Evidence Platform
Influence of forest management systems on natural resource use and provision of ecosystem services in Tanzania
Strauch, A. M., et al., 2016. Journal of Environmental Management
Original research (primary data)View External Publication Link
Abstract
Social, religious and economic facets of rural livelihoods in Sub-Saharan Africa are heavily dependent on natural resources, but improper resource management, drought, and social instability frequently lead to their unsustainable exploitation. In rural Tanzania, natural resources are often governed locally by informal systems of traditional resource management (TRM), defined as cultural practices developed within the context of social and religious institutions over hundreds of years. However, following independence from colonial rule, centralized governments began to exercise jurisdictional control over natural resources. Following decades of mismanagement that resulted in lost ecosystem services, communities demanded change. To improve resource protection and participation in management among stakeholders, the Tanzanian government began to decentralize management programs in the early 2000s. We investigated these two differing management approaches (traditional and decentralized government) in Sonjo communities, to examine local perceptions of resource governance, management influences on forest use, and their consequences for forest and water resources. While 97% of households understood the regulations governing traditionally-managed forests, this was true for only 39% of households for government-managed forests, leading to differences in forest use. Traditional management practices resulted in improved forest condition and surface water quality. This research provides an essential case study demonstrating the importance of TRM in shaping decision frameworks for natural resource planning and management.
Case studies
Basic information
- Case ID: INT-093-2
- Intervention type: Management
- Intervention description:
decentralized forest management – community-based forest management scheme; reform policies that designated the co-management and joint ownership of forests between local communities and regional governments. decision-making power is shifted to lower levels of government closer to the people who are directly affected by management and more capable of adapting to changing local conditions and needs. Note however that it rarely materializes as such on the ground with power imbalances b/w central government and local communities remaining.
- Landscape/sea scape ecosystem management: Yes
-
Climate change impacts Effect of Nbs on CCI Effect measures Loss of other ecosystem goods Unclear results Forest structure measures: mean stem density weighted mean tree size basal area tree size class distribution size class relative abundances Reduced water quality Unclear results water quality using using both chemical and biological methods: Dissolved oxygen (DO), spe- cific conductivity (EC) and temperature Orthophosphate (PO 4 3), total ammonia and ammonium (NHT), and total nitrite and nitrate (NOx) Total coliforms and Escherichia coli bacteria - Approach implemented in the field: Yes
- Specific location:
Sonjo villages of Northern Tanzania; Sale Division of the Ngorongoro District, in northern Tanzania (2 100 S, 35 450 E). This district is located between the Rift Valley escarpment and the Serengeti Plains, divided by the Loliondo Game Controlled Area boundary (Fig. 1). Of the Sonjo villages in the area, we focused on Samunge, the largest village, Kisangiro, Yasimdito, and Sale.
- Country: United Republic of Tanzania
- Habitat/Biome type: Montane/Alpine | Streams, rivers, riparian |
- Issue specific term: Community-based (general)
Evidence
- Notes on intervention effectivness: both interventions were NbS and to code for both. Therefore there was no valid comparator or any baseline and so effectiveness could not be determined, labeled as unclear focus was comparison between NbS. Findings: traditional management -> better than decentralized forest management (regulated by govt) for forest condition and surface water quality
- Is the assessment original?: Yes
- Broadtype of intervention considered: Another NbS
- Compare effectivness?: No
- Compared to the non-NBS approach: Not applicable
- Report greenhouse gas mitigation?: No
- Impacts on GHG: Not applicable
- Assess outcomes of the intervention on natural ecosystems: No
- Impacts for the ecosystem: Not reported
- Ecosystem measures:
- Assess outcomes of the intervention on people: Yes
- Impacts for people: Positive
- People measures: qualitative statements of social benefits and contributions from forests: habitat for wildlife hunted for bushmeat, trees for household construction and fence maintenance, plants for medicinal use, and water for irrigation, consumption and hygiene
- Considers economic costs: No
- Economic appraisal conducted: No
- Economic appraisal described:
- Economic costs of alternative considered: No
- Compared to an alternative: Not reported
Evaluation methodology
- Type of data: Quantitative
- Is it experimental: No
- Experimental evalution done: Not applicable
- Non-experimental evalution done: Empirical case study
- Study is systematic:
Basic information
- Case ID: INT-093-1
- Intervention type: Combination
- Intervention description:
traditional management - forests governed by informal practices with oversight by traditional leaders (mwanamijie) with social and religious norms influencing resource use behaviors mwanamijie draw from an extensive knowledge base to govern traditional forests and their resources. The mwanamijie restrict access to and use of traditional forests in an effort to protect the vegetation and water resources through a system of taboos, social capital, fees, ceremonies and local policing. The TF are considered sacred and entrance is restricted by the mwanamijie to prevent physical, biological and spiritual contamination. Most households were both actively planting trees and consciously retaining or protecting trees, although the method of conservation varied by village
- Landscape/sea scape ecosystem management: Yes
-
Climate change impacts Effect of Nbs on CCI Effect measures Loss of other ecosystem goods Unclear results Forest structure measures: mean stem density weighted mean tree size basal area tree size class distribution size class relative abundances Reduced water quality Unclear results water quality using using both chemical and biological methods: Dissolved oxygen (DO), spe- cific conductivity (EC) and temperature Orthophosphate (PO 4 3), total ammonia and ammonium (NHT), and total nitrite and nitrate (NOx) Total coliforms and Escherichia coli bacteria - Approach implemented in the field: Yes
- Specific location:
Sonjo villages of Northern Tanzania; Sale Division of the Ngorongoro District, in northern Tanzania (2 100 S, 35 450 E). This district is located between the Rift Valley escarpment and the Serengeti Plains, divided by the Loliondo Game Controlled Area boundary (Fig. 1). Of the Sonjo villages in the area, we focused on Samunge, the largest village, Kisangiro, Yasimdito, and Sale.
- Country: United Republic of Tanzania
- Habitat/Biome type: Montane/Alpine | Streams, rivers, riparian |
- Issue specific term: Community-based (general)
Evidence
- Notes on intervention effectivness: both interventions were NbS and to code for both. Therefore there was no valid comparator or any baseline and so effectiveness could not be determined, labeled as unclear focus was comparison between NbS. Findings: traditional management -> better than decentralized forest management (regulated by govt) for forest condition and surface water quality
- Is the assessment original?: Yes
- Broadtype of intervention considered: Another NbS
- Compare effectivness?: No
- Compared to the non-NBS approach: Not applicable
- Report greenhouse gas mitigation?: No
- Impacts on GHG: Not applicable
- Assess outcomes of the intervention on natural ecosystems: Yes
- Impacts for the ecosystem: Positive
- Ecosystem measures: qualitative assessment that management protects wildlife habitat and protects the forest itself "the social and religious importance of TF provides both greater protection of trees as well as greater replanting of tree species"
- Assess outcomes of the intervention on people: Yes
- Impacts for people: Positive
- People measures: qualitative statements of social benefits and contributions from forests: habitat for wildlife hunted for bushmeat, trees for household construction and fence maintenance, plants for medicinal use, and water for irrigation, consumption and hygiene cultural service: forest played an important role in the social and religious customs
- Considers economic costs: No
- Economic appraisal conducted: No
- Economic appraisal described:
- Economic costs of alternative considered: No
- Compared to an alternative: Not reported
Evaluation methodology
- Type of data: Quantitative
- Is it experimental: No
- Experimental evalution done: Not applicable
- Non-experimental evalution done: Empirical case study
- Study is systematic: