Sunday, February 15, 2009

UNDERUTILIZATION OF FOREST IN TANZANIA

1.1 INTRODUCTION

In recent years, there has been a move in eastern and southern African countries from centralized and state-driven management of natural resources towards decentralised and people-centred based regimes. In Tanzania, the inception of the 1998 national forest policy has led to institutionalization of community-based forest management (CBFM) and joint forest management (JFM). This paper is going to discuss about the forest resources in Tanzania, how do Tanzanian value and manage the forest and bee keeping business and how is the forest mismanaged and underutilized.

The paper will be divided into four main parts: the theoretical literature review part which will include definition and explanation in general we can say it gives the historical back ground. The second part is the policy review part which will be identifying different policies and strategies which enhances the management of the forests in Tanzania. The empirical part will be the third part where the real situation of practices of the implementation of the policies will be discussed verifying the real situation of uses of forest products, and how does the forest mismanaged and underutilized.

2.1 THEORETICAL LITERATURE REVIEW
In March 2005, the Environment and Development Ministers of the G8 countries, the Europe Commissioners responsible for the environment and development, the EU Presidency, the United Nations, World Bank and IUCN passed the following resolution concerning the global eradication of illegal logging: ‘Eradicating illegal logging is an important step towards realizing the sustainable management of forests and sustainable development. We recognize the impacts that illegal logging, associated trade, and corruption have on environmental degradation, biodiversity loss, and deforestation and, hence, climatic systems. Moreover, illegal logging damages livelihoods in the poorest countries, causes losses of revenues to Governments, distorts markets and trade, and sustains conflicts. We agree to increase our support to producer countries in their efforts to eradicate illegal logging and associated trade by: combating corruption though enhanced transparency and access to information, particularly on the allocation of forest harvest rights and revenues; strengthening capacity to enforce forest, wildlife, and other relevant laws; engaging civil society and local communities in these actions….!

2.2 The physical environment in Tanzania
2.2.1 Location and Administrative Framework
The United Republic of Tanzania is located between 10 00' S and 120 00' S and between 300 00' E and 41 00' E. It was formed by the union of the former Tanganyika and the islands of Pemba and Zanzibar in 1964. This paper deals only with mainland Tanzania. Tanzania has a total land area of 883,749 km2, of which the mainland constitutes 881,289 km2 (99.72%), while the islands account for the rest (2,460 km2, 0.28%) (Bureau of Statistics, 1992). The country is endowed with a wide range of resources offering considerable social and economic potential, including extensive areas of arable land, a coastal and marine zone, wildlife reserves and parks, forests, rivers, and lakes (TFAP, 1989). The country is endowed with a wide range of resources offering considerable social and economic potential and including extensive areas of arable land, coastline, game reserves and parks, forests, rivers and lakes (Government of the United Republic of Tanzania, 1989). The mainland has a low population density of about 25 people per km2 and has sufficient land resources to allow substantial growth of agricultural production, at least in the short to medium term.

Administratively, the mainland is divided into 20 regions, each of which has a high degree of autonomy in the administration of its development programmes. Each region is divided into districts, and these are subdivided into divisions, wards and villages. At present, there are 88 districts and over 8,000 villages (Bureau of Statistics, 1988). Generally, the road and railway network in Tanzania is poor, and most areas are poorly accessible.

2.2.2Land In terms of production, land is still predominantly utilized for small-scale agriculture, although there is some large-scale farming, for example of tea, sisal, coffee and sugar. On the mainland, little more than 6 percent of land area is actually cultivated (Government of the United Republic of Tanzania, 1989). Extensive nomadic grazing is a major occupation of people in the northern arid lands, Masai steppe and the central semi-arid lands, some adjacent to national parks and game reserves.

2.2.3 Physiography
Tanzania includes both the highest and lowest places in Africa - the summit of Mt. Kilimanjaro (5950m above the sea level) and the floor of Lake Tanganyika (358m below sea level). Except for the coastal belt, most of the country is part of the Central African plateau, 1000 - 1500 m above sea level, characterised by gently sloping plains and plateau broken by scattered hills and low-lying wetlands (Morgan 1969; Berry & Berry 1971;).

2.2.4 Climate
The country has a great diversity of climatic conditions, with mean annual temperatures ranging from 240-340C, while mean annual rainfall varies from below 500 mm to over 2500 mm p.a., depending on altitude and latitude (Morgan, 1969). The rain falls mainly during December-May, although a bimodal pattern is found in the north. Rainfall is erratic, only 21% of the country can expect, with 90% probability, annual rainfall of more than 750 mm (Atlas of Tanzania 1976); and the central third of the country can expect less than 500 mm, with evapo-transpiration rates exceeding precipitation for most of the year.

2.2.5 Soils
The coastal zone is mainly covered with deep, sandy to heavy textured soils with moderate to high available water content. Most of the central and western plateau areas are mantled by sandy loams of low nutrient content and low water holding capacity. Drought-prone soils cover a great part of the northern portion of the country, including the Masai steppe and the south eastern plateau. Eroded land and deeply weathered soils, susceptible to erosion, occur on hill or mountain slopes and in the central highlands. Well drained, volcanic soils of high ash content are found in the northern rift zone and the volcanic areas in the northern and southern highlands. Generally, these are heavy textured, moderate to well drained, with moderate to high moisture storing properties. The soils of the western highlands are developed on basaltic or argillaceous rocks, and are well drained with good moisture holding properties. Those soils developed over sandstone are sandy to loamy and have low fertility (de Pauw, 1984).

2.2.7 Hydrology
Tanzania can be divided into five hydrological basins:
areas draining into the Indian Ocean - mainly the Rufiji river and its tributaries (draining one fifth of the land of the country), and the Pangani and Ruvu Rivers;

The Malagarasi basin draining into Lake Tanganyika, with a supply of water during about 2-3 months of the year; the Lake Victoria basin draining via the Nile into the Mediterranean Sea; and two inland drainage systems - one draining into Lakes Eyasi, Manyara and Natron in the North, and the other into Lake Rukwa in the South-West.

2.3 The social economic environment
2.3.1 Population
Recent population estimates put the population at about 26 million people (Bureau of Statistics, 1992), with a population growth rate of 2.8%. Tanzania has a low overall population density, averaging about 19 persons per square km. However, some areas are more densely populated with over 200 persons per square km , e.g. Ukerewe Island, Kilimanjaro, Mwanza and Dar es Salaam (Bureau of Statistics 1988). Other areas are more sparsely populated (e.g. Lindi, Rukwa, Ruvuma and Tabora regions). Some of these regions are areas with low and unreliable rainfall and, mainly, infertile soils. However, some sparsely populated areas, such as the Kilombero valley in Morogoro region and the Usangu plains in Mbeya district, have fertile soils and reliable rainfall. Pastoralists and agriculturalists from various parts of the country have been attracted increasingly to these areas, and this trend is resulting in land use and land ownership conflicts between the newcomers and the indigenous people (IIED/IRA 1992; WWF 1992). Urbanisation has been increasing steadily. About 20% of the country's total population lived in the urban areas in 1988 compared to 13.8% in 1978 and 5.7% in 1967 (Bureau of Statistics 1988). It is estimated that, by the year 2000, about 33% of the country's projected population of about 35 million will live in urban areas (Bureau of Statistics 1992).

2.3.2 Fishing and Water Resources
Tanzania has about 53,000 km2 of inland water and about 19,000 km2 of coastal shelf (Planning Commission 1991), and a 200 nautical mile exclusive economic zone offshore. However, fish catches are small compared to the potential. In 1989, the total freshwater catch was 337,000 tonnes in freshwater whilst the marine catch was almost 50,000 tonnes (Planning Commission 1991). The number of people who depend on the fishing industry is also small. Fishing is a part-time individual venture using outdated or simple equipment (Mohamed and Mwalyosi 1991).

2.3.3 Minerals and Energy Resources
There are abundant mineral resources in Tanzania, but only a few are being exploited. The main minerals which have been explored are iron ore (reserves estimated at 85 million tons), coal (324 m.t.), gypsum (2.6 m.t.), kaolin (50 m.t.), lime and limestone (vast reserves), magnetite (4.5 m.t.), meerschaum (28,000 t), phosphate (2.5 m.t.), salt (vast reserves), plus substantial amounts of diamonds and gold reef (COSTECH 1991). Commercial nickel mining is being planned in western.

Tanzania. Hydropower potential is about 4,500 MW of which 327 MW have been developed (Mwandosya 1990). Coal, although abundant in the country, plays a minor role as a source of energy due to its poor quality, undeveloped market, peripheral location and poor transport facilities. Proven offshore natural gas reserves at Songosongo are estimated at 0.72 trillion cubic feet. There has been petroleum exploration along the east coast during the past few years, but it has not yet provided firm information
about the reserves - if any.

2.3.4 Forests and Woodlands
Forest resources comprise forests, woodlands or woody savannah. It is estimated that forests and woodlands in Tanzania's mainland cover about 400 000 km2, i.e. about 45 percent of the country. Of this area about 135 000 km2 are designated as forest reserve. It is estimated that between 300 000 and 400 000 ha are destroyed annually (Government of the United Republic of Tanzania, 1989), the major causes of deforestation being farming, wood fuel harvesting, bush fires and land reclamation against the tsetse fly.

Upland evergreen forests occur in the highlands of Kilimanjaro, Meru, Ngorongoro, the Pare, Usambara and Uluguru mountains and the Southern Highlands. Lowland evergreen forests occur in isolated patches on the coastal plain. These areas all receive over 1000mm rainfall annually.

There are various types of open deciduous woodland, categorised according to the dominant genera which include Brachystegia, Julbernardia, Acacia, Combretum and Terminalia. The most common woodland type are the miombo woodlands, characterised by species of Brachystegia and Julbernardia. They cover nearly half of the country (400,000 km2), particularly in the western, central, and south-eastern parts of the plateau (TFAP 1989), and are associated with annual rainfall of 800-1200 mm. Acacia woodland is sometimes associated with drier areas.

Mangrove forests occur along the estuaries of Rufiji, Wami and Ruvuma Rivers and in creeks along the mainland coastline. About 135,000 km2 are designated as forest reserves and include 840 km2 of plantations and demonstration woodlots. These areas are the responsibility of the Forest Division of the Ministry of Tourism, Natural Resources and Environment (MTNRE). Within the forest reserve estate, there are 16,000 km2 of land specially gazetted as catchment reserves for watershed protection. Neighbouring communities are prohibited from using forest products from the reserves, eg, timber, wood for building construction and firewood. Most of the forest reserves are little managed: management plans are only available for areas supported by certain donor-funded projects (e.g. the HADO Project, Dodoma; the HASHI Project, Shinyanga).


3.0 POLICY REVIEW
Community involvement forest resource management in Tanzania
During the last decade, Tanzania, like many other eastern and southern African countries, has experienced a number of policy reforms. Most of these reforms were geared towards devolving common pool resources management from the state to lower levels (Alden Wily & Mbaya 2001). More specifically, these policies underlined the need for community participation and empowerment in the management of natural resources in order to achieve sustainable development (Mniwasa & Shauri 2001). While the importance of community forestry was recognised early in the 1980s (Kajembe 1994), it was not until the mid-1990s that CBFM started making news in Tanzania, particularly with the success stories from Duru-Haitemba Village Forest Reserves. Before the inception of the national forest policy of 1998 (URT 1998), the management of forests in Tanzania was the full responsibility of the government and much of the attention on reforming forest management focused on increasing powers and responsibilities on the government. The focus on management of forest resources by communities or managing them as common property had rarely been considered seriously (WRM 2002). In general, people around forestlands perceived them as government property and as such, they had no say on their management. Generally, this situation has been at the root of most misuses of forests on general lands and illegal activities in reserved forests.

In 1990, work commenced on the preparation of a National Conservation Strategy (NCS), coordinated by the newly formed National Environmental Management Council (NEMC). The NCS process is based on concepts of 'conservation for development' first espoused in the World Conservation Strategy (IUCN/UNEP/WWF 1980). The latter was subsequently updated in a revised report, "Caring for the Earth" (IUCN/UNEP/WWF 1991) which focussed more on the concept of sustainable development as promoted by the report of the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED 1987). Following the 1992 UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) held in Rio de Janeiro, Tanzania has modified the NCS process to encompass the goals and priorities of Agenda 21, one of the main accords agreed at UNCED. Accordingly, work is proceeding, with support from SIDA, on preparing a National Conservation Strategy for Sustainable Development (NCSSD). To date, two workshops have been held (at Dodoma in 1990, and at Tanga in 1991) at which background papers, prepared by Tanzanian experts, have been considered, and a first draft of the NCSSD has been prepared (NEMC 1994). A regional consultative process is planned in 1994 (Lweno 1992). As with the National Forestry Action Plan process, no new data collection or survey work is involved. In parallel to the NCS, a regional conservation strategy is being prepared for the Serengeti ecosystem. Launched in 1985, it is a project of the Ministry of Tourism, Natural Resources and the Environment in collaboration with IUCN. The goal is to ensure the long term conservation of the Serengeti-Mara migratory ecosystem as one of the world's most important wildlife areas. This aim is to achieve conservation through the collaboration of all resource users and managers in active adaptive planning and management (Hough 1992).

In Tanzania, today, the major forest sector guideline is the Forest Policy of 1953, which has been adequately reviewed elsewhere (Ahlback, 1988). It emphasizes, among other things, the need to protect forests as a national asset; and managing them in the most productive way possible to meet society's present and future needs. The pieces of legislation to enforce the policy, however, does not go beyond state-owned reserves; nor does it consider indigenous peoples' customary rights of access to the resources.

In general terms, forest management may be categorised in three systems: government, private, and institutional controls. Government controlled forests may further be differentiated into forest reserves national parks, game reserves, and game controlled areas. It should be noted that the forests in national parks are the best protected from human intervention, given the relatively higher capital investment in this sub-sector. Clearly then, the high canopy forests in Tanzania are faced with serious problems of forest degradation (URT, 1997; 1998). The often reported causes may be referred to as immediate factors contributing to forest degradation, which include subsistence farming, fuelwood collection, acquisition of building poles, lumbering and other socio-economic activities. Essentially, there are underlying causes which have to be addressed if forest resources are to be conserved (World Bank, 1997).

Second, are the private forest reserves and plantations. These forestlands are owned and exploited by independent educational and commercial institutions. They were reported to be under strict control and efficient management. The third are the local authority forest reserves. These reserves are under the management of the local government at district level. Under this resource use system, communities within the vicinity of the reserves have access to some forest resources. Local people have access to forestland for subsistence and cash crops production. Smallholder farmers clear part of the forestland for growing crops such as maize, beans, cardamom; collect fuelwood, building materials, fodder, fruits and vegetables. Incidentally, the regulation of community access to the resources, in terms of rural land use planning, has not been efficient enough to sustain and/or promote the productivity of the forestlands. This state of affairs has resulted in forest resource degradation (Figure 3) that underlies environmental degradation, triggers human-induced disasters, and exacerbates rural poverty.

Apparently, in the short term the system has, nonetheless, been able to contribute to combating food insecurity and improved the quality of life of the people. It was found out however that some of the forestlands currently under subsistence agriculture are still on government records as reserves. The fourth category constitutes the reforested lands. At the community level, and with SECAP support, about 20 new forests are being established in the formerly forested and now denuded landscapes by planting indigenous tree species through regeneration and recuperation. As in type three forests, and despite being too early to pass any sound judgement, it may be professed that these efforts will not be able to meet the needs of the stakeholders. Initially, these landscapes were controlled by the local authority (category three). The fifth category refer~ to the farmlands. At household level, some croplands have been planted with trees under the agroforestry program of SECAP. The approach has been to integrate agriculture, livestock and forestry management practices so that the conservation measures from the three sectors reinforce each other in the process of environmental conservation and improvement of the peoples' quality of life to achieve synergy. The envisaged program, in a way, seeks to gradually bring the forest to the people, and not the people to the forest. Prohibitive rules, however, have not succeeded to turn local people away from hunting and gathering some forest products from forest categories one, two, and three.

It has been found out that the cultural bond between people and the forests with regards to sound management is low. The local people no longer find it incumbent upon them to conserve these resources. The survey showed that most people's attitude to forest products is one of indifference. Most people believe that should an opportunity avail itself, they are ready to get away with everything from the forest as quickly as possible, leaving it barren. Unfortunately the situation can be likened to the Hardin's tragedy of the commons. This demonstrates a low level of awareness of the role played by the forest ecosystem on the local communities' survival, on the surface of the earth.



Forest Planning is largely governed by the comprehensive Tanzania Forestry Action Plan (TFAP 1989), developed as an integrated planning and development package with donor support, following FAO guidelines. Plans cover all fields in forestry, including industrial forests (natural and plantation), community forests and agro-forestry, conservation forests (for biodiversity and catchment preservation), training, research, and infrastructure. The reports stress the linkages between forestry and the water, power and agricultrural sectors. The TFAP was linked to changes in policy and legislation which are still being debated


4.0 EMPIRICAL REVIEW
The country was under one party rule for over thirty years, however during the last six years it has gone through a rapid democratisation process where several political parties have been registered and multiparty elections conducted.
Since 1986 there have been several government interventions aimed at redressing the country's economic problems. They include the Economic Recovery Programs (ERPs) and the Economic and Social Action Programmes (ESAPs). The macroeconomic reforms addressed various issues namely the exchange rate, foreign exchange allocation, trade and pricing policies, fiscal and monetary policies and interest rates. Specifically the government has liberalised external and domestic trade and decontrolled almost all the commodity prices. The government has also liberalised marketing arrangements, reformed the financial sector by allowing entry and autonomy to privately owned banks bureau de changes. All these macroeconomic changes have improved access by enterprises to essential inputs and better marketing opportunities. The country's GDP has been growing at 5% from 1995/96 mainly due to good performance in the agricultural sector. Inflation which reached a peak of 38% in 1995, dropped to 14% by April 1998.
The parastatals have been operating inefficiently, causing substantial losses to the government and the society as a whole. As a result the government has taken steps to restructure the parastatal sector through the Presidential Parastatal Reform Commission. The strategies recommended include privatisation of ailing parastatals.
4.1 Planning in the Forestry Sector
The government is concentrating on infrastructure investments, policy formulation, sectoral planning, collection and dissemination of information on prices and markets, public awareness etc. This implies that the role of the government is confined to provision of an enabling environment for the expansion of the production, trade and investments by the private sector. The country, however, still faces some serious problems. For example, industrial production is seriously suffering from inadequate infrastructure and stiff competition from imports and provision of employment to the young people who are mainly unskilled is a major social challenge for the country.
The increasing population combined with slow economic growth increases, places a high demand on, among other things, forest products and services. Like other government sectors, the main objective of the forestry sector is to meet the increasing demand and at the same time secure a sustainable resource base. Strategies to achieve this have changed periodically. The most recent strategies are contained in the revised Forestry Policy that was endorsed by the government in March 1998. The following are the main features of the revised policy:
To restructure the institutional structure whereby the role of the sectoral administration will focus mainly on policy development, regulation, monitoring and facilitation. Promotion of decentralisation of forest resource management responsibilities and sharing specialist, technical, backup service training as well as information dissemination.
To efficiently manage all natural forests specifically those having particular, bio-diversity and productive values. New forest reserves will be established in areas of high bio-diversity value in consultation with other stake holders. The status of existing forest reserves with high bio-diversity values will be upgraded to nature reserves to ensure their perpetual protection. Conservation and management objectives for each forest and nature reserve will be defined and management plans prepared. Local community and other stakeholder involvement in the conservation and management will be promoted through joint management agreements between involved parties. Buffer zones around reserved areas and corridors will be established to link fragmented forests with collaboration of local people.
Commercialisation of forest plantations to make them self-supporting and sustainable, the management responsibilities of the forest plantations will be delegated to from the forest authorities to one or several executive agencies to be created for this purpose. The agencies will operate on a commercial basis.
The legal framework for the promotion of private and community based forestry including village forest reserves is currently absent. Shortage of land and unclear land tenure, particularly for women, have hampered investment in village and private lands. The new forest policy is addressing this problem the following policy statement: "Legal framework for promotion of private and community ownership of forests will be established". Farmers will be entitled to have ownership rights of indigenous species including reserved species. Village forest reserves will be managed by village governments or other entities designated by village governments e.g. NGOs. Gender specific extension advice as well as financial incentives will be provided for establishment of forest plantations in farmlands.
A good example of community or village forest management is identified by the study done at Duru – Haitemba and Kwazu villages which shows the factors behind the success at Duru-Haitemba Village Forest Reserves as follows:vegetation in this part of the forest reserve is tropical montane forest with Leptoncycia usambarensis, Nuxia floribunda, Teclea nobilis and Celtis gomphophylla being the main species. As for the lowland, the area is flat at an average of 900m above sea level.

4.1.1 Kwizu Forest Reserve
Kwizu Forest Reserve is located in Same district, Kilimanjaro region, north-west Tanzania. The forest lies between 37o5’–38o00’ latitude and 4o10’–4o 25’ longitude. The forest reserve is approximately 3 070ha, with distinct highland and lowland parts. The eastern part of the reserve is the highland with steep slopes and an altitude of about 1 300m above sea level. The dominated by grasslands and shrubs, with Combretum exalatum, Commiphora campestris, Tamarindus indica, Acacia tortilis, and Chrysanthomoides monilifera as the commonest species (Kajembe et al. 2004a). The rainfall pattern is bimodal. Rainfall in the highlands is in the range 600–1 200mm per year, while in the lowland it is 350–600mm. Highland temperature is 18oC–28oC while in the lowland it falls between 24oC and 34oC. Three settlements were studied – namely Mtunguja, Kwizu and Mkonga-Iginyu villages. The predominant ethnic group in all the settlements is Pare. The people in the highlands are predominantly subsistence farmers cultivating mainly maize, banana and coffee, while those in lowland are predominantly pastoralists who keep cattle, goats and sheep.

As early as 1953, the central government had gazetted this forest for production purposes and put it under the management of the local government. The forest reserve was to supply timber, poles, firewood and other forest products through controlled harvesting. Forest officers working under local authority had the obligation of issuing licences for extraction of the forest products (Holmes 1995). It was unlawful for a person to harvest any product without a licence including the removal of dead fallen fuel for domestic use or drawing water for domestic purposes. However, a directive from the Ministry of Lands, Natural Resources and Tourism in 1992 banned all types of harvesting in catchment forests, including Kwizu Forest Reserve. With the inception of the 1998 forest policy, a JFM scheme was initiated in Kwizu Forest Reserve through the establishment of village environmental committees, which was to be followed later by the enactment of by-laws regulating JFM.

4.1.2 Duru-Haitemba
Duru-Haitemba forests were reserved as village forest reserves in 1994. This came about as a result of the discontent of local communities at the way the remaining tracts of miombo woodlands were managed by the government. The condition of the woodlands had been progressively degrading due to farming encroachment, grazing, hunting and charcoal burning by local dwellers, and timber extraction by outsiders. The Duru Haitemba forests had been targeted for gazetting as local government forest reserve in 1990/1991. However, the programme caused discontent among local people. The process – and the attempt to withdraw the forest from the public domain and put it in the hands of government – was definitely the catalyst for both local concern and the ultimate decision to find a more acceptable and more workable management regime (Alden Wily 1997). After a long process of dialogue, the situation was resolved through the decision to abandon gazetting in favour of allowing and assisting each of the eight surrounding villages to take full rights and responsibility for conservation of the woodlands. Alden Wily (1997) explains that this launched a very dynamic process by villagers involving drawing of simple management plans, which were later rephrased and approved as by laws by district authorities, setting up of VFCs and selection of village forest guards. The assistance from local foresters and other outside advisers in the whole process was limited to what was needed on an ad hoc basis, for example in the cases of legal matters and resolution of inter-village boundary disputes. In short, the Duru-Haitemba model was locally initiated, without outside pressures or the use of blueprint schemes. For Alden Wily (1997), the main role of the government has been ‘to let it go’. Kajembe et al. (2003) outlined the following further factors that were likely to have contributed to the success at Duru-Haitemba. Firstly, each village has clearly defined and hence secure boundaries.

Secondly, village governments have worked out rules that clearly define appropriation and provision, and which have facilitated protection and management of the village forest reserves. Thirdly, there is good collective choice of VFCs, which are comprised largely of ordinary villagers. Fourthly, locally-instituted conflict resolution mechanisms are respected by villagers. Fifthly, there are clearly defined resource property rights since each village has obtained its title deeds on its forest. Lastly, there is full empowerment – that is, the villagers have the right to devise their own institutions without being challenged by external government authorities.

CBFM has so far proved to be successful as demonstrated by the existence of a healthy forest with little disturbance. The local communities accrue some benefits from the forest as outlined above. However, in the long-run more tangible benefits are needed to attract villagers’ full commitment to forest management (Kajembe et al. 2004b). Controlled harvesting of mature timber species would be one way to improve motivation of villagers to manage the forests. Equitable distribution of revenues accruing from the forests should
also be ensured, particularly the improvement of social services such as communication and health facilities. Beekeeping activities should also be promoted in line with market promotion for bee products. The possibilities of selling trapped carbon stocks to potential investors should also be explored (Kajembe & Kessy 2000).
The enforcement of law at Kwizu Forest Reserve has been generally constrained by the District Council’s lack of adequate personnel and funds. The district has only eight full-time and five parttime employees who are supposed to effect law enforcement in eight forest reserves managed by the district (Kwizu inclusive). The district has so far failed to mobilise villages to formulate effective regulations and produce workable management plans. The continued decline of resource base in the forest (Table 3) suggests a clear institutional failure – the local district government has not safeguarded the forest effectively, which is also evident in the few cases of culprits who have been tried. Moreover, the nature of the reported cases of illegal activities in Kwizu Forest Reserve shows that monitoring is mostly practised along the road and not in the forest where the actual theft is committed. Although each of the surrounding settlements has a village environmental committee to deal with policing issues, actual protection is yet to be realized because by-laws formulated have not yet been enacted as legal instruments. Moreover, the implementation of JFM would not be expected to be successful when even a basic understanding of processes of local institutional change is low among the foresters who are charged with moving the process forward (Kajembe & Kessy 2000). In fact, a gap still exists between the practice at the resource user level and the implementation of the forest policy on JFM. Foresters are practising JFM as ‘trials’ and this may lead to avoiding sincere commitment to JFM. The gap between policy and practice may be partly attributed to ‘traditionalist approaches’ or ‘conservatism’ to forest management (Kajembe 1994). Moreover, inevitably there are struggles against the devolution of authority, which is equated with the loss of power and status. It is therefore not surprising that there has been and will continue to be some resistance, despite enabling policy and political support of JFM (Kajembe & Kessy 2000). In addition to a lack of awareness on the JFM package, there is still a poor understanding of whether and when a community has any incentive to take on responsibilities for JFM (Alden Wily & Dewees 2001). In most cases, local communities are not sure of what kind of additional benefits they are going to obtain from the jointly managed forest, beyond what they used to enjoy. For JFM to be successful, there is need to define clearly the rights, returns and responsibilities for each stakeholder in JFM (Dubois 1999).
The two main instruments of implementing the forest policy are the forest legislation and the national forestry programme. Forest legislation is currently under review to match the new policy. This exercise will be followed by updating the National Forestry Programme called the Tanzania Forestry Action Plan (TFAP). TFAP translates the policy areas highlighted above into action. The National Forestry Programme will develop community based programmes which will involve local communities, the private sector, NGOs and individuals in joint forest management of the country's forest resources.
The private sector's role particularly in the forestry industry is crucial. This sector is expected to invest in raw material production through the establishment of its own forest plantations. Other key players are the international community, the local governments and the Forestry and Bee-keeping Division in the Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism.
Stakeholders will promote investments in forestry by cash contribution and/or capacity building, otherwise forest sector funding is through two main sources namely local and international sources. The local sources include revenue from the sector's activities such as royalties and stumpage and other miscellaneous charges on forest goods and services. The forestry sector retains 70% of the total revenue collected. The remaining 30% is remitted to the treasury to support other government services. The retained funds support both current and developing activities.
FOREST RESOURCES AND CONSERVATION
According to the National land cover and land use reconnaissance carried out in 1996 through satellite imagery, Tanzania mainland has the following areas under forest cover.=
Type of Forest
Area covered (km2)
Proportion (%)
Miombo woodlands
374,356
93.2
Natural Closed Forests
24,313
6.1
Mangroves
1,569
0.4
Plantations
1,349
0.3
Total Forested Area
401,587
100.0
SOURCE: TFAP 1989/90-2007/08
This constitutes approximately 46% of the total land area. If the bush land is included (as some areas are already protected as forest reserves), the percentage will jump to 66% of the total land area. Out of this 125,170 km2 have been set aside as forest reserves including 83.8 km2 of nature forest reserve and 20,000 km2 have been protected as game reserves and national parks.

4.2 BENEFITS OF FORESTS
Forest and woodlands are key elements in the livelihoods of hundreds of thousands of households across Tanzania and cover an estimated 38.5 million hectares (ha). They provide a wide range of benefits both directly in the form of timber forage, fruits, charcoal, tradition medicines, and gums and resins, and indirectly through their ecosystem function including regulating water-catchment, erosion control, nutrient cycling, of the forests and woodlands are currently unreserved and lack any effective management, with many areas expected to be severely denuded to totally cleared by 2020. Different benefits are acquired from the forests, these include the following:

4.2.1 FOREST, SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
The contribution of the forest sector to the national economy is estimated at 3-4%. However, this figure includes only tangible and marketed products like sawn wood and carvings and excludes wood consumed as fuel wood and charcoal, the role of forests as source of water for electricity generation, agriculture and fisheries. It also excludes the role of forests in the provision of pasture land, wildlife habitat hence tourism, medicinal values, contribution to the carbon pool and general environmental values. From a social point of view, forestry provides direct employment to a considerable number of people in both primary and secondary and artisan wood industries notably sawmills, carpentry and joinery and weaving.
4.2.2 WOOD ENERGY
Estimates indicate that wood contributes over 90% to the national energy budget. The government has, in principle, two principal policy objectives for bio-energy. These are:
§ to improve the welfare of consumers by reducing the financial or labour costs of meeting their energy needs; and
§ to reduce the destructive impacts of wood energy demand on forests and other land use systems.
§ To meet these objectives two main strategies have been pursued: (1) the increase of local wood supplies by various forms of afforestation and (2) the reduction of wood energy needs through greater efficiencies of wood conversion and utilisation. A third alternative strategy - the substitution of wood fuels by alternative energy sources - has not been pursued vigorously because of prohibitive costs both for consumers and for the government return of capital for establishing the necessary infrastructure. At the same time, wood energy planning is seriously hampered by poor information about levels of consumption and sustainable supply and even the nature of wood energy demand - supply system itself, leading to inappropriate policy and project responses.
4.2.3 WOOD PROCESSING, PRODUCTS AND TRADE
There are two sources of wood in the country: natural forests and industrial plantations. Most of the wood is cut from natural forests and is in pole form for construction, charcoal production and fuelwood and the rest being cut for sawnwood production through pit sawing. Another large amount of wood is removed from these forests is wasted by burning through shifting cultivation resulting in considerable loss of forest land to other land uses. The rest is recovered through natural regeneration, but ends up in most cases as degraded forest land.
The industrial plantations, dominated by softwoods especially pines and eucalyptus are the main source of roundwood in the form of sawlogs, pulpwood and transmission poles. Cypress species also occupied a reasonable proportion of the industrial plantations but, their share has been considerably reduced by the emergence of aphids (cupressii cinara). Approximately 10% of industrial plantation area is occupied by hardwoods including eucalyptus, grevillea, cedrella, teak, iroko and wattle species. While most plantation wood end up in wood industries, a majority of people living adjacent to these forests are increasingly benefiting from them as a source of fuelwood and semi-processed construction material.
Wood production from the industrial plantations is approximately 25-30m3/ha. Basing on these figures and plantation area of 70,000 ha of softwoods, roundwood production was estimated at 1,500,000m3/year during mid-eighties. However, due to a number of reasons including outdated management plans, irregular replanting of clear-felled areas and low industrial capacity, both the allowable cut and actual removals are very low. Also, due to poor survival and lack of pruning and thinning, stand conditions are poor and uneven making the estimation of allowable cut difficult.
Wood industry and processing is dominated by small scale sawmills with an annual intake of approximately 10-15,000m3/annum. Again, due to poor co-ordination, their turnover is difficult to estimate. There are less than 10 medium-sized sawmills, 1particle board, 1hardboard,1match factory, 2 paper-mills, a number of impregnation plants. Most of these plants and mills are or were state owned and partly due to their poor performance they are being privatised. Due to mismanagement, these installations are heavily under-utilised.
As is the case with wood processing, trade in wood and wood products is in the private sector. There was an attempt by the state to control trade in wood and wood products and a parastatal organisation by the name of TANTIMBER was formed for that purpose. like the Tanzania Wood Industry Corporation (TWICO) which was operating the nationalised wood industries, failed due to poor management and competition from the private sector. Most of the wood and wood products are consumed locally, though recent trends indicate that export of sawnwood is increasing. For example, the largest operating sawmill in the country (Sao Hill Timber Ltd) is already exporting almost 90% of its production of sawnwood and more orders are being placed. Poor quality is the only threat to export industry, which cannot compete with industrial nations.
4.2.4 RECREATION AND TOURISM
As other countries with abundant forest resources, forest ecosystems offer excellent natural recreation possibilities. However, while eco-tourism was not regarded as source of forest income, other sectors have been and continue to benefit from eco-tourism partly because the management of most areas with high tourism potential is vested under the National parks Authority. Other areas like mangroves and other aquatic ecosystems are increasingly attracting eco-tourists.
4.2.5 THE OUTLOOK FOR FOREST RESOURCES
The most important wood product in Tanzania is fuelwood (which may also be processed into charcoal). consumption is estimated at 26 million cubic metres per annum. The future demand levels will depend on population growth, urbanisation, income, use, availability of alternative sources of energy and improvement of utilisation efficiency. Despite the lack of reliable data, it is estimated that the fuelwood demand could be in the range of 52 million cubic metres by 2008.
The most important industrial wood product is sawnwood which is mainly used in construction, joinery and furniture making and packaging. The end sectors as well as the use per capita and sawnwood are increasing and therefore the sawnwood demand is expected to double by the year 2008. Almost half of the total demand is presently met by pit-sawers but, their role is gradually being replaced by industrial production.
PROJECTED WOOD DEMAND (000m3)*

Year
Assortment
1998
2003
2008
Logs
689
796
937
Pulp wood
219
312
398
TOTAL
908
1108
1335
PROJECTED DEMAND OF PRODUCTS (000m3)*
Product
Year

1998
2003
2008
Sawnwood
270
320
380
Wood based panels
20
26
33
Paper and boards
40
55
75
Pulp
52
73
92
*Source: TFAP 1989/90-2007/08
The demand for wood panels (plywood, particle and fibre-boards) is growing faster than that for sawnwood, but the volumes will be relatively limited. The most dynamic products are paper and paperboards whose demand has risen with economic growth in the country. Their demand is expected to rise by 75,000 tonnes in 2008.
Making the people living adjacent to forests the guardians of the forest resource in the
neighbourhood appears to be the most viable, effective, cheaper and long-lasting way to manage natural forest resources (Kajembe et al. 2003). Under the right conditions, such as appropriate legal framework and incentive structures, these people are likely to become the most effective managers and this should be far more cost-effective. The burden of policing by the government should then fall away and the foresters should become technical advisers, not police.

Abdallah and Monella mentioned potentials of Miombo woodlands for livelihood improvement. Miombo woodlands are central to the livelihood systems of millions of rural and urban dwellers in Tanzania. Goods and services provided by miombo woodlands to livelihoods of local communities are products such as medicines, energy, food, fibers, and construction and craft materials. The services include cultural and spiritual values, climate regulations, erosion and hydrological control. All of the products and services mentioned above cover the basic needs (i.e. food, shelter, health and spiritual well being). Therefore the ranges of products from the miombo woodlands support rural living from medicines and food to building timber and fuel (Abdallah 2001). Luoga (2000) found that in Eastern Tanzania apart from using miombo woodlands for farming, local people have eleven types of uses for the trees including charcoal, firewood, poles, timber, medicine, withies, food, ropes (fibre), live fences, carving and rituals. Rainfall in the miombo area is variable, resulting in periodic food shortages. On these occasions, the availability of wild foods and fruits, as well as other natural products that can be harvested and sold or exchanged for food, can be crucial for survival (Desanker et al.1997). 83 indigenous tree species, which bear edible fruits and nuts throughout the year, have been identified in the Tanzania miombo (Temu and Msanga 1994), while more than 50 fruit trees are found in Tabora region miombo (Temu and Chihongo 1998). The rural communities recognize and consume a variety of these edible fruits, which are normally gathered and eaten within the locality, while some are sold in the local markets. Most of these fruits are normally available in the dry season when there is food shortage and make a significant contribution to the diet and income of the rural communities.

It is estimated that humans use only 10% of the fruits potential and the rest goes to waste, due to the poor markets and rudimentary processing technologies (Nsubemuki et al. 1997). The collection of wild products is an integrated part of other types of off-farm activities and consumption frequently occur outside the home. This type of consumption results in under-reporting in many studies. In Tanzania about 97% of all annual wood production is consumed in form of woodfuel, accounting for 91% of Tanzania’s total energy consumption (FAO 1981). Wooodfuel in Tanzania is used for cooking and in rural and urban agricultural industries. However, quantitative information on consumption of woodfuel for various activities is inconsistent and sometimes is lacking. For example, previous studies revealed inconsistent results in relation to small-scale tobacco curing: e.g. Temu (1979) reported that 20 m3 of miombo woodlands is used to cure 1 ha of tobacco, while Wahid (1984) revealed that 15 m3 is used to cure 500 kg. On average, of recent tobacco farmers use about 1 m3 firewood to cure 57 kg of tobacco (Abdallah and Sauer 2007). However, the actual amount of firewood used varies with the design of the barn. Most farmers use any species type and size they found, but frequently used are Julbernadia globiflora, Brachystegia spp. And Combretum spp.

Firewood in Tanzania is regarded as free good even if it is used to generate cash. For example although flue-cured tobacco had higher gross margin of compared with alternative crops (maize, sunflower and tomato) in Iringa, but environmental cost-benefit analysis of tobacco production had a negative NPV, suggesting that small-scale flue-cured virginia growing on miombo woodlands would not be economically viable under current practices. Fish smoking and frying, and bricks burning are among socio economic activity use woodfuel. Information on the amount and extent of woodfuel utilization during fish smoking and frying, and bricks burning is scarce. Charcoal making is crucial activity in miombo woodlands and is increasingly becoming a lucrative business. Species frequently used (in case of Tabora) are such as Pterocarpus angolensis, Afzelia quanzesis, Brachystegia and Julbernadia. A traditional kiln in Tabora can take an average volume of 13.96 m3 of billetts of various tree species to produce 20 to 30 charcaol bags each weighing 40 to 55 kg depending on species used. The current method of charcoal production by using traditional earth kilns has been preferred by most Tanzanians as they need very little skill and low capital investment. But, traditional conversion of wood to charcoal, wastes as much as 70% of wood caloric value, thus accelerating pressure in destruction of miombo woodlands.

Furthermore charcoal production venture is growing high because it is taken as part time job to supplement farmers’ income. The incentives from the ready existing markets in cities and towns encourage charcoal production as a full-time income generating work. The main market is urban areas. A bag of charcoal in Morogoro is valued at TAS 12,000 while in Dar es Salaam is at 18,000. Charcoal makers can generate a profit of up to TAS 8000 from one bag of charcoal. The business is forecasted to continue in future, partially due to stagnant in technological development and inability of many consumers to switch over to alternative energy sources.

A further review of energy sector in Tanzania shows that the country has considerable amounts of alternative indigenous energy resources such as hydroelectricity, natural gas, solar energy and coal. But they do not play important role in rural and urban household energy sector because they are poorly developed with relatively high running costs. For instance, hydroelectric power is relatively playing role to the community compared to natural gas, solar and coal, its potential is estimated at 4.7 GW, of which only 10% has actually been developed.

Moreover, the coverage of electricity is only 10% and less than one percent in urban and rural areas respectively. Even in urban areas there is significant number of districts still not connected to national electric grid at all. Regions with lowest electricity coverage are Coast, Lindi, Mtwara, Ruvuma, Singida, Rukwa and Kigoma. Also, its services and related infrastructure are largely weak in both urban and rural areas, but also use of electricity for cooking is reported by only 1% of households in the country (National Bureau of Statistics 2002). Probably because the electric tariffs of 42.97 TAS/Kwh charged by Tanzania Electricity Supply Company (TANESCO – the only national electric supplier in the country) for domestic use is the highest in the SADC region (Mwandosya et al. 1997, Ubwani 2003). But the fact that prices of electric appliances are unaffordable by many households and agro-based industries, compared to the associate costs of firewood utilization, which is regarded as a free commodity could be the contributing factor for dependence on woodfuel. Therefore forests remained to be the main source of fuel for unforeseeable future in Tanzania. The main challenge is to develop these alternative energy sources and make them accessible to society.

Other important values of the miombo woodlands include revenue and employment creation, raw material supply to households and industries as well as producing a variety of non-woody products. There are other indirect contributions from these natural forests among which soil conservation, water catchment, and fodder for livestock as well as wildlife are major components (Kowero and O’Kting’ati 1990).

Local communities living adjacent to the forest derive a number of benefits from the forest. Most destructive uses that lead to the removal of considerable amount of wood biomass from the forest – such as timber, charcoal and building poles extraction – require licences. Harvesting for lumbering and building poles is allowed for trees that have started to dry up. A stumpage of Tshs. 3000/= (about US$3) is paid for a tree. A villager would qualify to buy poles if his or her building is at roofing stage (Malimbwi 2003). However, there are a number of non-timber forest products extracted freely from the forest. For example, during fieldwork, a beehive was noted in almost every plot (Malimbwi 2003). Kajembe and Kessy (2000) recommended beekeeping as an environmentally friendly income-generating activity that should be promoted in participatory forest management. Grazing is also allowed during the period 1 June–31 December. Grazing may also serve as fire control activity since it reduces fuel load. Firewood collection is normally allowed in the forest as long as the wood is dry. During the survey, no dry wood (standing or fallen) was observed. This is probably an indication of the intensity of firewood collection in the forest (Malimbwi 2003). Other non-timber products that are collected in small quantities from the forest include local medicines, ropes, fruits (for example, Vangueria infausta, Flacourtia indica), mushrooms and stones (Malimbwi 2003; Otieno 2000).
Also forest is attracting many kind of animals and birds to live in. Many species started to disappear because of forest degradation increase in these years. For example in Bagamoyo district, many there was a lot of animals and birds such as Mbizi and others have dissapered from the environment because of deforestation.
Tanzania High Forest Resonrces Utilisation Systems Some human activity processes have caused adverse effects on forest environments while searching for survival (URT, 1997). Forests are, in essence, a genetic resource due to the potential possessed by living organisms to produce commodities of value to humankind at different levels of socio-economic development. Tanzania tropical rain forests are important locally, nationally and globally for their cultural functions, as well as for sources of timber and non-wood products, conservation of catchment areas, and as a genetic pool of valuable species (Ahlback, 1988; Pocks, 1988;URT, 1998).

Other than some tree species producing valuable timber, wood is also important as a source of fuelwood and building poles. In rural areas, almost all housing structures are supported by poles. The collecting of fuelwood for cooking and/or heating, is predominantly a woman's domestic role in Tanzania, as elsewhere in Africa. It has to be emphasized that democratic ways and means be sought to mainstream gender in forest resources management policies (Skutsch, 1985). The provision of energy is one of the important activities of households living within forest neighbourhoods which calls for policy considerations.

Some forest resources-including non-wood forest products, sometimes referred to as minor forest products-are utilised by rural communities to support their subsistence livelihoods. According to FAa (1991) categorisation, non-wood products refer to non-market or subsistence goods and services for human or industrial consumption derived from renewable forest resources and biomas bearing promise for augmenting real rural household incomes and employment. The exploitation of these forest resources for subsistence is a cultural practice that has closely existed between the local people and the forest since time immemorial.

Besides, some forest locales and some tree species have been used as spiritual centers, and some tree species used for making household tools such as hoe handles, baskets and mats, pestles and pipes. Some species are used for medicinal purposes as well as for generating poisons for plants and animals, and for fodder. This unique function is largely ignored or forgotten by development researchers and policy makers. As clearly stated by the Tanzanian government, ecologically forests regulate hydrological regimes of their catchment areas as well as microcIimates and ma~roclimates, promote soil productivity through biochemical processes, serve as habItat for fauna and flora, as well as recreational functions (URT, 1988). Since the flora of many indigenous forests in Tanzania is still inadequately known, for every survey, new records of interesting endemic, rare or important species are being documented (Pocs, 1989). It is also reported that 38 out of 150 species in catchment forests are endemic and hence serve as a gene pool of indigenous tree species. Further, as noted by Lovett (1985), Tanzania contains 40% of the world's wild coffee relatives with 25% of these species not occurring outside the country.

Due to uncertainties in forest land changes as a result of degradation and deforestation, it is difficult to predict the future scenarios of the forest estate in the country. It suffices to point out that if the reforestation of clear-felled plantations is not improved and uncontrolled harvesting of natural forests is left to continue, the country's wood and water supply will be greatly hampered.

As per Tanzania Development partiners group, the value of forests in Tanzania
§ Tanzania’s forests provide employment opportunities to between 1 million and 10 million people.
§ Forest products contribute approx $4million (10-15%) of the country recorded export earnings.
§ Forests, through fuel wood and charcoal, provide 95% of Tanzania’s energy supply.
§ Approximately 75% of construction materials come directly from forests.
§ Forests provide essential indigenous medicinal and supplementary products to 70% of Tanzania.
Deforestation in Tanzania
Forest resources in Tanzania face high and increasing threats of deforestation and degradation. One major practical problem associated with this is our failure to gauge and monitor these threats. However, some unverified estimates indicate that between 130,000-400,000 ha. of forest land are lost annually through massive logging and slash-and-burn clearance. Much of the logging is illegal. Already today, in many places the need for wood, charcoal and other forest products cannot be met because of the shrinking of forest lands. The destruction of natural resources caused by forest mismanagement threatens not only biological diversity but also all the other functions and services performed by the forest, and with that an important potential for Tanzania’s national economic development.
The Tanzanian government has recognised the problem and since 1996 has introduced comprehensive reforms. In this connection, in the preceding three phases the project supported the national forest authority, the Forest and Beekeeping Department (FBD), in forming a new forest policy and a legal framework for its implementation. At the same time, efforts to remedy this situation are low due to poor economy and uncoordinated efforts of land users mainly agriculture, forestry, livestock and mining. It is also important to note that due to the ongoing civil service reform programmes, the capacity of the government to sustainably manage the forest resources is dwindling, especially in the absence of immediate measures to counteract the manpower vacuum created.
CAUSES OF FOREST DEPLETION IN TANZANIA
Post-Independence Modes of Development and Management of Miombo Woodlands
Miombo woodlands management has a long history in Tanzania, and this can be reflected from the policy transitions since independence. For example, after a promising start during the first decade of independence, economic performance in Tanzania started to weaken in the late 1970s, and by the early 1980s. The country plunged into an economic crisis of unprecedented proportions. Various internal and external factors can be identified behind the abrupt negative turn in Tanzania’s economy. Some of contribution factors for this include: since the mid-1970s Tanzania traded in an environment of escalating world prices of oil and manufactured goods, while simultaneously, a global recession dampened the demand for primary commodities. High import prices and low export earnings led to a drastic worsening of Tanzania’s terms of trade. The reduction in import capacity hit especially the newly established large-scale industrial units which, financed and planned mainly with foreign assistance. Furthermore, increase military spending related to the 1978-79 war with Iddi Amini’s Uganda depleted Tanzania’s economic resources and adversely affected its foreign exchange position. In the fiscal year 1979 the share of defense in total expenditure reached a high 23.3%. Finally another
exogenous shock came from break-up of the East African Community in 1977, which not
only ended trade with its nearest partners, but also caused the country to incur unexpected start-up costs for the new structures of civil aviation, railways and telecommunication systems.

Most of the factors contributed to the economic crisis of the late 1970s and 1980s, can be connected to the wrong choice of development policies and strategies, and misappropriation of domestic and external resources. The economy suffered from policies and administrative decisions such as: Neglect of the agriculture sector, forcing it to struggle with a shortage of available funds for investment, low producer prices, little expenditure on supportive infrastructure and extension services, poor marketing arrangements for agricultural products and a poor distribution network for agricultural inputs.

The “villagization” programme, which forced rural people to move to communal centre, causing disruption in rural areas and, at least in the short term, involving losses of agricultural output. An emphasis on large-scale industry, which was both capital- and import-intensive and suffered from technological and managerial dependencies, which aggravated problems of foreign exchange shortages.

Expansion of the public sector beyond the country’s technical, financial and managerial capacities, resulting in a proliferation of unproductive bureaucracies and excessive administration costs across the whole system. Excessive government intervention in the economy, including quantitative restrictions on all categories of imports, the fixing of interest and foreign exchange rates at artificial levels and government monopolization of various key sectors of the economy.

Drastic changes in policies, e.g. towards institutional arrangements in the key areas of agricultural marketing and input distribution, which paid little attention to efficiency, caused serious disruptions and prevented long-term development of the institutions involved. When the first signs of the economic crisis emerged in the late 1970s, there was a lag before policies reacted adequately. The Government spending increased by 47.5% between 1978 and 1980 relative to a 27.6% increase in revenue. The ratio of the overall budget deficit to GNP rose by 53.4% over the same period. Similarly, government borrowing increased dramatically and averaged 65% of total domestic credit in 1981–84. In total, ineffective counter-cyclical management characterized the onset of the economic crisis in Tanzania and deepened various imbalances in the national economy. By the early 1980s Tanzania was deep in economic crisis, which is reflected in the development of macro-economic indicators for that period. This trajectory had various implications in forests management including miombo. Economic crisis in this period reflected very well to small-scale farmer’s hardships. This necessitates changes in income sources, which reflected changes in priorities and activities in the rural areas, hence changes in the rural structure. They reflect a growing dependency on non-farm activities for livelihood. How this translated into dependence on forest resources such as miombo as sources of income in this period remained unclear. In that period there was a rapid increase in production of staples which was accompanied with increase in their real producer prices while there was decline in both production and real producer prices of major export crops. Information on the extent to which increased production drew land from forested areas such as miombo woodlands is scarce and much localized in Tanzania. For example, in Iringa region, Abdallah (2006) revealed that annual miombo woodlands deforestation rate for the period 1959–1978 was 335.7 ha/year, while for 1978–1999 the deforestation rate was 56.9 ha/year. The higher deforestation rate in 1959–1978 period could be attributed to the increased agriculture/tobacco area (173.6 ha/year), structured by firewood utilization and shifting cultivation.

On the other hand Tanzania adopted the policy of villagization in 1967 as part of a national strategy for development. It was assumed to be the best means by which the welfare and standard of living of the majority of people in rural areas could be improved. Since the majority of the population lived in isolated homesteads, large-scale resettlement was recommended as the first step in the direction of modernization. This policy entailed, among other things, the resettlement of all households outside areas of dense settlements into villages. By 1975, it was estimated that over 75% of the national population was resident in such villages. Judging from the effects of the implementation of the villagization policy, it seems that major environmental implications of large-scale resettlements were not fully considered before the plan was carried out. The extent of deforestation resulting from implementing this policy during this period remains unclear.

