25 3 2 oxen 1 horse 25 livestock 10 poultry 0.2 3 1 ox 1 horse 15 livestock 5 poultry 0 1.5 0
Cheri Got (Gadda Kebele, Masha Woreda) In this Got four wealth classes were distinguished, not only the rich, medium and poor, but also the very poor. The last category mostly comprises female headed households, disabled people, and people with hardly any agricultural assets. Additionally to small-scale farming these groups of people are involved in other activities. They migrate to other areas in search of labor work (e.g. as coffee pickers in the Tepi coffee plantation). They also involved in sale of forest products including bamboo (products) and beehives. The livelihood conditions of the other groups resemble those in Yigo Got. Table3.7: Wealth categories and involvement in economic activities in the Cheri Got
Economic Class
Rich
14%
Number beehives up to 100
Economic assets of Enset (hectare) Annual livestock crops (hectare) 0.375 4 2 oxen 1 horse 25 other livestock 3 milking cows 0.25 2 1 ox 2-3 other livestock milking cow
Medium 19%
up to 80
Poor
33%
Up to 60
?
0.125
Very poor
44%
10
0.0625
0.25
0.5 Ox, milking cows, and 1-2 other livestock few have 1 sheep, some poultry
15
Uti Got (Yokichichi Kebele, Anderacha Woreda) In the Uti Got, all wealth categories are engaged in rather similar livelihood activities, but the poor do not posses livestock for working agricultural lands. To complement their income they are often employed as labourers in the Gemadero coffee plantation. In some communities, the poor are engaged in collection and sometimes also cultivation of Korerima; however, in Uti Got the richer class is mostly involved in the cultivation of Korerima, mainly for household consumption.
Table3.8: Wealth categories and involvement in economic activities in the Uti Got
Economic Class Rich
34 %
Number beehives 60
Medium 24 %
40
42 %
20
Poor
Economic assets in Uti Got of Enset (hectare) Annual crops livestock (hectare) 0.25 3 2 oxen 1 horse 8 cattle 0.13 2 1 ox 0.5 horse 5 livestock 0.06 1 0
Yaga Got (Chegecha kebele, Anderacha Woreda) In the Yaga Got the poor households are engaged in the collection and sales of wild Korerima. The medium and the rich economic classes only collect Korerima occasionally, which they only use for household consumption. The rich also engage often in coffee cultivation as they have money to purchase coffee seedlings.
Table 3.9: Wealth categories and involvement in economic activities in the Yaga Got
Economic Class Rich
18 %
Number beehives 80
Medium 51 %
50
31 %
30
Poor
Economic assets in Yaga Got of Enset (hectare) Annual crops livestock (hectare) 0.5 1.5 2 oxen 2 horses 20 livestock 0.35 1 1 ox 1 horse 10 livestock 0.25 0.5 0.5 ox 3 livestock
16
Chetta Got (Anderacha kebele, Gesha woreda) In Chetta Got the poor people are often hired by rich people for beekeeping and other agricultural activities, for which they receive remuneration in kind or cash. Table 3.10: Wealth categories and involvement in economic activities in Chetta Got
Economic Class Rich
17 %
Medium 54 %
Poor
20 %
Number beehives 250
100
70
Economic assets in Chetta Got of Enset (hectare) Annual crops livestock (hectare) 0.5 5 2 oxen 3 horse 20 livestock 0.2 3 1ox 1 livestock 0
1
0
Noka Got (Wachitoyeri Kebele, Gesha Woreda) Around thirteen percent of the people in Noka Got belong to the very poor economic category. They are mostly involved in labour activities serving the rich class. These activities include assisting in honey production by carrying out activities such as the making beehives, hanging beehives in trees and collection of honey from hives hanging in trees. As remuneration for their work they get a share of the produced honey. The medium class is self-sufficient; they produce crops, keep livestock and produce honey. Around fifty percent of the people in Noka Got belong to this category. Around ten percent of the people formed the rich elite. They are selfsufficient in food all year around. They support the poor class by hiring them and by borrowing them money which can be paid back in any kind. Rich people are involved in crop production, livestock and honey production. They have good knowledge about crop production and about storing and selling honey. A constraint for the poor in all the Kebeles is that they cannot store honey to wait for good market prices. They take the harvest directly to the local market, where rich people may buy it for subsequent sale to town traders when prices are right. The role of women in NTFP production, processing and marketing In all Gots women play a very active role in the production, processing and marketing of different NTFP sources. In the production of honey it was pointed out that this activity is hardly possible without women's active involvement. They make ropes that are used for hanging up the beehives and are involved in the preparation of food which their husbands use to
17
receive cooperation from the other Got members (defo and kocho). During the harvesting of honey, especially the 'menjo' women used to assist their husband. In the majority of the cases men are involved in marketing of honey produces; though some women of 'Menjo' Got accompany their husbands in marketing. The other women are sometimes allowed to sell up to 5kg of honey. In return they buy goods for household consumption. The financial management, budgeting and use of the finance can be done jointly with women's active involvement. They require the information on the amount sold and the revenue (sale) of the honey. In the case of coffee, most of the production activities are handled by men, but in harvesting and marketing women also do play an important role. If the volume of production is relatively large, men are responsible for marketing, whereas if the production is low, women are supposed to sell it. Both gender groups help with the collection of Korerima but the women do the marketing part. The fact that women are involved in the marketing of Korerima is a potential for the domestication of this product around homesteads. Both gender groups, with the men group doing the majority of it, collect fuel wood. The women arrange also for this product the marketing. 3.5 Local institutional arrangements for forest management Brief history Under the former imperial ‘Haile Sellassie’ regime the forest areas were owned by landlords. Each landlord divided the land under his ownership to different ‘Gashas’. Under each ‘Gasha’ leader, there were tenants who made use of the forest resources and paid a tax for the use of their area. The Gasha leaders defined the size and the boundaries of the land for the tenant, and such an area is called a ‘Kobbo’ system, which is often 40 ha’s. Gasha leaders resolved the conflicts between the people who used the forest resources. Newcomers who want to own a ‘Kobbo’ system can only be male blood relatives of the owner and he had to be presented to the Gasha leader. Landowners were powerful in these times. They were the rich people able to pay the taxes for the use of the land; also they always had the right what they want to do with it. Beside their own activities, tenants were expected to serve landowners in other activities (making fences, looking after livestock, etc.). During the ‘Derge’ regime landlordism is abolished, and the ‘Kobbo’ system started to breakdown in the Kebeles. Where the ‘Kobbo’ system still prevailed, the owner had to pay a tax to the government. In some kebeles, the access to the forest resources started to open towards all the people, but the trees (especially those apt for beekeeping purposes) were still individually owned with exclusive use rights. The ownership can only be passed via blood relatives, similar to the traditional ‘Kobbo’ system.
18
Current institutional arrangements In the Uwa, Beto, Yokichichi and Anderacha Kebeles the traditional ‘Kobbo’ system still prevails. In the studied Gots, only in the Yigo, Mechisa Gots and in the Cheti subGot of Gadda the ‘Kobbo’ system is still in use. In the studied Uti Got this system is not practiced because this Got is not indigenous. This Got mentioned that the ‘Kobbo’ system only works out when Got is small size on one hand and resources are abundant on the other hand so that it less likely conflicts will occur over the resources. In the Yokichichi and Anderacha Kebeles, the ‘Kobbo’ system is accessible for Got members to place beehives; the owner can place beehives himself (or cut trees for making beehives) but can also rent a tree and share the produce. The latter arrangement, also called sharing arrangement, is in order to give the poor Got members who don’t have their own tree the possibility to produce honey. In Anderacha, the members can also sell their ‘Kobbo’ to non blood relatives. In all the ‘Kobbo’ systems other NTFPs are freely accessible for the Got members of the Kebeles. In both the Kebeles members from other Kebeles do not have access to the forest resources. In the Uwa and Beto Kebeles, there is no exclusive right but customary right (open access) to collect forest coffee, Korerima, ‘timiz’ and climbers. The Gots in neighboring Kebeles can also have access rights in collecting these products for household consumption and/or sale. Got members only have the right to hang beehives if they are inherited within the Kobbo system. In the Chegecha Kebele there is no ‘Kobbo’ system anymore. The members of this Kebele have equal access rights to forest resources, but there is an exception for the use of the coffee plants. The coffee plants are owned by the first person who uses the plant, and from that time onwards the plant belongs to him. Making use of the plant is defined when a person plants coffee or makes some weed clearing around the plant. The roles of various institutions in forest management At present various institutions are involved in forest management. Table 3.10 summarizes the tasks of the various institutions; this table presents the institutions in order of importance concerning the forest management Table 3.10: Institutions and their role in forest management
Institution
Role with respect to natural resources /NTFP resources management Woreda Rural Development Providing natural resources conservation education to Coordination Office (RDCO) the rural Gots. Takes the initiative to establish task force on natural resource conservation. In case there is no ‘Kobbo’ system anymore, the RDCO has to give approval if someone wants to convert forest land into farmland
19
Kebele administration office
Implements the natural resources conservation acts, directives, proclamation, etc. They cooperate with the Kebeles in resolving serious conflicts. Resolves disputes in user rights in the Kebele through arbitration. The only current conflict mentioned is the border conflict between Chegecha Kebele with Goja Kebele in the west about the location of the border. In case there is no ‘Kobbo’ system anymore, Forest and NTFPs management responsibility fall under the Kebele administration and the respective Got using the resources. Natural resources conservation Resolves use right disputes in the respective 'Gots' committee of the respective 'Gots' through arbitration. Monitors natural resources conservation. They cooperate with the RDCO and the Kebele administration. In case there are serious conflicts they will be resolved by the Kebele administration. Commanders and guards Monitor illegal harvest and timber smuggling In Gesha Woreda, no commanders and guards were identified by the Got members Clan and religious leaders In collaboration with the Kebele administration the clanleader does arbitration work on use right disputes. Religious leaders come together at the Ider (god meeting place) To investigate misuse of the forest and any act of theft. Also there both Christian and Muslim religious organization who teach their followers to behave well, speak the truth, and be loyal to governmental organizations. Woreda Administration office Provide policy directives on the natural resources conservation. Woreda police office They capture those illegal harvesters upon reporting from the concerned authorities They also sue charge against illegal harvesters Justice It carries jurisdiction activities in cases of charge against illegal resource harvesters, smugglers Other relevant institutions In the Uwa and Beto Kebeles, Neighboring Kebeles or institutions cooperate in suing charge against illegal harvesters and smugglers coming from their Kebeles. Also schools and churches play a role in the providing of seeds to plant trees and to give advise about the forest use Access right and management responsibilities in the Gadda Kebele
As mentioned earlier, in Gadda Kebele bamboo forms an important forest resource. Regarding this resource several specific arrangements for exploitation and management are present. Each member of the Kebele has access right to cut down
20
bamboo for own use, but not for sale. Only government offices have the rights to sell bamboo. Got members from outside Gadda Kebele who don't have their own bamboo such as Kewo Kebele, Kefa zone also use bamboo from this Kebele. Woreda administration and Woreda Rural Development Offices discuss together to approve sale of bamboo after which the Woreda Rural Development Office issues buying permits for the buyers. Buyers are usually government institutions from other regions, private investors and UNHCR. According to the informants the bamboo forest is getting over-exploited because of illegal cutting. These illegal cutting practices are increasing because the decrease in the bamboo market prices. People use their cutting permits to cut the bamboo forest more then they are entitled to. These permits are granted by the Rural Development Office. The Kebele administration is responsible for the control of the access rights, but they are corrupted by bribes from the cutters. According to the informants there are there are no strict and enforced measures taken so far. 3.6 Potentials and constraints for NTFP development Geographic variation Due to geographic location between the various project areas some variation in the potential for NTFP development occurs. In Yokichichi and Beto Kebele, the availability of relatively dense forest in both Kebeles and the extensive knowledge of the forest-dwelling people in NTFP extraction are potentials for NTFP development. One of the bottlenecks for increasing dismal importance of NTFPs to forest-based livelihoods in the area is the remoteness of the areas with primary forest where NTFPs are found in relative abundance with respect to varying distance to markets and related transport costs. It was mentioned the livelihood of Yokichichi Kebele started to change with the coming of the Gemadero Coffee Plantation Pvt. LTD. This plantation gave the livelihood a positive impact in terms of promoting the importance of coffee plantation in the livelihood of the people in the neighbouring Kebele. Some participants in the Uti Got have noted that this farm has become source of employment opportunity for the local poor people to complement their household income. As a result of which these people have started to change their life style. But there are also people who lost their kobbo holding due to expansion of Gemadero Coffee Plantation farm, and there is fear that other private entrepreneurs will further expand to the remaining forest areas. In the Anderacha and Wachito Kebeles the forest resources are diminishing and under continuous threat. This is caused by the expansion of agricultural land and settlers (this is intra-settlement activity carried out by the Kebele for youngsters without landholding) and the increasing number of young people engaged in lumber processing. Also there are pressures from the outside. In the neighboring Kebele the wood has finished and they are interested in the remaining forest resources of these Kebeles. In relation with the forest resources it was mentioned that other livelihood sources of the Got need to be given more importance. Because the danger in the livelihood can directly or indirectly bring pressure on forest resources which will ultimately hamper the forest resources/ NTFPs in a vicious circle manner.
21
In Chegecha, the less disturbed and wide coverage of forest resource in the Kebele on one hand and the interest of the Got to maintain the current status of forest resource is good opportunity for the project to intervene in this area. The Got has already started NTFP development particularly honey and coffee. There is also good potential for the development of other NTFPs like spices (Korerima and timiz, piper capense) and palm.
