| dc.description |
The study intended to evaluate community participation in Community Based Forest Management (CBFM), to assess the appropriateness of methodologies used in forest conservation, to assess the effects of community based forest management (CBFM) and to recommend strategies for improving community management of forest. A case study design was adopted and a total of 150 respondents including individual household were interviewed. Both probability and non probability sampling techniques were employed. Data were collected through interviews, questionnaires, observation and documentary reviews. The study revealed that despite all the efforts, processes, and legal procedures made to rescue/ restore the forest, the results of the study revealed beyond reasonable doubt that there have been many obstacles along the way or in the implementation of CBFM approach with respect to people‟s awareness and participation of the community based forest management (CBFM) projects. Each obstacle has had to be overcome. Community forest management is a process. Each year it changes, grows stronger and develops. Community forestry involves the exchange of ideas, techniques and knowledge. The communities must not be treated as ignorant; they have extensive knowledge and skills in forest management.
Based on the findings, the study recommends that, in order to improve the contribution of the forestry sector to community poverty reduction, the government, the private sector, and NGOs need to do more to promote corporate social responsibility and outline the benefits and responsibilities of investors and communities. There is need for fostering formal community-private sector partnerships. Community institutions should receive the resources and support so as to secure access to their 20 percent royalties so as to be in a position to negotiate and form lasting mutually beneficial partnerships, when there are long delays in getting communities incorporated a Bank accounts should be opened and the local government administration at the district level should hold the funds on behalf of the communities. |
|