Also, some farmers who would have moved to new villages in the preceding period would still open new farms, probably by encroaching more forests and woodlands. Consequently, the poor location of new settlements on land of inferior quality led to a sharp decline in agricultural production in the years followed villagization. Moreover, villagization necessitated the intensification of land use, a practice unfamiliar to most of the people and unsuitable for fragile environments. The result has been the spread of serious cases of soil erosion and the rapid destruction of the natural vegetation. However, given the difficulty economic climate prevailing in this period, the provision of social services declined dramatically. Accordingly the growth rates in government expenditure on education nationally and on per capital basis were respectively 0.3% and -2.8% in 1980–86.

The corresponding statistics for health were -0.7 and -3.7 for the same period. These were also the same rate for the period 1972–79, indicating that perhaps the relative weight for various sectors in government priorities remained unchanged and were therefore not taking into account evolving socio-economic demands. Given the big and increasing deficit in successive government budgets and pressure on balance of payments, it is also likely that in real terms social services received less attention by the Government. This also indirectly increased rural households’ reliance on non-farm activities. It is likely that such non-farm income sources included forests and miombo woodland resources. It is during this period that localized fuelwood scarcity as well as incidences of land degradation due to grazing started to draw national attention. In order to arrest and/or contain such situations the government initiated some specific environmental conservation oriented projects like soil conservation, with acronym HADO and HASHI, initiated in 1973 to contain extensive soil erosion in the central part of the country. In addition, government’s village forestry programmes which had been ongoing since 1967/68 gained momentum in the late 1970s. Some forest plantations were established to complement and possibly to substitute for wood supply from the miombo woodlands. However, village forestry programme proceeded very slowly.

By 1989 only about 8,000 ha of forest plantations had been established by the government. Therefore the effort to arrest wood demands through afforestation continued to receive decline emphasis. In fact real government expenditure on afforestation declined by slightly more than 50% between 1975 and 1985. This constrained government efforts in complementing and/or substituting for wood supplies from the miombo woodlands using plantation wood.

Overall it would appear that the demand for land has still been driven by demands in agricultural production, villagization programme, habitation due to increased population and perhaps less so from rural infrastructure to support major social services like those of education and health. The extent to which rural communities depend forests such as miombo woodlands as sources of income in this period is unknown, as well as the pattern and degree of their probably deforestation.

The major causes of forest depletion can be generalized as large scale farming, especially in Arusha, Kiteto, Tanga and Morogoro districts. Substantial pressure on forests also results from small-scale farmers expanding their cropland, and cutting trees for fuelwood, charcoal production for urban users, and from increasing numbers of livestock and wildlife on limited pasture land and woodland. The clear felling of woodland and 'bush' to control or reduce tsetse flies has also resulted in serious environmental hazards through increased run-off and soil erosion. Other reasons include lack of forest management capacity which can be verified as follows:
One of the major problems faced by the sector is that its true value to Tanzanian’s development remains largely unrecognized. Recent estimates, that also include the illegal use of forest products, as well as tourism related income, suggest that the forest sector’s total annual contribution may be as high as 10% - 15% of total GDP, roughly equivalent to the Government’s annual public spending. Although the generation of revenue from forest related activities is improving, it is estimated that only 5 – 10 %of the potential revenue is actually collected. Despite the known, and the potential importance of to the livelihood of the people of Tanzania, the forest and bee keeping Division (FBD) is only allocated 0.1 -0.2% of the total annual government budget. The geographical distribution of the FBD’s human resources across the country. It is clear that there are large areas with no or little coverage.(Tanzania Development Partners Group)
Technical capacity at all levels is also generally inadequate, particulary in land- use planning, forest management systems, business and financial management, participatory development, resource inventories and valuation, monitoring and evaluation, and data management. The lack of capacity in administration and finance is evidence from the delay in procurement, ironically resulting in significant under spending especially in relation to the both Development partiner – funded activities, and in relation to the government’s own budget.
Taking an example of Kwizu and Duru villages one of the reasons why people carry out activities that degrade forests is because of the high economic benefits they can obtain. There is often little immediate economic gain from conserving forest resources or assuring their sustainable utilisation. Forest management regimes – particularly in Tanzania –have long denied communities legitimate opportunities to use forest reserve resources for their own livelihood profit. Local communities have been deprived of autonomy and sovereigntyover their forest resources. The Duru-Haitemba case study of CBFM demonstrates that by restoring these rights and responsibilities to forest communities, the resource base – along with people’s livelihood – is likely to improve and become sustainable ultimately.

Nevertheless, the case study of Kwizu Forest Reserve suggests that there is still uncertainty in JFM schemes. Foresters are practising JFM as ‘trials’ and there is still a gap between policy and practice. In addition, the minds of local communities are not clearly settled on what their rights, returns and responsibilities are in the jointly managed forests, beyond those that they are used to. It appears that the incentives currently offered are not high enough to warrant the full commitment of local communities.

Considering the level of contraventions noted at Kwizu Forest Reserve under JFM, there is need for clear definition of rights, returns and responsibilities of each stakeholder. Because economic gain is the critical motive (whether conscious or unconscious) behind most human actions, more tangible incentives should be offered to all stakeholders in collaborative management. This may be achieved through fair benefit-sharing of returns and promotion of alternative income-generating activities such as ecotourism, beekeeping woodworking and other environmentally-friendly activities. Furthermore, in order to ensure effective involvement, there is a vital need for more training and awareness creation among stakeholders before launching people-centred forest resource management schemes.

Misana (1988a) added that in Tanzania, the apparent main reasons behind forest depletion and degradation have been reported to include clearing for agriculture, overgrazing, commercial and domestic fuelwood production, mining, forest fires for various reasons (e.g. tsetse eradication, shifting cultivation and hunting) and harvesting industrial wood (Misana 1988a). Shifting cultivation may account for more than 50% of deforestation on Tanzania mainland. Charcoal making becomes the second contributing factor. Illegal harvesting and mining activities are also reported (Iddi 2002) to contribute to deforestation in Tanzania. However, several scholars (e.g. Vanclay 1993, Misana et al. 1996) have argued that not all causes behind forest depletion are real, others are simply apparent or symptoms, and hence, in order to tackle the problem of forest depletion and degradation a clear and deep understanding of the causes of deforestation is essential. For these scholars, the current deforestation problem is a complex socio-economic problem generated by the interaction of economic, social, political, historical and natural factors. Thus, the real causes of forest depletion and degradation, include among others poverty, overpopulation, inadequate agrarian policies, corruption and greed, ignorance and carelessness, undervaluation of natural forests, and open access into public forestlands (general lands). Adequate solution to forest depletion and degradation can only be achieved by addressing these real causes of deforestation.

Lack of Forest Management Capacity
One of the major problems faced by the sector is that its true value to Tanzania’s development largely unrecognized. Recent estimates, that also included the illegal use of forest products, as well as tourism-related income, suggest that the forest sector’s total annual contribution may be as high as 10%-15% of total GDP, roughly equivalent to the Government’s annual public spending. Although the generation of revenues from forest-related activities is improving, it is estimated that only 5-10 of the potential revenue is actually collected. Despite the known, and the potential importance of forestry to the livelihoods of the people of Tanzania, the Forest and Beekeeping Division (FBD) is only allocated 0.1-0.2% of the annual government budget. One effect of this limited budgetary support is apparent in the map below, which shows the geographical distribution of the FBD’s human resources across the country.

Geographical distribution of human resources, 2003.
Is its clear that there are large areas with little or no coverage. Those organizations that do attempt to implement management in accordance with the Forest Act and the NFP are often only able to do so with financial support from Development Partners.

Largely because of the lack of financial, and therefore human resources, within the FBD there have been relatively few assessments of the true extent and characteristics of the forest resources in Tanzania, with the existing work largely concentrating on catchment forests. There are few up-to-date statistics on the forestry sector’s performance and there is no sector-wide Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) system. At the regional and district governance level, secretariats and councils tend to allocate negligible resources to forests in their development plans. This is partly explain by the decentralization of decision-making without adequate financial support or the means by which to generate sufficient revenues to actually implement management activities.

Technical capacity at all levels is also generally inadequate, particularly in land-use planning, forest management systems, business and financial management, participatory development, resources inventories and valuation, M&E, and data-management. The lack of capacity in administration and finance is evident from the delay in procurements, ironically resulting in significant under-spending especially in relation to the both Development Partner-funded activities, and in relation to the Government’s own budget. There is no sector-wide mid/log-term human resources capacity development plan that involves all stakeholders and current investments in capacity building tend to be short-term and isolated.

An example o this lack of technical capacity is that although royalties from timber sales account for 83% of all forestry revenue collected, they are often fixed arbitrarily and with an inadequate understanding of market values due to the lack of staff competencies in valuation. For example, the official valuation of timber in the LogScam for example was 55 US$/m3, but this represented only a small fraction of the true market value, which can be as high as 6,000 US$/m3, or more, for certain species such as African Blackwood and Ebony. It is estimated that because of erroneous market valuations the Government is currently losing revenues on sales and export royalties to the value of approximately US$23.8 million per annum.

Furthermore, because FBD’s current capacity is so inadequate it is often unable to provide even routine management services, such as the issuing of licenses or permits. The establishment of TFS and the necessary restructuring of the FBD will further delay improvements in basic management performance. At the moment, perhaps too much attention is being directed to the appointment of the key management staff and construction of new physical infrastructure, at the cost of not dealing adequately with the existing management challenges. Evidence from similar institutional and organizational adjustments elsewhere suggests that effective in service delivery will only come-on-stream at least 2-3 years after the restructuring has been initiated.


MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES
There are four types of forests recognized in the 2002 Forest Act: National forests, Local Authority forests, village forests and Private forests. Within this categorization forests may be either forest reserves/national park forests or non-reserved forest land; about 60% of the total forest area is currently non-reserved. Although the majority of these forests are under central or local government control, there are opportunities to be between 160,000ha and 200,000ha, comprising 83,000ha state-managed plantations, 6,000-7ha private industrial plantations, and an estimated 80,000 to 100,000ha of village and farm plantations. These plantations have the potential to create additional employment ant incomes to the rural poor, as well as to generate revenues to contribute to the needs of both district and national-level government. They are especially important in the more remote areas where they are often located.

Participatory Forest Management
History reveals that for rural communities in the tropics, forestlands management has been, and still is, part and parcel of rural livelihoods-caring for trees for present and future generations. Forest tenurial systems in Tanzania have, up till, now, been a replica of the colonial legacy. This article contributes to achieving sustainable forest resources development through a community-based resources co-management with the government in the West Usambara high canopy forests in northeastern Tanzania. The strategy is designed to accelerate the forest tenure reform process. The study focuses on the East Usambara forests. Ecologically, they belong to the Tropical Rain Forests of Tanzania, otherwise referred to as the Tropical High Forests which are important locally, nationally and globally for their cultural functions, as well as for sources of timber and non-wood products, conservation of catchment areas, and as a genetic pool of valuable species.

Preliminary research findings reveal that a co-management of forestland between the stakeholders and the Government is an amicable solution to the existing tenurial conflicts. This alternative tenure regime-though a sensitive issue amongst some government officials-is but a novel strategy for local communities. Hence, by empowering rural communities to make rational decisions through provision of education and other resources concerning forest conservation, it is hoped that they will gain more economic interest in protecting forestlands and increasing their productivity. It is proposed that Participatory rural appraisal tools, when applied to local communities, will enable them to scientifically care for the forests; and by the same token become resource stewards. By working at the grassroots level, it is anticipated that promotion of the productivity of forests and reduction of environmental hazards might be intrinsically linked to improved quality of life of local communities which are stewards of forest resources.

Participatory Forest Management is a key strategy to realize sustainable and equitable forestry in Tanzania. PFM offers important potential to improve management performance in all forest types, and to realize improved livelihood benefits at a local scale. A recent pilot study has demonstrated that annual village income under this type of management increased by up to US$653; such an amount can be quite significant in a rural context. However, the introduction of PFM is currently hampered by the cost and time taken to transfer management rights to non-government stakeholders and currently only 1% of the total forest reserve area is under this form of management. For example, it is estimated that a single PFM event may take up to 4-years to realize, and cost between US$50,000-100,000 to implement, depending on the size and the location of the forest. Clearly more work is needed to improve the economic efficiency of the PFM process and to streamline the actual implementation process.

In Tanzania, community involvement in forest management entails mainly two concepts, namely JFM and CBFM. In JFM, the government is the owner but shares duty and benefits with local communities, while in CBFM local communities are both owners and duty bearers (that is, owners, users and managers) (Alden Wily 1997). Currently, a number of government forest reserves have initiated participatory forest management and are at various stages in the process of implementing JFM. These reserves include, among others, Gologolo, Kipumbwi and Amani Nature Reserve in Tanga region, Udzungwa in Iringa region, Ufiome in Arusha region, Nkwenshoo in Kilimanjaro region, Kitulangh’alo in Morogoro region and Urumwa in Tabora region (Kajembe et al. 2004b). Examples of forests under CBFM include Duru-Haitemba in Manyara region, Mgori in Singida region and part of South Ruvu Forest Reserve in Coast region (Alden Wily & Mbaya 2001). However, despite many efforts by governments and development organisations to establish and implement collaborative management, little is known about what has been achieved so far in terms of improving local people’s welfare and the resource base condition (Adams & Hulme 2001).