Potentials and constraints for specific NTFPs Honey Honey is the most important NTFP product in the region, and also has the most potential for production improvements. In the Anderacha Kebele, beehives are mainly found on the homesteads, but the honey production is not yet commercialised. The members would like to place more beehives in the forest to improve production. In Yokichichi, increased competition in beehive hanging resulted in a decrease in the production of the honey. Also it was mentioned that the number of bees in the area was decreasing, and that the introduction of new type of beehives was unsuccessful. In this Kebele, the people started to use bamboo for bee hive making, and according the interviews, the bees will not enter in these types of beehives. In Wachito Yeri the inhabitants plant also trees on their homesteads for hanging up the beehives, but the domestication of bees is difficult because of ant attacks. Furthermore, the people mentioned that an improved way of honey production can relief people from dangerous activities like tree climbing. In general the potentials and the constraints for honey production are as follows: Potentials - A Lot of people engaged in honey production - Often open access to the forests to hang beehives Constraints - Ant attacks - Beehives are regularly a target for wild animals - Dangerous activity (involves tree climbing, possible accidents) - The development workers gave little attention for this activity Forest Coffee, Korerima, and other spices Except for the Anderacha Kebele, where the coffee is mainly found on the homesteads, all the Kebeles have plenty of coffee in the forest areas (which is often introduced from the lower areas). The major constraint for the use of this coffee is the frequent diseases resulting in low production (because the area actually too high for coffee production) The main constraint for the production of Korerima in the forests is that the harvests are frequently eaten by baboons. Therefore this product can better be produced on the homesteads. Although spices especially timiz and also korerima can be found everywhere in the forests, it is not commercialized yet, or at a very small scale.
22
Forest management arrangements In order to improve the livelihoods of the rural poor by development of NTFP production the focus should be on the sustainable use and management of the remaining forest and its resources. At present, different management strategies are implemented and are controlled by various institutions. The existing traditional forest management systems (kobbo-system) vis-à-vis the current forest protection laws has to be carefully explored in order to design a well thought and acceptable forest management strategy. One Got mentioned that the ‘Kobbo’ system only works out when a Got is small sized on one hand and resources are abundant on the other hand so that it is less likely that conflicts will occur concerning the resources. In some Gots the open access system is prevailed. This is a subject of concern; especially Korerima, forest coffee and climbers are sometimes harvested in an unsustainable way. Important to mention is the fact that women groups do often have a vital role in the production, marketing and control over NTFPs. Therefore it is important to involve them in further participatory forest management planning. Possible threats for the forests in Gadda Kebele are the coming of an interior and lumber processing by unknown people. Destruction of the forest has been intensified since opening up of the new Masha-Diri road. People from other areas load lumber and tree fern on Lories and take it away. Currently the forest only seems healthy from far away, but is highly degraded within. Participants said: "we can't easily get tree fern for our own use as before; it is not even regenerating properly as before". Trade & marketing The trade in NTFPs is often hindered by marketing problems, such as lack of information on potential markets and marketing channels, the fragmented nature of NTFP markets, the lack of sufficient volume due to the perishable nature of many NTFPs, and the unpredictability of production cycles result in irregular supplies. Beside this, good markets are often far away which makes the Got members sell their products on nearby markets for lower prices. The poor infrastructure and high transportation costs often hinder successful marketing. Many locations are not accessible by vehicle or motorcycle (like Chegecha and Wachito Kebele) and some villages are even hard to reach by foot, especially during the rainy season when many big rivers can not be crossed. Yaga Got for instance is located far away from the main road; it takes about 2.30 – 3.00 hours walking. On the other hand, when improving the infrastructure the risk of unsustainable timber felling operations and other interventions in the forest area will get higher. Furthermore, improved accessibility of this area to external markets will tend to make the forest-based livelihood in the area to disappear. The patterns of use and relative importance of NTFPs differ among the various economic groups or households and within households by gender. The role of income from honey production, collecting Korerima and wild coffee is particularly important for poorer households of the Got. A major difference with regard to honey is the
23
aptitude to keep/store the produce until its price improves in town. The poor class can not wait even for a while and takes the harvest directly to the market while the rich tend to buy extra honey from others (the poor) to store it until its price in town improves well. In this way the rich can be seen as the local traders who profit the most from honey production. In Mechisa, the rich are the ones highly engaged in honey production, while the poor class is benefiting a lot by collecting wild coffee and Korerima. But in Uti Got it is the class with a better living standard which extensively practices the Korerima domestication. Poorer households have seldom access to skills as knowledge and capital to be able to benefit from the growing market opportunities of NTFPs. As a result control over these opportunities and over the resources are usually enjoyed by the better living standard group and most powerful town traders at the expense of poorer households within the Got.
24
4. Description of project areas in Bench-Maji zone 4.1 Introduction This chapter concerns the two Woredas Sheko and Bench located in Bench-Maji zone (fig. 2.1). The Bench-Maji zone lies on average lower than the Sheka and Kefa zones described in Chapteer 3. The altitude ranges from 800 m on the lowest parts of Kontir-Berhan protected forest, up till around 1400 m; the highest location of 1800 m is located in Shayita Kebele. Information on the demographic conditions in the selected project areas is summarized in table 4.1. Table 4.1: Demographic information of Woredas, Kebeles and Gots.
Woreda Sheko
Kebele Shimi
Ha 2318
Population 1032
Bench
Shayita Janchuta Fanika
2353 ? ?
1026 2958 2171
# Gots Got 8 Mehal-Shimi Mejengar Gots 3 Weruka 11 Bayibesinta 7 Zanika (Menets)
4.2 Resource base All Woredas are located in the same agro-ecological zone Weyna Dega. The authentic vegetation was tropical lowland forest with the natural occurrence of wild coffee. The original inhabitants were Sheko, Mejengar and Menet ethnic groups who could be characterized as pastoralists and hunters-gatherers. Later on there was an increase in agricultural people due to immigration, which caused a greater ethnic diversity and a higher population pressure. Many forest areas have been lost recently. This was mainly due to the higher population pressure and expansion of the agricultural area, but also due to the extension of commercial coffee plantations by the government and investors. The remaining natural forest is highly disturbed and is threatened by illegal timber and charcoal production, forest fires during honey harvesting especially in areas where there is undergrowth of bush grass, and overexploitation of some forest products like lianas. According to the indigenous people the quality of honey production is decreasing due to the forest degradation. Settlers from northern Ethiopia, who are less involved in honey production, disagree with this relation and blame the decrease in honey quality on changing weather conditions. The deforestation and degradation of the forest and the loss of almost all wild animals changed the way of living of especially the Mejengars. They used to be hunters-
25
gatherers, but now they have started to eat meat sold in towns instead of depending on bush meat, and they started to slash parts of the forest for agriculture. Within the region, still important variations in the resource base exist. In the following the situation in each project will be described separately. The areas can roughly be subdivided into three stages of forest degradation with stage one being relatively undisturbed and stage three highly disturbed: • •
•
Natural forest: Relatively undisturbed forest with unmanaged natural coffee (only small part) and the production of honey. Coffee forest: The original lowland high forest is currently heavily intervened and more or less intensively managed for (wild) coffee production. This can extend from taking away undergrowth and some trees until only leaving some shade trees. In terms of economic activities, both local and immigrant Gots are involved in coffee production, whereas other Gots are specialized in honey production (Majengir, Menets). Agro forestry area: The forests in these areas have been cleared and land has now been mostly converted for agricultural production. However, the agriculture in this area takes place in a forested landscape with high incidence of (local and introduced) trees in different agroforestry systems, both in home gardens and farmlands. Domesticated NTFP-production takes place in this area, especially of coffee.
