Community Perceptions of Ecosystem Services and the Management of Mt. Marsabit Forest in Northern Kenya

Abstract

Identifying and characterizing ecosystem services (ES) has been shown to have an important role in sustainable natural resource management. However, understanding communities’ perspectives is critical in determining opportunities and constraints for ES management in multi-use landscapes. To do so, a study was conducted around Mt. Marsabit forest, a multiuse landscape in Kenya. Using stratification, participants from 11 administrative locations adjacent to the forest were selected. A total of 265 households were interviewed using semi-structured questionnaires. The study analyzed local communities’ perceptions of ES derived from the forest and their involvement in its management. Respondents identified trees, forage, water, fallback land cultivation, aesthetic enjoyment, and shade as key services derived from the forest. However, overexploitation of forest resources has led to degradation. Degradation and insecurity were perceived as the major threats to the ecosystem. The local communities were minimally involved in developing governance structures or management of this forest. Family size, education level, and age were important predictors of level of involvement in management. Lack of involvement in the forest management may have largely contributed to the unsustainable extraction of resources by local communities. We suggest that meaningful engagement of communities in the management of this forest will be critical to its sustainability.

Local perceptions and factors determining ecosystem services identification around two forest reserves in Northern Benin

“…Moreover, plant parts were used in traditional medicine. Therefore, the high level of provisioning service identification was justified by their direct implications on the physical, economic, and social well-being of the community [43]. Moreover, the level of poverty was an important factor in identifying provisioning services, confirming that the poorest people relied more on provisioning services from ecosystems for their daily subsistence.…”

“…Factors affecting people’s dependence on forests or their attitudes towards forest management or conservation have been examined extensively using both spatial and social variables. From a socio-economic viewpoint, a number of studies have revealed that educated people, as well as poor people, valued forest ecosystem services more, albeit sometimes in different ways [34, 43]. Demographic characteristics, family size, gender, and age have also been reported to influence the dependence of local communities on the forest and thus their perceptions of ecosystem services [43, 44].…”

“…From a socio-economic viewpoint, a number of studies have revealed that educated people, as well as poor people, valued forest ecosystem services more, albeit sometimes in different ways [34, 43]. Demographic characteristics, family size, gender, and age have also been reported to influence the dependence of local communities on the forest and thus their perceptions of ecosystem services [43, 44]. For example referring to age class, Moutouama et al [44] reported that adults and old people were more likely to perceive supporting services in Atacora Chain of Mountains in Benin than the young who are less involved in farming activities.…”

“…For example referring to age class, Moutouama et al [44] reported that adults and old people were more likely to perceive supporting services in Atacora Chain of Mountains in Benin than the young who are less involved in farming activities. From a spatial or geographical location perspective, several studies have shown that a location can change the way a household depends on forest resources [43–46]. Kinzer [47] termed this the “spatial zone of influence.” This is often expressed as a distance in terms of a few kilometers between two rural households [43] to several kilometers between villages and towns [44].…”

“…From a spatial or geographical location perspective, several studies have shown that a location can change the way a household depends on forest resources [43–46]. Kinzer [47] termed this the “spatial zone of influence.” This is often expressed as a distance in terms of a few kilometers between two rural households [43] to several kilometers between villages and towns [44]. In any case, the influence was shown to decrease with increasing distance from the forest edge, and this decrease was not linear [45].…”