Private Sector Involvement
There is considerable interest by large-scale private companies to invest in plantation development in Tanzania. However, despite the provisions in the Forest Act and Regulation, no concessions for the state-owned plantations have been granted to private investors. And any potential that the private sector does have to realize management dividends is currently constrained by excessive bureaucracy, corruption, and inadequate support services. In any case, the royalties and other fees set by the Government tend to lead to only low rates of return on forestry investment and therefore do not encourage investments in production or processing technologies, or in innovation. This is exacerbated by the high commercial interest rates, lack of special credit facilities and the present licensing policy, whereby licensing policy, whereby licenses are issued for one-year only.

It is also apparent that the private forestry sector is fragmented, and poorly organized and this hinders stakeholder dialogue on policy to the extent that the private sector was largely ignored in formulating the current Forest Policy, Forest Act and Forest regulations. There is also a lack of consensus within the industry regarding a potential Code of Conduct and a quality assurance system.

Communication Strategy
An important component of any management strategy is the effective communication to stakeholders of policies, legal rights and responsibilities and economic incentives. But many stakeholders in district government, village councils, NGOs/CBOs, and the private sector do not have access to the provisions of the Forest Act and are therefore not adequately aware of the opportunities it present. The President’s Office-Regional Administration and local Government (PO-RALG) therefore has a potentially useful role to link the FBD and Districts and to communicate the contents and opportunities of the Forest Act, the National Forest Programme and Participatory Forest Management, but again there is confusion as to its precise it has limited capacity and resources to carry out this task.

IMPACTS OF FOREST DEFORESTATION
Forest depletion and degradation has several impacts that affect people’s livelihoods and their environment. Some of these impacts include erosion and loss of soil productivity; acute shortages of timber, fuelwood and other forest products and services; drying of water sources and shortage of water for various purposes; floods, sedimentation of rivers, reservoirs and irrigation systems; global warming, and species extinction due to habitat fragmentation and over-exploitation.

In Tanzania, due to deforestation, many parts of the country have been experiencing serious soilerosion problem particularly in the central region where miombo woodlands dominate (Misana 1988b, Misana et al. 1996). Deforestation has also affected the potential of water catchment areas in terms of the quantity and quality of water they supply. Increased sedimentation of rivers and dams, river sands and frequent flash floods are reported in several parts of the country (e.g. recent floods in Mwanza, Shinyanga and Tabora where 60% of total forest is miombo woodlands). The resulting lack of water and poor quality of water have been, in many cases, associated with incidences of many water-borne diseases such as typhoid, diarrhoea and cholera. Addressing effectively the problem of forest depletion and degradation will mitigate/reduce or eliminate those hazards and improve rural livelihoods. This can be achieved through good miombo woodland governance and sound management practices.

Tree planting campaigns in Tanzania is done national wide. First day of January each year is set aside specifically for planting trees. There are also private initiatives and incentives for tree planting by small farmers such as free distribution of seedlings. However, these settings do not frequently take into account the opportunity costs of the land, land tenure problems, availability and accessibility of markets, and so on. Therefore, although tree planting can be seen as a suitable rejoinder to fuel wood shortages, regrettably, too often the decision to pay out meager revenue, time and land for planting trees has been roughly an imprudent retort to most of the small-scale farmers, taken without contemplation of other alternatives and the consequences of existing market and policy failures (Ahlbäck 1995, Bakengesa 1997).

The current forest management move is to designate the main responsibility of forest management to local stakeholders i.e. the villagers and village governments. A forest component, with a programmatic approach, was approved in December 2002 for a five-year period. The programme, called Participatory Forest Management (PFM) is contributing to a comprehensive reform of Tanzania’s forest administration and management, which places new emphasis on participatory management systems of natural and other forests. In Tanzania, PFM has become the most important approach within the forestry sector following its inclusion in the National Forest Policy in 1998 and the Forest Act of 2002 and Land Act of 1999.

Early attempt to solve environmental problems without local people involvement have achieved very little success. Today the role community in the management of natural resources has become a key component in development programs (Kajembe and Mgoo 1999). Since 1998 the Government has changed forest policy from central government oriented to participatory management were communities around were given mandate to manage the forests on behalf or under joint management. Various Community Based Forest Management models (CBFM) been established with success such as Duru-haitemba (CBFM), Urumwa (CBFM) in Tabora, Mgori Joint Forest Management (JFM) in Singida. However, under JFM and CBFM the legal ownership of land remains with the Government. Village committees are co-managers of the forest and are entitled to shares in forest products. Forest protection committees control access to the forests and manage them. These local community institutions are said to proving more effective than State Forest Departments in managing the forest. Regenerating forests now provide more medicinal, fibre, fodder, and dry fuelwood and food products for rural people, whose livelihoods are thereby improved.

For example, Abdallah and Sauer (2007) compared species diversity of three forest management regimes: forests under general land, community based management in Iringa region. The that most of the species were observed in forests with lowest Shannon-Weaver and with uneven relative abundances (general land forests and family forests). However, the forests under family and general lands revealed the lowest volume and basal area (11.1 m3/ha and 2.5 m2/ha respectively) compared to forests under community based management (20.0 m3/ha and 4.3 m2/ha respectively).

Further economic efficiency of small-scale farmers where correletated with species diversity of places where forest management regimes where they collect firedwood for tobacco curing. The correlation coefficients indicate that a higher economic efficiency of small-scale tobacco production is associated with higher species diversity in the surrounding forest area. Since species di- diversity is not a direct input for tobacco production, however, it could be suggested that a more efficient use of firewood (energy saving) for tobacco curing as well as a more efficient use of land would lower the rate of biodiversity loss. In other words, reducing shift cultivation/forest clearing for new tobacco plots could reduce the rate of change of miombo woodlands to other land use.

The coefficients further indicate that CBFM has a positive impact on the species diversity of the respective forest resources. Hence community based institutional arrangements significantly would contribute to the conservation of the forests in Tanzania. This indicates the need for replication of such arrangements to other types of forest management such as those in general lands and families. This supports the view of PFM and decentralization of forest management in the country i.e. continue to transfer the control over the woodland resources to the community level because local communities are successful in curbing free-riding behaviour and in sustainably managing the resource (Dewees 1994, Ruttan 1998, Ostrom 1999, Trawick 2001, Milinski and Semmann 2002).

Since forests with lower diversity indices occur in the general lands (non gazetted), which
lack proper management, and harvesting is done without close supervision due to absence of or weak property rights, households producing tobacco at the expense of these forests could lead to inefficient scores. This is because forests under general lands rarely motivate conservation efforts. According to Ostrom (1999) general lands forests do not have property right, appropriators gain property rights only to what they harvest. However, the appropriators usually make no effort to conserve the resource. Frequently, the appropriators act independently and do not communicate or coordinate their activities in any way, hence these predict over-harvesting.

However, both CBFM and JFM in Tanzania are still in experimental stage. Although efforts for scaling-up JFM and CBFM in Tanzania are underway, but private sectors, donors and government efforts to provide benefits on an equivalent scale from non-forest sources and an essential supplement to agriculture are naïve. Therefore chances for poverty reduction and forest conservation reconciliation are rare.

Participatory Forest Management Constraint
While many villages are participating in PFM across the country, relatively few have formalized their forest management in line with the Forest Act of 2002. This requires that villagers have an approved management plan or signed Joint Management Agreement for their forest land. The introduction of PFM is currently hampered by the cost and time taken to transfer management right to non-government stakeholders and currently only 1% of the total forest reserve area is under this form of management. For example, it is estimated that a single PFM may even take up to 4 years to realize, and cost between US$50,000 – 100,000 to implement, depending on the size and the location of the forest. Clearly more work is needed to improve the economic efficiency of the PFM process and to streamline the actual implementation process.

FBD (2006) revealed that revenues reported from areas under JFM, particularly in catchment forests remain particularly low. One important source of revenue from village forest management is fines levied by the village council on those found undertaking unauthorized activities in the forest. However, as law enforcement efforts by local communities increase and as illegal activities drop, revenue from fines decreases. This sometimes acts as a disincentive to local forest management as fines often represents one of the only sources of revenue to local communities from catchment forests. The accelerated retrenchment during the 1990s, often to comply with structural adjustment policies, occurred together with the realization that centrist management strategies need reformulation. Erosion of the legitimacy of local institutions is one of the PFM constraints. Local institutions have no real authority to decide on the management of forest resources. Another challenge is with regard to the stratified communities. Interests of some actors are represented only inadequately.

Lack of political will at the centre to give powers to communities and grassroots organizations is also a challenge to CBFM initiatives. It is also important that benefits must be significant if the community is to go to the trouble of establishing and enforcing the rules about resource use. This begs the question on whether community based forest management programmes/projects have sufficient value to stimulate community participation. This remains a puzzle! Rural communities are undergoing rapid social, economic, and political change, as the development and modernization process spreads and deepens. Even if effective and viable user groups exist or can be put in place today, will they survive and persist in the face of modernization pressures? Much more need to be known about the institutional context in which users now find themselves and the type of support that will increase the probability of sustainable management of our forest resources (Kajembe et al. 2000).

In some PFM projects often the interests of women are forgotten. In addition to this, conversion of general lands into JFM or CBFM restricts access to land and other natural resources by women (Rani Undated). Realities that could work against CBFM or JFM include, among others, difficulty in recognizing the most appropriate community members for programme participation, e.g. men or women (Little 1994). Women are often excluded from community organizations or committees that manage natural resources, even when the projects are intended to benefit them (IFAD Undated). NGO alliance launches campaign to tackle illegal logging Dar es Salaam, Tanzania 7 April 2008 Seventeen non-governmental organisations have signed a milestone agreement to tackle corruption and mismanagement in Tanzania’s forestry sector. The signing of the agreement marks the start of the ‘Mama Misitu’ campaign, an initiative that aims to dramatically improve forest governance in the country. Illegal logging and weak forest governance cost Tanzania billions of shillings in lost revenue each year as well as threatening some of the nation’s landscapes and unique biodiversity. The Mama Misitu campaign aims to bring about major improvements in forest governance, particularly in southern Tanzania. The campaign will be working with people at all levels of society to ensure that forests are managed sustainably for the benefit of present and future generations. The campaign will focus on areas where illegal logging has been most destructive including Coast, Morogoro, Lindi, Tanga, Ruvuma and Mtwara Regions. ‘Now is the time for action’, declared Cassian Sianga of the Tanzania Natural Resources Forum. ‘We have the information, we know what needs to be done and through the Mama Misitu campaign we plan to support peope to make real changes in how Tanzania’s forests are managed. Business as usual is no longer acceptable. It is robbing our nation of desperately needed resources for rural development and poverty reduction.’ Billions of shillings worth of timber revenue is lost to Tanzania each year because of widespread corruption and poor governance. Losses of up to US$ 58 million were estimated in 2005 alone. That is equivalent to the cost of building 1,933 primary schools.

A culture of corruption has plagued the natural resources sector made worse by low awareness at many levels of the relevant legal and policy tools. The 17 founding partners in ‘Mama Misitu’ are Africare, CARE-Tanzania, Farm Africa, Journalists’ Environmental Team, International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), Lawyers Environmental Action Team, Mpingo Conservation Project, Policy Forum, Tanzania Association of Foresters (TAF), Tanzania Forest Conservation Group (TFCG), Tanzania Natural Resources Forum (TNRF), TRAFFIC, the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS), Wildlife Conservation Society of Tanzania (WCST), World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF) and the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) Tanzania Programme Office. The initiative is facilitated by the Tanzania Natural Resources Forum and is financed by the Government of Finland. Charles Meshack, Director of the Tanzania Forest Conservation Group stated that ‘The Mama Misitu campaign will shine a spotlight on areas where forest governance is weakest.