The forests in Shimi Kebele are characterized by stage one, natural forest; Shayita Kebele has a large amount of both coffee forests and agro forestry areas, whereas Janchuta and Fanika Kebele are mainly characterized by the high amount of agro forestry. Shimi Kebele (Sheko Woreda) Of the four Kebeles only in Shimi Kebele natural dense forest still forms a large share of the land cover (over 50%). This area, sometimes named honey forest, is very important for beehive hanging, for honey production by the Mejengars (The Mejengars is a group of people active in honey production. They used to be huntersgatherers.). It is located in the north and south western part of the Kebele (from Beko River to Gacheb River) and constitutes part of the area designated as Kontir-Berhan Biodiversity Conservation Project. It is known for its rich biodiversity, particularly of forest coffee and many tree species. Investors have cleared other parts in recent years. The Mejengars are afraid that the Tyre Tree Plantation Project on the other side of Gacheb River may extend its area into their area as well. Coffee exists naturally in the entire Kebele, but is managed intensively only on the coffee lands (managed forest coffee and planted coffee), which cover about 14% of the area. On the coffee land, which is mainly located around Mehal Shimi, only taller trees and shade trees are left. Settlement areas and the communal grazing lands for the few cows and oxen occupy the remainder of the Kebele. Other NTFPs that exist include Korerima, Ginger, wild (hot) pepper, Timiz and different fruits of trees. Only korerima and timiz are local species; the others introduced long ago and now grow with natural regeneration.
26
Shayita Kebele (Sheko Woreda) In Shayita Kebele there is hardly any undisturbed natural forest left. The main land uses of the Kebele are grazing land, agricultural land, coffee forest and settlement areas. The latter, settlement areas, are on gentle to steep slopes and are surrounded by homesteads with sometimes small farmlands. Homesteads have perennial crops like tubers, fruit trees, banana, eucalyptus woodlot, liana called Kechi, coffee, enset, and spices like Korerima. The areas next to the settlements are used both for agricultural lands and for grazing lands which belong to individual farmers. This area has steep slopes and is susceptible for soil erosion. There used to be forest but this has been cleared for agricultural use. Only some big remnant trees and secondary vegetations are found mainly in the gorge areas. The commonly used crops are millet and corn. Furthermore, the fields are often full of weedy herbs which consumes much of the farmers time during land preparation. Next to the agricultural fields the coffee forest starts. This is located in the gorge of Gacheb River with rocky and steep slope in the upper part and a more or less flat area near the river-mouth. The coffee forest is a mixed forest of evergreen and deciduous trees, has a good canopy cover, and well managed coffee in the lower stratum. But because of clearance for coffee tending operations, only a small number of saplings and seedlings are left. Wild animals also do not feel comfortable to stay in a forest planted with coffee underneath. Yet, 'coffee forests' are more environment friendly than the complete conversion of forests to farmlands and settlements. Beside coffee, this forest is also the main place for hanging up traditional beehives, collection of liana for construction, and collection of spices like Korerima. (Semi) forest coffee is the most important NTFP to be found. Three areas of coffee forest are distinguished by the Got; Shayita coffee forest, Kertiqa coffee forest and Weruqa coffee forest. Janchuta and Fanika Kebele(Bench Woreda) The two Kebeles (Janchuta and Fanika) studied in this Woreda look quite similar. They both have almost no natural forest left, however there is a state protected forest which is not accessible for the Kebele members and it is mostly meant for forestry research activities. This forest is found at the south-eastern edge of Fanika Kebele. In Fanika Kebele there is also a small communal protected natural forest area. This is the area they described as forest (forest with trees) where they do the majority of ‘bee keeping’. This is relatively less disturbed and is used by all members of the Kebele for hanging up beehives but with Dembi, Zanika, and Yamuka Gots having relatively more access right due to closer distance to the resource. In Janchuta there is no undisturbed forest and the very small area of natural forest that is left (on the steep escarpment and gorge area along the northern periphery) is highly disturbed. It is dominated by open scattered trees intermingled with bush grass in some places and cultivation of annual crops or perennial crops in other parts. This area is used for hanging up of beehives, coffee production, and collection of spices
27
(Korerima and piper capense) liana, tree fern, palm, firewood, farm implements, construction materials and medicinal plants. The vegetation cover near the settlements is characterized by homestead agroforestry. In these agro forestry systems many domesticated (exotic) fruit trees (mainly mango, papaya, orange, and avocado), coffee, and exotic species (eucalyptus tree) are grown with some scattered trees for shade in between. The scattered shade trees around the homesteads are also widely used for hanging up of beehives. New coffee varieties are also widely grown around homestead, which are intensively managed. The fallow lands are located everywhere adjacent to the villages, which are life fenced. The villages are located around or near by these grazing lands. Of the two Gots studied within Fanika Kebele, the Zanika Got is located nearby Yamuka forest and is more involved in honey production. Managed forest coffee has also significant coverage and agro forestry practice is the very recent development in this Got. The Bayibesinta Got on the other hand is known for its typical agro-forestry practices, mixed fruit trees and forest trees mainly for coffee shade. 4.3 Livelihood strategies NTFP and crop resources and their contribution to livelihoods Within the region people primarily depend on crop production and livestock keeping for their livelihoods with NTFP supplementing the primary resources. Table 4.2 and Figure 4.1 give an overview of the different crops and NTFPs and their contribution to local livelihoods. In contrast to the Sheka and Kefa zones, coffee is mostly produced in plantation systems rather than collected as wild forest coffee. Table 4.2: Resources and their relative contribution to local livelihoods in the different kebeles (%).
Livelihood resource Enset (false banana) Livestock production Honey production Vegetables Lianas, climbers Pulse crops (beans and peas) Haricot bean Coffee Forest godere Mushrooms Pepper Chat Luya Lemon Construction material Timiz Taro Kichi Banana
Relative importance of different resources (%) Shimi Shayita Janchuta Fanika 0 12 9 14 0 14 12 14 17 5 4 5 0 6 5 2 14 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33 23 22 9 5 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 3 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 10 10 20 0 7 0 0 0 5 0 0
28
Sorghum Dekena Korerima Fruits from trees Small business Labour work Maize Total
0 4 5 8 0 0 0 100
0 0 0 5 0 0 0 100
10 0 0 8 2 2 13 100
8 0 0 8 0 0 18 100
Relative contribution of livelihood sources within the different kebeles 100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0% Shimi
Shayita
Janchuta
Fanika
maize Labour work Small business Fruits from trees korerima dekena Sorghum Banana Kichi Taro Timiz Construction material Lemon luya Chat Peper Mushrooms Forest godere Coffee Haricot bean Pulse crops (beans and peas) Lianas, climbers Vegetables Honey production Livestock production Enset (flase banana)
Figure 4.1: Relative importance of different resources in the different kebeles
Marketing of NTFPs In the Bench-Maji zone both coffee and honey are regularly marketed. The marketing conditions for these two products differ. Coffee marketing takes place along government-set marketing channels, with clearly identified regulations for trading arrangements at various administrative levels. Honey marketing is not government controlled. It is mostly locally sold. The local marketing places for honey are in Shimi, Gizmeret, Sheko and Mizan. There are two levels of trade: from the producer to the trader and from the trader to the shop or other 29
markets. There are about 20 honey traders in the area, all men for whom honey trade is mostly a supplementary activity. Many of them own a tej (honey beer) house and keep part of the sold honey for preparing tej. Each trader may buy up to 100 containers (70 – 100 kg) of honey each season. Due to its relative small-scale, for honey traders there is usually no problem in getting start capital. The type of storage they use and the length of storage time is considered not to affect the honey quality. More constraining factors are the limited supply, seasonal fluctuation in supply and the sometimes low quality of the honey. The price producers get is negotiated between the producer and local traders. If the traders at Shimi are unwilling to pay this price, the producer may decide to take his produce to Gizmeret or Sheko, depending on his own situation. For traders the basis for fixing the price is said to be the information from the nearby areas (Tepi, Meti, Sheko and Mizan). There is no variation in price per kilo among shops in Shimi or Gizmeret. Some people have tried to sell honey to Addis Ababa (Mercato) but the traders in Addis offer very low price as compared to the price at the origin. The traders in Addis Ababa are said to consider the quality of the forest honey is inferior to that of honey from the northern part of the country. The honey from forest areas are considered less viscous and variable in taste. The reason for the better quality of honey from the north is said to be due to the fact that honey from the north is made from flowers of cereals and other crops, not from tree flowers.
4.4 Socio-economic stratification. Within the region variation in socio-economic status of different people exist. In the following the nature of the socio-economic stratification in the various project Kebele’s will be characterized as well as its impact on the role of NTFPs in local livelihoods. Shimi Kebele In Shimi we have to do with Gots living in different parts of the Kebele, who have different livelihood strategies and therefore a sometimes conflicting interest on the forest resources. On the one hand, there are the Mejengars, one of the indigenous Gots in Shimi. They mainly depend on honey production for their living. Though the major source of their livelihood is honey production, they also practice very limited crop farming. They use minimum tillage where women prepare holes with wooden hoes for planting maize. The produce from the small plots they own is not enough for the family to feed all the year round. The women also do pottery for sale to supplement the household income. The Got living in and around Mehal Shimi is a mixture of more than 4 ethnic groups with Amharas and the Shekos significant in number. The majority of the farmers in this village are coffee farmers. In addition to coffee farming, most of them are engaged in honey and coffee trading. The small bars where tej and other local drinks are sold also belong to these groups. In the Wealth Ranking exercise the size of coffee land a person holds was identified as the major criterion for ranking. Other sources of livelihoods such as coffee and honey trading were not seriously taken in to account. The ranking also indicated that there are groups living in Mehal Shimi (about 15% of
30
the total population) who do not posses either beehives or coffee land but work for coffee landholders for their living. Shayita Kebele The Gots identified around 12 items on which their livelihood is based among which four are NTFP, they are obtained from the forest and or homestead. Coffee is the most important source of income. Coffee, honey and liana together contribute to 30 percent of the livelihood of the Kebele Got. There is no specialization or particular group engaged in certain NTFP related economic activity. Size of coffee holding in the forest is one of the important criteria for categorizing Got members into the three economic classes. Besides the size of the holding, ability/motivation to properly manage the coffee holdings in the forest is an important factor. The coffee plants in the forest requires regular tending operations such as cutting climbing plants, clearing woody as well as herbaceous plants, regulating shade by removing some big trees in the canopy layer, and sometimes hoeing. Therefore some households possessing larger coffee lands in the forest can harvest less in the end of the day, because they cannot do all the work. Sharecropping arrangements take place between people from different economic classes. Though honey production has been practiced in the area since old times, involvement of the people at present is very minimal. Even though the area seems to have higher potential for honey production pertaining to the fact that beehive hanging can be combined with the forest coffee holdings where there are a number of flowering trees for bee foraging. But, people are discouraged in maintaining this practice because not many people are able to climb trees at present on the one hand and obtaining material (Cordia Africana wood) for beehive making is also becoming difficult nowadays, since it is prohibited to chop these trees. The role of women in coffee production is comparable to that in Shimi. Women also collect constituents used for 'chemo' preparation from the wild such as Korerima, chilly, ginger and coffee leaves. However, they are hardly collected for sale in the market. Women also engage in firewood collection for household use. Table 4.3: Wealth categories and involvement in economic activities in the Weruka Got
Economic Class Rich
15 %
Medium 60 % Poor
25 %
Number beehives
Economic assets of Coffee land Annual crops livestock (hectare) (hectare) 1 2 oxen 5 cows 0.5 0.5 1 cow 0.5
0.1
0
Janchuta Kebele Coffee (domesticated) covers the largest proportion of livelihood sources followed by Maize, Livestock, root crops; sorghum, enset and fruits all together account 63.1% of
31
livelihood meanness. Contribution of honey is insignificant proportion 3.3% and ranked 10th out of the 11 items. Coffee is used for domestic consumption but mainly produced for sale. It is regarded as a sustainable source of livelihood for the local Got regardless of fluctuating price, long maturation time, labour-intensive and back ward processing of the produce. Fanika Kebele According to the secondary data provided by the Kebele’s development agent, the major source of livelihood is derived from agriculture, mainly from taro production with a substantial share followed by corn production, coffee production, fruits, livestock production, honey production, sorghum, other root crops and spices. According to the results of the livelihood mapping of the local Got, NTFPs alone contribute only 17% to the farmers’ livelihood indicating that the Gots hardly rely on natural forest resources. The lion share is contributed by coffee (9%), while others contributing only 8% altogether. This indicates that those NTFPs other than coffee are not being given considerable importance. However, it should be noted that, other livelihood sources of the Got need to be given due consideration as the constraints identified in these livelihood means can directly or indirectly bring about a pressure on forest resources which will ultimately hamper the efforts on NTFPs in a vicious circle manner. With regard to the NTFPs production, processing and marketing, there is no single specialization being practiced by the farmers. However, there are some NTFPs that can be collected largely by some Got subgroups. For instance, the Menites are characterized by having long period of attachments and experiences to using honey production as livelihood sources and collecting black pepper for sale than any other Got subgroups. They form the majority of the studied Zanika Got, living close to the Yamuka forest. Land holding size is small and the economic status of the Got is low. Size of coffee farm and number of traditional beehives are among the indicators to explain economic status of an individual in Zanika Got. As compared to other Gots, the proportion of poor class is large in Zanika Got. The survival strategy of poor classes is labour work. They are also the one who less benefited from NTFPs, firstly because they are resource lack groups and secondly because they spend much of their effort on labour work in order to sustain their life i.e., they have no time to put their maximum management effort on their own holdings. They are involved in collection of minor forest products either directly or through especial arrangement with resource owners. On the contrary, the rich classes are the ones who benefit more from NTFPs (coffee and honey) due to their better holding, proper management and appropriate marketing season. They are also the ones who started agro-forestry development (fruit trees). Women groups of the Got involved both in domestic and farm activities out side home. Even though it is not as such strong, they have also role in controlling income obtained from sale of NTFPs (coffee and honey). They also collect the wild hot pepper either to prepare for domestic use or for sale.