Tanzania has excellent forest policy and laws. Although some of these policies and laws need to be improved further, they need to be implemented and applied equally to everybody. People need to know their rights, their responsibilities and apply them properly’, Over the next two years, the Mama Misitu Campaign will be providing communities, government officers and the private sector with information and training about forest governance. The campaign will be pushing forest governance to the forefront of the public’s attention. The campaign will focus on issues relating to timber harvesting and community involvement in sustainably managing forests and forest revenues. The name Mama Misitu reflects the life-supporting role of forests and the need for everybody to play a role in nurturing those forests so that while benefiting from them now, we can hand them on to future generations to benefit from too.
Jack Titsworth(2007) the governance advisor wrote a paper on governance in the forestry sector National, International and Local linkages suggested that there is evidence of unsustainable harvests, government potential not realized, negative trend in revenue collection, species depletion, decline in wood quality, land degradation, land degradation, reduced water storage capacity, Depletion of sources of traditional fuel(charcoal) and medicines upon which most of the population depends and rural communities exploited disturbing longer term outlook.
Taking an example of revenue collection, it is estimated that Tanzania gets a very small percentage for example in 2004 Tanzania collected only 4%revenue collected from the timber actually harvested. Levels of illegal, unreported. Unregulated (IUU) Logging increased from 80% year 2001 to 96% in 2004. A vivid example found in July 2004, the Minister for Natural Resources and Tourism visited Dar es Salaam port to review aspects of the performance of the newly implemented Forest Act. During this visit 187 shipping-containers were discovered holding logs that had either not been legally acquired or were not licensed for export. Further inspections were ordered in coastal districts that revealed 6,898m3 of illegal logs valued at Tsh 382.65million (US$320,000). The revelation of this illegal trade in timber, the LogScam, made headlines in the national media.
There are different reasons as to why there is a negative trend in revenue collection, these include governance shortfalls are a limiting factors in revenue collection, social equity and sustainable practices, including the effectiveness of current technical intervention; empirical data and qualitative knowledge required to manage the forestry resources are inadequate or missing; capacity shortage and low motivation contribute heavily; corruption especially that involving seniour public servant, has negative influence on management decision making.
In Tanzania, forest programmes and policies have been designed at central government level. As a specific part of human's respective habitat, forestland forms an essential basis for human history and culture. History reveals that for rural communities in the Tropics, forestlands management has been, and still is, part and parcel of rural livelihoods-caring for trees for present and future generations (Report of the Independent Commission on Population and the Quality of Life, 1996).

Forest resources management regimes in Tanzania today are a function of colonial administrations (Ahlback, 1988; Neumann, 1993). The forestlands regimes established by the Germans (1885-1916) and the British (1918-61) authorities ensured that the indigenous people had no ownership rights over the forests. Hence through relevant legal instruments, forests became the property of the colonial state. This mechanism enabled only the colonisers to exploit forests and other resources, including labour thus underdeveloping Tanzanians.

The forest management systems therefore are, up till now, a replica of the colonial legacy, There are no significant departures with respect to the mode of relationships in so far as who has access to, responsibility and control over'these resources. The current state of affairs is that more often than not, some community members living in the neighbourhoods of some forest resources benefit mainly through sale of their labour power to entrepreneurs (not indigenous to forested areas), who own licenses to exploit forest products and services. Thus, co-management of forestland between stakeholders at grassroots level and the government has great potential to promote forest productivity and reduce environmental hazards which are intrinsically linked to improved quality of life of local communities and the nation, who are stewards of forest resources.

There are only a few tenure critics who stilI propound the "tragedy of the commons" thesis that enjoyed considerable support especially during the 1970s and the early 1980s. It has become more evident that unlike open access which implies an absence of property rights, community-based tenure systems reveal the presence of property rights (Lynch, 1994; Shivji, 1998). In Tanzania, the central issue is one of rights of access rather than ownership through whatever means. As noted in the National Forest Policy of the United Republic of Tanzania (URT, 1998), local communities will be encouraged to participate in forestry activities. It is imperative, therefore, that a democratic management of forest resources envisages rural resource use patterns in a spatial continuum. In this case, a household farm be conceived as a nucleus and as part and parcel of a neighbouring forestland, just as forest resources have local, subnational, national and global importance. This is a kind of overlapping community-based rights on land resources in totality.

A Forest Resources Co-Management Strategy for Tanzania
Based on this premise, efforts directed towards efficient and democratic forest management should address the smallholder farmer as the key stakeholder, who is also dependent on the natural resources that form part of the livelihood. The role of the state and the international communi.ty should therefore be to provide an enabling environment that ensures stable, equitable and sustainable development of the resources for the present and future generations.

The West Usambara forests belong to the tropical rain forests of Tanzania, otherwise referred to as the tropical high forests, or the high canopy forests. The single-dominant forest occurs primarily as Juniperus procera (Alhback, 1988; Pocs, 1989). The forests form part of the series of the eastern arc mountain forests spanning from the Pare mountains in the northeast to the Udzungwa in the southeast. Since these forestlands are spatially isolated from each other, they have a very diverse flora and fauna. As a genetic resource, these high canopy forests contain more species than any other ecosystem (Lovett 1985). The Tanzania high canopy forests are characterized by the plants' competition for light compared to other ecosystems. The resultant structure is the creation of layering or vertical structure, whereby the topmost layer is the emergent trees followed by a continuous canopy which tends to restrict sunlight to reach layers below it, making them permanently under shade. Given sporadic windthrows, a process called phytoturbation, gaps are created in the canopy which influence the horizontal structure facilitating seedlings and saplings of the middle storey and canopy trees, shrubs and herbs to colonise the areas (Figure 2). Species of fully vertically structured forest are the primary species; and the light demanding, fast-growing colonising species, are called secondary species. The Tanzania high canopy forests characterised by a high level of endemism are hence a dynamic ecosystem.

Further, this resource has a great potential in improving commercial varieties with respect to breeding improved yield, aroma, pests and disease resistance. All the mentioned forest functions can best be achieved if-and only if-all the actors are democratically involved in forestry management programmes and policies (World Resources Institute 1994). Contemporary Forest Resource Management Issues

According to Wytt-Smith (1987), effective high canopy forest resources management calls for a better understanding of the silvi-cultural characteristics of the woody species. Since most management standards concentrate on destruction or interference of the structure of closed forests, there is need for a careful contemplation of the constraints in terms of nature and area covered, intensity as well as stakeholders. Hence, forest policies and rules should, among other things, address these key issues.

There are however, some managerial and institutional framework which govern, albeit undemocratically, the contemporary forest tenurial regime. The German colonial administration enacted the first Forest Conservation Ordinance in 1904 which was concerned with creating a system of forest reserves and establishing prohibitions against their unauthorized use by indigenous communities (Neuman, 1993). It is interesting to note that the first Forest Department Headquarters was Lushoto, the present study area. It is further reported that the British, after World War I, closely followed the exploitative forest regulations set up by the Germans.

Clearly, an effective forest resources management is far from being achieved through state control. It is advanced that other than outdated toothless laws, the sector suffers from lack of trained manpower and financial resources to undertake a thorough monitoring and surveillance of forestlands. This limits the enforcement of prohibition rules. Given the state of the national economy, one wonders whether financial support per se would improve forestry management. Following the discussion with the villagers and their leaders, the need to involve the people in protecting the forests was expressed differently by various groups. Participation of villagers in resource exploitation, however, was deplored by some top forest officials and supported by villagers and some village and district leaders. Some officials at the Ministry headquarters were arguing that the farmers do not have a technical know-how in forestry management, hence involving them in decision making is tantamount to destruction of forest resources. This means giving power to villagers is loss of power by some top government officials as far as forest revenue is concerned. Additionally, there is need also to consider seriously the issue of combating grafting in this sub-sector of the economy as a means for achieving sustainable resource use systems.

As for the SECAP leadership at the project site, the opmlon was that comanagement was a sensitive issue but they were ready to support these community empowerment initiatives whenever asked to. This positive response may have been derived from their long experience in community forestry in the region. In view of the 1998 National Forest Policy framework, efforts directed to searching for a strategy for grassroots level forest resources management cannot be underestimated. The social relations between the local people and the state institutions with respect to forest management in terms of access, responsibility, and control over the resource could be summed up as antagonistic. It is against this background that a co-management of forestland between the communities and the government is a sensitive issue amongst some government officials, and a noble idea amongst local communities. Similar experiences have been reported in some regions in Tanzania regarding land rights (Shivji, 1998) and in some Latin American countries (Peter Veit pers. com.). Based on these observations, there is an urgent need for recasting rural resource use patterns in a spatial continuum. It is imperative that the household farm be seen as a nucleus and as part and parcel of the forestland for sustainable rural livelihoods. In this case, efforts must be made towards ensuring that the smallholder farmer, who is the key stakeholder, is responsible for the natural resources that form part of the livelihood, and the state should provide an enabling environment that ensures sustainable development of the resource for the present and future generation. Some Suggested Practical Research Steps for Reforming Forest Management In order to carry the tenure reform process forward, two sites have been identified in West Usambara forests for a detailed research on forest resources co-management at grassroots level. As noted by Misana et. ai. (1997), such a process seeks to assist stakeholders make scientific decisions on their resources. The study area has been selected on the basis of the diversity of the forest management regimes.

The sites are, first, the Mtumbi local authority forest reserve. This resource is located on Kitala ridge in Mlalo division, Lushoto district. Formerly it was a governmental reserve which has recently been under the Lushoto District Council's responsibility. The communities living in the surrounding villages include Wapare, Wasambaa, and Wambugu. The Wapare have been termed land hungry and thence leading in the deforestation process, whereas the Wambugu are said to be conservationists as characterized by their bushy enclosed homesteads. The second site is Kihitu local authority forest reserve located in Soni division. The surrounding communities live in the villages of Kihitu and Kwemihafa. The dominant communities are the Wapare and the Wambugu.

Since villages in Tanzania are political administrative units as defined by village governments under decentralization, forest resource management at this level is feasible. The village government, therefore, has powers of decision-making corresponding to three more familiar categories of central government, namely legislative, executive, and judicial (Agarawal and Ribot, 2000). Efficient resource management at village level calls for the power to: create rules or modify outdated ones, make decision about how a particular product or service is to be used, implement and ensure compliance to the new or altered rules, and adjucate disputes that arise in the process to create rules and ensure compliance.

It is emphasized here that rural people and their institutions be empowered to make decisions on utilisation and conservation of forest resources. This may be achieved by providing them with knowledge, information, and other resources pertaining to forest management and conservation (URT, 1998). In so doing, the stakeholders will be more responsible and answerable in the preservation, renewal and enrichment of forestland resources. As a result, local people are assisted in better understanding of ecological principles and institutional framework for combating forest resources degradation. Special emphasis should be placed on training and extension activities for women who perform most of the work related to forest minor products (FAO, 1991; Misana et.al., 1997). It may be stipulated that once the stakeholders are assured of ownership of a resource, they will be all out to protect it against degradation. Ultimately, the forest resources will be utilized equitably and sustainably.
BEE KEEPING IN TANZANIA
INTRODUCTION
Beekeeping in Tanzania plays a major role in socio-economic development and environment conservation. It is a source of food (e.g. honey, pollen and brood), raw materials for various industries (e.g. beeswax candles, lubricants), medicine (honey, propolis, beeswax bee venom) and source of income for beekeepers. It is estimate that the sector generates about US$ 1.7 million each year from sales of honey and beeswax and employs about 2 million rural people. It is an important income generating activity with high potential for proving incomes, especially for communities leaving close to forest and woodlands. Beekeeping also plays a major role in improving biodiversity and increasing crop production through pollination. (Mwakatobe and Mlingwa).

THEORETICAL LITERATURE REVIEW
Beekeeping in Tanzania is carried out using tradition methods that account for 99% of the total production of honey and beeswax in the country. Approximately 95% of all hives are traditional including log and bark hives. Others are needs, gourds, pots etc. During the colonial and early independence period the production of bee products was higher than what we have now and was among the important non-wood products from the forest with a higher contribution to the national GDP and international trade (kihwele, 1991). However, today the industry has declined in exports in exports to an insignificant level despite of its high potential.

Tanzania (i.e. then Tanganyika) was an important source of beeswax during the Germany colonial period (Ntenga, 1976). The production of beeswax from Tanzania increased from 320 to 905 tons during 1906 to 1952. Honey was estimated at an annual average production of 10,000 tons all consumed locally (Smith, 1958). Following independence in 1961, a marketing organization of honey and beeswax was formed. According to Ntegna (1976), Tanzanian exports averaged 368 tons of beeswax and 467 tons of honey. During the 1996/97 period, the annual exports dropped to 359 tons of beeswax and 2.46 tons of honey (Tanzania Customs Department, 1997).

According to Seegeren et al. (1996), in 1984 world honey export totaled 270 000 tones of which 60% came from the tropics. Prices varied between US $ 0.7 and 2.5kg-1. Beeswax, which, among other things, is used in the manufacture of cosmetics, candles, foundation sheets for hives, medicine and polishes, had a good and very stable market. In 1990 world market prices varied between US $ 2 and 3 kg-1. Beeswax production varies from 0.2 to 0.5 kilogram hive-1 year-1 when frame are used and 0.5 to 2 kilograms hive-1 year-1 when the honey is pressed and call combs are melted (Mwakatobe and Mlingwa).

In Tanzania traditional beekeeping is credited for almost all production of honey and beeswax (Mwakatobe, 2001). Besides playing wider domestic roles in the bees and bee-products industry in Tanzania, beekeeping is also a good source of foreign exchange earnings. The information currently available indicates that during the year 1996/1997, Tanzania exported 359 tons of beeswax and 2.46 tons of honey worth US$ 1019 020 and US$ 2 058 respectivley (BDP, 2005; Tanzania Customs Department, 1997). Several authors (Kiwhele & Bradbear, 1989; TFAP, 1988; Mlay, 1997) have estimated that the production of bee products could increasing by 50%, if its potential could be optimally exploited.