32
In the Bayibesinta Got the agro-forestry practice, which came into existence during the late Derg regime due to the decline in the supply side of forest resource, is very vital in the livelihood of the farmers that encompasses diversified strategies of mixed farming for subsistence and cash income earnings with the home garden forest planting which is relatively secured during the present regime. This has also benefited women group, which are the socially marginalized part of the rural Got, because they take hold of the management, marketing and control over revenue generated from sale of home garden fruits. As a matter of fact coffee trees found in the gardens are either forest coffee or semi managed forest coffee that has been transplanted, and hence are wild coffee tree variety. The patterns of use and relative importance of NTFPs differ among different economic groups or households and within households by gender. It was also found out that agro-forestry practice with home garden coffee plays an important role in the livelihood of this Got irrespective of the extent of their engagement and variation in the economic status of the Got. But the rich and relatively wealthier group of the Got indiscriminately enjoys the available market opportunities of coffee. Because they have several coping strategies to take the advantage emerged due to access to the skill, knowledge and capital to control the resource. Like in Zanika, poor households engage in off-farm wage labour, mainly in the Bebeka Coffee Estate farm. Share arrangements take place throughout the Kebele between people from different economic classes. The rich contribute land, seed and oxen, while the poor contribute land, seed and oxen, while the poor contribute labour and they finally share the produce. The poor also tend livestock for the rich in exchange for part of the products. Poor women are also often allowed to collect coffee beans from the ground if they share it with the owner. There are forest trees that are used for coffee shade and beehive placing. But the bees' attack during coffee weeding and harvesting makes it difficult to domesticate beehive placing in the home garden forest trees. Moreover, the Got is not skilled in beekeeping merely because they are scared of bee attack. Thus, the role of honey in the livelihood of this Got is very meagre. Table 4.4: Wealth categories and involvement in different economic activities in the Bayibesinta Got
Economic Class Rich
12 %
Medium 23 %
Poor
65 %
fruits 10 mango trees 10 orange trees 100 banana trees 4 mango trees 2 orange trees 20 banana trees 1 mango tree 6 banana trees
Economic assets Coffee land Annual crops livestock (hectare) (hectare) 15 5 6 oxen 15 other livestock 8
2
2 oxen 5 other livestock
1
0.5
0
33
Table 4.5: Wealth categories and involvement in different economic activities in the Zanika Got
Economic Class Rich
13 %
Medium 30 % Poor
57 %
Number beehives 70 30 6
Economic assets of Coffee land Annual crops livestock (hectare) (hectare) 5 2 2 oxen 4 other livestock 1.5 0.13 1 ox 0.1
0.1
0
The role of gender in NTFP production, processing and Marketing The role of women with regard to NTFPs does not differ much amongst the different Gots. Women contribute in the production, harvesting (processing) and marketing of NTFPs. A further elaboration of their roles: Coffee • They participate during slashing and in collecting the fruits. • Drying and cleaning the coffee produce (processing) is solely a women’s job. • The sale from the major produce is in the hands of the men. Women may sell the left over in the fields (on which men do not participate in gathering). • The Mehal Shimi say that the decision making process on the use of the money from the major produce depends on the relationship individual husband and wife have, it is not easy to generalize about that. The Mejengar say the decision on how to spend the income from coffee sale has never involved women. Honey • Normally only men do beehive construction, hanging and any other related management. Women, however, may assist the husband during hanging. • As for selling honey, only men sell and decide on the money. If there is enough production women may be allowed to sell the honey in small containers and do what ever she likes with the money. • Indigenous women seem to be less involved in production and processing of honey than women settlers are in the production and processing of coffee. Korerima and Ginger • Men collect Korerima and Ginger from the forest and women use it for household consumption. There is not enough to market. Hot (wild) pepper • Collected and used by women
34
4.5 Local institutional arrangements for forest management Brief history During the former imperial Haile Sellassie regime the forest resource was owned and managed by land lords, with tenants working for him or on their own plots in exchange for taxes. Except for shade trees of coffee and trees used for hive placing, there was free access right over other NTFPs. The Mejengar could fell trees if they got permission from the landlord in exchange for tax payments. When coffee starting to be commercialized, private or landlord owned plantations expanded at large scale. Most of the private coffee farm owners who purchased large plots of land exclusively for commercialized coffee farming also introduced new techniques of farming to the indigenous Got which includes production, management, harvesting, post harvest handing and processing as well as packaging. The landlords or private coffee farm owners used to employ daily laborers (indigenous Got and the immigrants). After nationalization of rural lands during the Derg, Kebele administration took over the management responsibility of forest resources. The displacement of immigrants who came for search of labor work in the privately owned coffee plantation during Haile Sellassie regime but were displaced when the farms were nationalized and displacement of surrounding dwellers due to expansion of the state owned coffee plantation, ultimately increased pressure on the remaining natural forests. In addition, the weak law enforcement on illegal uses of forest resource on one hand and accelerated population growth on the other hand further speed up the degradation of natural forest in the current regime. The high tendency towards crop production and coffee production, which demanded extensive area of forestland to come under cultivation, necessitated introducing an agro-forestry practice in the village. This was facilitated by the fact that there were farmers trained in different disciplines like animal husbandry, crop production and natural resources conservations.
Current institutional arrangements Except for individual trees used for hanging beehive and managed coffee land, every member of the Got has free access right to the forest areas and their resources. All the coffee lands are privately owned (most of them by settlers), and accessibility is restricted to the owners, who form the elite. In Janchuta there is hereditary ownership of the trees used for beehive hanging. The Mejengars are allowed to hang their beehives in coffee lands, though this requires consultation with the coffee owner. There is no any traditional local institution involved in forest and NTFPs management. In Shimi the dense ‘honey forest’ is located in relatively inaccessible parts of the Kebele and is mostly state owned. Access to the honey forest is free except in the Kontir-Birhan Project Areas (for Conservation in situ of Coffea arabica) where the project is given the mandate to bring those who illegally cultivate coffee or pit saw to the court. Though there are confusions about what is permitted and what is not by the Kontir-Berhan project, based on the information from site project manager
35
of this project, beehive hanging and collecting of the fruits of wild coffee and spices is permitted as long as this does not entail slashing or cultivation. These areas are usually accessed by the Mejengars. There is no restriction on the use of spices such as Korerima & Timiz.The Mejengar would like their rights to use the forest to be officially recognized by the Kontir-Berhan Project, since they depend on it for their livelihood and pay taxes to the government for the use. The roles of institutions in forest management In the table below the involved institutions and their roles are identified. They are presented in order of importance concerning the forest management. Table 4.6: Institutions and their role in forest management
Institution
Role with respect to natural resources /NTFP resources management Kebele − Implements the natural resources conservation acts, directives, administration proclamation, etc office − Resolves use right disputes in the Kebele through arbitration − It easily identifies those illegal harvesters and warns them against illegal act. If the offence is light, it punishes them with money or put them in jail for few days. If the offender fells big trees down, the case is sent to the police and Woreda Rural Development coordination Office. It does such controlling activities of forest destruction through its development units with in the Kebele administration council and they are assigned in every 'Nius' Kebele. Cadres with in the Kebele do play important role in this aspect. Woreda Rural − Providing natural resources conservation education to the Development rural Gots through DA who is available at their own disposal. Coordination − Takes the initiative to establish task force on natural resource Office conservation Woreda police and − It captures those illegal harvesters upon reporting from the justice office concerned Kebele administration for illegal action − It also sues charge against illegal harvesters Woreda − Provide policy directives on the natural resources Administration conservation, office − It handles issues beyond the control of the Kebele administration − It takes the initiative to command other government institutions related to forest management for proper functioning.
36
4.6 Potentials and constraints for NTFP development Geographic variation The opportunity to work on NTFP development in an area firstly depends upon their availability and the knowledge of local people how to use them. Shimi Kebele is the only project area in this Zone that still has an extensive undisturbed natural forest with abundant NTFP resources. Coffee lands have become the second most important land use. In Shayita a major part of the Kebele is covered by coffee forests: forests that are undergrown by coffee and where undergrowth and many trees are taken away. In Bench there is hardly any forest left and the land-use is mainly characterized by agro-forestry practices. The promotion of NTFPs use would be a good incentive in protection of the remaining forest. Potentials and constraints for specific NTFPs Honey Honey production is present throughout this whole Zone, but most important for only some minority groups: the Mejengars in Shimi Kebele and the Menets people of the Zanika Got in Fanika Kebele. These groups have in common that they live closer to the forest and have a low socio-economic status. Their longstanding tradition and knowledge of honey production forms an important opportunity. However the knowledge and skills remain exclusively with these groups and are lacked by others. Bee hives are not only installed in the forest, but also on the trees left in the coffee lands, mixed fruit gardens and around the homestead. Especially in Bench this may be expanded, to provide the poor with an extra source of income. However the bees will still have little flowers to suck from due to the small forest cover. Constraints to honey production include: • • • • • •
The smaller predictability of production compared to coffee The undeveloped market (done mostly by accident-not in an organized way compared to the more developed marketing of coffee), The need for tree climbing and beehive construction skills, which most youngsters are not interesting in learning about. Tree climbing can be hard and dangerous, especially for the old and the weak. the fact that it should be done in remote areas to ensure good production, which are getting scarce The big fluctuations in price. During the pick honey production time (April, June and July), for instance, it is between ETB3-5 per kg while this could rise up to ETB8-10 per kg during the dry season. The income from coffee seems much better than that from honey. The low perceived quality of the forest honey. Quality control would be tough, with so many people doing honey trading. The cutting of Cordia Africana trees, which are traditionally used to make beehives, is forbidden. Only in some areas this prohibition is fully enforced, causing problems for the local honey producing Gots in these areas.
37
There is the problem of ants that attack the bee
However the biggest constraint to forest honey is posed by the rapid decline in natural forest over the last decades. This is caused by increasing population pressure and expansion of big coffee plantations (esp. in Bench) and smaller plots of coffee land (Sheko) and the expansion of agricultural lands. In Shimi the major challenge is posed by the presence of different ethnic groups with different and maybe hostile livelihood strategies, because of there competing claims on the land. The honey producing Mejengars would like the coffee farmers to stop extending into the forest (as this affects their livelihood negatively). The settlers and the Shekos think that these groups do not use their land effectively as they do not want to cultivate unless forced. For this group development comes by ‘developing land’ as they call it, which means introducing coffee cultivation in side the dense forest. At least at present, honey could not compete with coffee whose expansion has caused the conversion of most honey land use to coffee land. As one of the elders from the Mejengars group put it ‘the future is coffee and not honey, we are loosing all our traditions, economic pressures are progressively eroding this; the Mejengars would like to see this reversed and the forest be used only for honey production not to be cleared for coffee farming’. Coffee Throughout this zone coffee occurs naturally and is the most important cash crop. In the Sheko Woreda we still find forest coffee and it may therefore offer the opportunity to market it as such. Also this coffee is managed/grown in the forest without any inputs (be it organic or chemicals). However this may change in the future. As discussed above, coffee land use type is in competition with forest/honey land use types. Since most coffee owners belong to the Amharas and the Sheko groups, who do not depend on the forest, this may lead to a further decline in forest cover. The forest coffee then turns into cultivated coffee and a forest coffee marketing initiative would then be history. Coffee as compared to other NTFPs is paying better in terms of labor and other input. Potentials and problems in Sheko’s coffee have been listed in this table:
Table 4.7 Potentials and problems with regard to coffee production
Potentials Problems Coffee • It exists naturally and plenty in forest • Unpredictable price (suitable agro ecology), well known • Development workers are not happy with the cash crop in the area. cultivation of coffee in forest. • No coffee disease • Unable to comply with the appropriate • No damage by wild animals processing method to maintain quality, for instance they could not get wire mesh and • Many suitable shade trees exist plastic materials to season the coffee beans • Not susceptible to post harvest pests as maize
38
In Bench, most of the coffee is grown in home gardens and on plantations. The additional constraints named in this Woreda were: • The 'payback period' for production of coffee is rather long (3-5 years) • The domesticated ones demand three to four times weeding per year, which is a laborious activity • Coffee Berry Disease may lead to decline in productivity in this area Spices (Timiz, Korerima, ginger and black pepper) In the forests of Sheko there is an abundant occurrence of spices such as Korerima and Timiz. Although in the case of Shimi, Timiz is named as a minor source of cash, it is also said that the demand for these products is very low (Timiz and Korerima for instance do not have demand locally). In Shayita it is reported that their use is not known very well and baboon also damage the Korerima. However, the project team recommends concentrating in further studies on investigating the feasibility of cultivating wild Korerima, pepper, timiz and ginger plants on-farm. If viable, appropriate technologies could be developed and the activity promoted among the Got. The growth nature of cardamom is invasive and it out competes smaller plants, hence it is better to initiate planting at home stead level instead of initiating production inside forest. Besides for sale these plants are very essential in the preparation of a local drink named chemo and, therefore, involvement of women can be considered in this regard. This may be a chance for women to ‘conquer’ a new domain; the production and sale of honey is mostly in the hands of the man (except for the production of tej which is a women business), and also coffee sale is in their hands. For Bench the same seems true: it is a minor source of cash; important for ‘chemo’ and the destroying by wild animals like baboons and monkeys form an obstacle. In Bench, it is more common to grow spices in the homestead. Forest management arrangements A potential is that in every Kebele local institutions – primarily the Woreda Rural Development Coordination Office and the Kebele administration office - are given the responsibility for forest management and protection and the power to punish illegal use of the resources. However, the control is often weak and especially in Janchuta illegal cutting and forest fire was reported. Furthermore, as we have seen the competing claims on the land are a major threat to the forest left and therefore to the use of NTFPs out of that forest. The expansion of coffee lands and plantations, big enterprises and agriculture (mainly for export) is given preference over the protection of the forest. This is not stopped, but even encouraged by the national authorities. The local institutions are impaired in the protection of the use rights of their Gots as they can be overruled by the national government who designates certain areas to big investors without local consent. Different laws are often in conflict with each other, like the laws on agricultural expansion (made by the national governments) and the by-laws on natural resource management made by the Kebeles. Thirdly, the open access system of NTFPs utilization especially in the cases of Korerima, unmanaged forest coffee and climbers is a subject of concern for sustainability issues.
39
In Shimi a potential can be the presence of Kontir-Birhan and the fact that that NTFPResearch and Development Project already works with the Got. Other constraints Further constraints related to production and marketing of NTFPS are: the lack of appropriate road networks, lack of information on potential markets and marketing channels and the lack of capital and knowledge to trade in NTFPs. Since poverty alleviation is the wider goal of this project, it is important to note that it is very often not the poor who benefit most from the NTFPs, although for them it is a very important source of livelihood. For instance, in Bench was stated that the main NTFPs, coffee and honey, are largely exploited by the rich and relatively wealthier household who have the control over most of the land and resources. Especially the NTFP trade is predominantly in the hands of the richer. Due to the lack of wellaccepted traditional institutional arrangements such as the Kobbo system for control over forest exploitation, the NTFP exploitation on the remaining forest lands, mostly by poor people, is often unsustainable. Therefore, further exploration is needed on how NTFP development can really support the poor.
40
5. Comparison between the two areas 5.1 Differentiation in project areas From the above descriptions it is clear, that the two project areas represent two different stages in forest conditions and NTFP use. An important part (about 60%) of the project area in the Sheka and Kefa zones is still covered by natural forests, whereas in the project area in the Bench-Maji zone the forest cover is only limited (around 15%) because many forests have been replaced by agroforestry systems and tree crop plantations. In the Sheka/Kefa zone honey is the most important NTFP and enset the major stable food crop (Table 5.1). In contrast, in the Bench-Maji zone coffee is more important than honey, an important portion of this production takes place in coffee forest and agroforestry system rather than that it is collected from wild forests. In view of the forest conditions as well as NTFP production status, the project area in the Sheka/Kefa zones can be characterized as still representing a truly forest environment, whereas the project area in the Bench-Maji zone represents an agroforestry zone. In the first zone, many NTFPs are still collected in the wild forests, whereas in the second zone many NTFPs are already (semi)domesticated and cultivated in forest replacement systems.
Table 5.1 Main resources and contribution to local livelihoods
Sheka & Kefa zones Average forest cover
Bench-Maji zone
About 60%
Less than 15%
Average contribution of forest products to livelihoods Honey Coffee
18% 6%
8% 22%
Average contribution of main food crops to livelihoods Maize Enset
7% 24%
8% 9%
Average contribution of livestock to livelihoods
17%
10%
41
The difference in land-use conditions is reflected in the local livelihood conditions. Overall people in the Sheka/Kefa project area are poorer than the people in the BenchMaji project area. Using local standards, within the first project areas 10%, 49% and 31% of the local people belong to the rich, median and poor categories respectively, while in the Bench-Maji project area these percentages are 15%, 60% and 25% respectively. As illustrated in Table 5.2 not only the overall economic standards are lower in the Sheka/Kefa area than in the Bench-Mai area, but also important differences in livelihood activities exist. In the Bench-Maji area the average size of croplands is much higher than in the Sheka/Kefa area, whereas in the Sheka/Kefa area the average number of beehives owned is much larger. A most beehives are located in forests, this illustrates how the people in the Sheka/Kefa area depend to a much large extent on forest than the people in the Bench-Maji area, who have more access to private farmlands. Table 5.2 Socio-economic stratification and economic assets in the two project areas
Average area of cropland per household Sheka/Kefa project area Rich people Medium income people Poor people Bench-Maji project area Rich people Medium income people Poor people
Average number of beehives per household
3.1 ha 2.2 ha 0.8 ha
100 65 50
9 ha 9 ha 0.7 ha
23 10 2
5.2 Potentials for stimulating NTFP use and management in the different areas Considering the differences in land-use and socio-economic conditions, the two project areas offer good examples of the various options for stimulating improved NTFP management as a contribution to poverty alleviation. Within the forested Sheka/Kefa zones there is still good scope for stimulating NTFP exploitation from the existing forests through the stimulation of community-based forest conservation and development of local arrangements for benefit-sharing of forest-based NTFP production. At present, the local arrangements for forest-based NTFP production are only focused on honey production, these could be further adapted into new arrangements for multiple NTFP-production. An important aspect to consider is the position of the traditional forest-dwelling tribal people whose livelihoods still mostly depend on forest product gathering, but who are not included in the present community arrangements on forest product sharing. Within the agroforestry zone of Bench-Maji good options exist for further stimulation of NTFP production in agroforestry production systems on private lands. Coffee offers an example par excellence of the options for gradual domestication of NTFP products; such options also offer potential for other NTFPs such as spices. In
42
stimulating increased cultivation, attention should be given to the preservation of the NTFP appeal of the products. This appeal can be highlighted by arranging certification of the production systems as being environmentally sustainable and socially responsible. In addition to stimulating improved production systems, also improved marketing systems are essential for increasing the role of NTFPs for poverty alleviation. In the forested Sheka/Kefa area the trading networks are still less developed than in the Bench-Maji areas, and thus offer good potential for stimulating improved NTFP trade, especially for honey.
43
Appendices Appendix 1 Overview of the NTFP resources in the Kebeles NTFP resources forest products Honey
Use •
Used as nutritional additive Used for house hold consumption and sales
• •
•
(Forest) Coffee
Palm
• • • • • • • • • • • •
Piper capense
• • •
Used for house hold consumption and sales The leaves in this area are boiled together with the spices to prepare the local drinking material, 'chemo' Use to make coffee Used for house construction and construction needs Used for earning cash Drinking water during hard times Used for tying beehives and livestock Used for house hold consumption as a spice Used for earning cash For own use Used for earning cash Used for consumption as energetic booster Used for earning cash Used for making of different hand craft, thatching particularly temporary tukuls constructed during honey harvesting, covering beehives to protect from rain and give warmth to the bees Serve as food (tender shoots) Used for earning cash Used to make spice mixed with other plant parts
Forest godere
•
Used for household consumption
Mushrooms
•
Use for household consumption
Korerima
•
Spices in tea
Dekeno
• • •
Good for cows with low milk production, Used as a spice for coffee Used as oils, good for new mitad (cooking plate)
• • • •
Used for household consumption Used for earning money Use as a spice Used for earning cash
Climbers
Korerima Liana Chat and Gesho
Luya Lemon Timiz,
44
Appendix 2 Overview of the homestead products in the Kebeles Resources homestead products Banana Sugarcane Enset
Use • • • • • •
Livestock production
• •
Pulse crops (beans and peas)
• • •
Teff
• • • •
Barely
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Vegetables
Haricot bean Taro Maize
Sorghum
sweet potato, kachi and harekote)
Produced for food both for home consumption Used to earn money Used for home consumption and as cash crop It is used for household consumption as staple food 3 times per The fiber is used for making ropes for hanging up beehives It is used for earning cash by selling its main byproduct (Amicho) Used for house hold consumption (milk, butter, meat) Used for earning cash by selling live animals or their hides and skins Used as sources of drought power and transport Used for earning cash Used for house hold consumption as sources of protein Used for house hold consumption Used for earning cash Used for making local drinking, 'tella' The straws are used for roof cover and construction purpose Used as for earning cash Used for fermentation purpose Used for house hold consumption Used for making local drinking, 'tella' Medicinal value Used for house hold consumption Used for earning cash Some of them (garlic) have medicinal values Used for earning cash Used for house hold consumption Used as staple food 3 times per day Used for earning Used for house hold consumption Used for earning cash Used for making local drinking, 'tella' Used for house hold consumption Used for earning cash Used for making local drinking, 'bordle' Used for house hold consumption
45