POTENTIAL AND PRODUCTION OF THE BEE PRODUCTS
Beekeeping Potentials and Production
Tanzania is endowed with favourable environment for production of honey, beeswax and other bee products. The country has about 33.5 million hectares of forests and woodlands that are scattered throughout the country and are ideal for developing beekeeping industry. Almost 20.5million hectares out of this area are unreserved forests and woodlands, while 13 million hectares of forest and woodland have been gazetted as forest plantations that are also suitable for beekeeping. The mangrove forests of mainland Tanzania that covers about 115,500 ha are also valuable as bee fodder. High potential for beekeeping is also found in agricultural land where substantial bee products can be harvested from agricultural crops e.g. sunflower, green beans, coffee, coconut and sisal. The presence of both stinging and non-stinging honeybees coupled with existence of indigenous knowledge in beekeeping is also a great potential (see Table 1)

It is estimated that Tanzania has about 9.2 million honeybee colonies where production potential of bee products is about 138,000 tons of honey and 9,200 tons of beeswax per annum (URT, 1998). These are worthy US $ 138 million and US $ 18.4 million, respectively (using average prices of the year 2003, i.e. US $ 1 per kg. of Honey and US $ 2 per kg. of beeswax). Present Utilization of this potential is only about 3.5% annual.

Table 1: Honey production potential and actual production in selected districts in Tanzania
High producing area
Medium producing area
Un-exploited areas
District
Potential (tons)
Actual (tons)
District
Potential (tons)
Actual (tons)
District
Potential (tons)
Actual (tons)
Kahama
4,000
500
Kondoa
3,000
300
Lindi
8,000
50
Mpanda
8,000
1,500
Kiteto
2,000
250
Songea
6,000
50
Sikonge
6,000
2,000
Babati
1,200
150
Iringa
5,000
40
Urambo
6,000
1,400
Kibondo
4,000
250
Biharamuro
4,000
15
Nzega
4,000
400
Handeni
3,000
150
Kasulu
4,000
5
Tabora
5,000
1,200
Kigoma
3,000
100
Newala
4,000
15
Chunya
6,000
400
Arumeru
1,500
100
Tunduru
4,000
15
Manyoni
8,000
600
Rufiji
2,500
50
Singida
3,000
5
Bukombe
5,000
800
Nkasi
1,500
50
Hai
2,500
5
Total
52,000
7,800

21,700
1,400

40,000
180
Production ration of honey and beeswax per colony per year is estimated to be 15:1
Source: National Beekeeping Programme, 2001.

POLICY REVIEW
The National Beekeeping Policy, 1998
The Government of Tanzania developed the National Beekeeping Policy (NBP) in 1998. The overall goal of the National Beekeeping Policy is to enhance the contribution of the beekeeping sector to the sustainable development of Tanzania and the conservation and management of its natural resources for the benefit of present and future generations. NBP encourages active participation of all stakeholders in established and sustainable management of bee reserves and apiaries, promoting beekeeping-based industries and products and promoting sustainable management beekeeping in cross-sectoral areas for ecosystem conservation and management. To enable effective implementation on the NBP, two instruments have been put in place:
§ The National Beekeeping Programme (NBKP) and
§ The Beekeeping Act No. 15 of 2002.

The National Beekeeping Programme
The National Beekeeping Programme (NBKP, 2001) is an instrument designed to put into practice the NBP with emphasis on stakeholders participation in the planning, management, ownership and sustainable utilization of bee resources for poverty eradication, improved biodiversity development and environment conservation. The programme has three sub programmes including Beekeeping Development Programme, Legal and Regulatory Framework and Insitutional and Human Resources Development Programme.

The Beekeeping Act No. 15, (2002)
The Beekeeping Act No. 15 of 2002 was enacted by Parliament in April 2002. Its main objectives are: (i) To make provisions for the orderly conduct of beekeeping; (ii) To improve the quality and quantity of bee products; (iii) To prevent and eradicate bee diseases and bee pests, and (iv); To improve revenue collection.

National Forestry Policy, 1998
The National Forestry Policy Provides opportunities for beekeepers to practice beekeeping in forest reserves.

Wildlife Policy of Tanzania, 1998
Beekeeping activities are encouraged to be carried out in Wildlife Management Areas (WMA) by involving local communities. With special permission from the Direct of Wildlife beekeepers are allowed to carryout beekeeping in game reserves and game controlled areas.

Village Land Act, 1999
The Village Act 1999 is one of the most important legislative texts that support community based natural resources management (Willy, 2003). It empowers the community at local level (village) recognizing it has the appropriate representative structure to implement natural resources management. In view of this, through village land use management system beekeepers can be allocated land for beekeeping development.

Our main challenge now is to use this enabling environment created by the Policy, Progamme and legal framework to encourage Tanzania and other investors to take up beekeeping so that they can benefit in terms of income, poverty reduction and conservation of environment.

EMPIRICAL REVIEW
Internal market
According to Mapolu (2005), the internal markets for money and beeswax are not well established. Demand for homey as food and as an authentic ingredient in various foods and as a product with healing qualities is increasing. About 50% of honey produced is sold locally for honey beer and honey wine production and about 10% of honey produced as consumed locally as industrial honey in confectioneries and pharmaceutical industries. At the beekeepers gate 1 kg of honey is selling between 0.6 US $ and 0.9 US $ while in cities like Dar es Salaam, Arusha, Moshi etc the price of honey is between 1.0 US $ and US $ 2.5 US $ per kg.

The potential unexploited markets are large towns, hotels, airlines and tourist centres if packed in proper packaging materials. Only very small of quantities of beeswax are consumed locally in candle making and batiks. The price of 1kg of beeswax is selling between 1.5 US$ to 2.5. US$ In the domestic market, the key players are beekeepers, private traders, processors, association and honey beer brewers.

International market
Demand for honey and beeswax in the world market is very high and the demand for Tanzania honey and beeswax exceeds supply. The international markets for Tanzania honey and beeswax are highly competitive in terms of quality. In 1991, Tanzania honey won by 100% the quality test for “organic honey” in UK. However, quality control in terms of other factors such as “HMF”, color, taste, viscosity and aroma, needs legal directives that will have to be adhered by all people handling the honey before it reaches the consumer (URT, 1998).

The main buyers of Tanzania honey are the European Union member countries especially the UK, Germany and the Netherlands. Other countries are United Arab Emirates, Oman and Kenya. The main importers of Tanzania beeswax are Japan, USA and European Union member countries. Regarding international markets prices, the highest quality table honey price is 1,200 US $/ ton, while industrial honey is only about 1,000 US $/ ton. The price of beeswax is 5,000 US $ per ton. Table 2 below shows the export trend of honey and beeswax for the last five years.
Table 2: Tanzania Honey and beeswax exports for 1998-2003/2004

Beeswax
Honey

Year
Tons
Value (US$)
Tons
Value (US$)
1998 / 99
403.0
1,440,678.0
39.0
35,533.0
1999 / 2000
643.0
2,450,550.0
156.0
167,698.0
2000 / 2001
370.0
1,056,790.0
12.3
14,760
2001 / 2002
235.0
617,618.0
-
-
2002 / 2003
592.0
1,776,000.0
823.13
905,443.0
2003 / 2004
332,0.0
1,165,490.0
821.13
1,087,657.0
2004 / 2005 Nov.
193.0
757,400.0
367.72
418,358.0
Exchange rate: 1USD = 1069 TAS Source: BDP, Mapolu (2005)
Tanzania honey fetches high prices on the international market. For example, during 1999/2000 one ton of honey fetched 3,741.13 USD (Table 3) while the price of beeswax was about 1,075 USD. When compared with the prices of other export crops, export prices of bee products have remained relatively high which indicates high demand and lucrative opportunity for Tanzania bee products.

Table 3: Export prices for Bee Products for 1999 / 2000 to 2002 / 2003
Year
Honey
Beeswax

Tshs/ton
USD / ton
Tshs/ton
USD/ton
1999 / 2000
2,950,624.83
3,741.13
849,883.11
1,074.99
2000 / 2001
2,284,951.35
2,856.19
959,349.59
1,200.00
2001 / 2002
2,365,345.45
2,628.16
904,616.35
1,157.50
2002 / 2003
3,000,000.00
3,000.00
931,982.97
1,168.75
Source: FDB, 2004

CONTRANTS OF BEEKEEPING INDUSTRY IN TANZANIA
The major constraints that hinder beekeeping development in Tanzania as stipulated in the policy can be grouped in three categories as follows:

(i) Poor quality of bee product
Inadequate skills / knowledge to apply improved technologies
Use of inappropriate technology in harvesting, processing, storage and packaging.
Poor storage of products.

(ii) Low production of bee product
Poor use and access to improve production technologies.
Increased loss of beekeeping areas.
Inadequate and ineffective extension services.
Inadequate statistical information to guide plans and operations.

(iii) Inadequate marketing of bee product
Inaccessibility to markets
Unreliable transport
Lack of market information
Inadequate entrepreneurship skills among beekeepers
Inadequate joint efforts in marketing

MARKETING IMPROVEMENTS
According to Ngaga et al (2005), three are opportunities for improving marketing practices and efficiencies exist in Tanzania for both domestic and international markets.

Domestic Markets
In Domestic Markets the opportunities include:
(a) Improving the awareness of the uses of bee products;
(b) Increasing outputs per head per beehive;
(c) Creasing sustainable bee reserves;
(d) Enabling entrepreneur, beneficiaries and stakeholders to perform efficiently;
(e) Increasing the availability of relevant information to all stakeholders and beneficiaries
(f) Developing market centres in strategic locations for collecting and storing bee products and providing solutions to beekeepers’ needs and problems;
(g) Improving access to support services from private, government; and international agencies;

International Market
International Market opportunities include
(a) Collecting and dissemination of market information;
(b) Knowledge of demand, supply delivery requirements;
(c) Improvements in markets accessibility (e.g. reduction in restrictive, productive and preventive trade practices and regulations quality control, etc.);
(d) Improvement in export prices, packaging; and
(e) Increasing in trade development

EMPIRICAL REVIEW
The Government with the support of donors, private sectors and NGOs has initiated several interventions to support beekeeping development through improvement of quantity and quality of bee products in Tanzania.

Government budgets
The Governments in its annual budget sets fund for beekeeping activities such as training of extension workers, surveying and demarcation of bee reserves, extension and quality control of the products.

Beekeeping Development Project in Five Districts
The Government of Norway through NORAD is cooperating with the Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism (MNRT) in supporting beekeeping in five potential District (Handeni, Manyon, Kondoa, Kibondo and Tabora) through the Beekeeping Development Project (BDP). BDP was formed as a strategy to implement the National Beekeeping Policy (1998). BDP is implementing sub programme of Beekeeping Development Programme of the NBKP, 2001. The purpose of the BDP is to increasingly involve communities and other stakeholders in managing honeybee resources in sustainable manner. The key project activities include Information management, Extension and information dissemination, Institutional collaboration with internal external institutions, Capacity building of resources managers and entrepreneurs and Improve processing, packaging and marketing of bee products. The BDP is implemented through a partnership between the Forestry and Beekeeping Division (FBD), District Councils and Beekeepers (local communities).

According to Mwakatobe and Mlingwa, the BDP major achievements included the following:
(i) Establishment of bee reserves
The National Beekeeping Policy (1998) envisages setting aside sufficient forest cover as bee conservation area for the purpose of providing areas for production of bee products; conservation of biodiversity; source of packaging bees etc. The villages in these five districts have proposed an area of 82,931 ha as bee reserves. Out of these 20,732 ha (25%) have been surveyed and demarcated.

(ii) Training of extension agents
The project has already trained 1,400 beekeepers in appropriate beekeeping technologies where by 662 are women and 738 are men. The trained beekeepers are the trainers for other beekeepers.

(iii) Production of extension materials
Publishing a book, Beekeeping in Tanzania (Swahili and English Versions) The sales of the books are expected to generate Tshs 82,500,000 that will a contribution to Beekeeping Development Fund (BEDF). Several leaflets and brochures have been produces and disseminated to the stakeholders.

(iv) Average honey production increase
The average production of honey per trained beekeeper has increased from 3.7 tons in the year 1999 to 6.5 tons in the year 2003 in Manyoni district.

(v) Average income
During the period 2003 / 2004, the price of honey increased from Tshs 15,000 per 30kg container in June 2003 to 18,000 Tshs by June 2004. in Manyoni district for example beekeepers accrued an average income per beekeepers of Tshs 574,403.20. Beekeepers therefore, accrues the higher income as compared to others.

(vi) Training of beekeepers on processing of bee product
About 1400 beekeepers were trained on appropriate beekeeping practices including processing, packaging and marketing of bee products. As a result of quality control and monitoring of bee products about 100 tons of export quality honey was purchased from the project area by several companies for export.

Intervention to be supported by the Government of Belgium
The government is expecting to receive support from the Government of Belgium. This support will specially focus on the development and improvement of processing, packaging, and marketing of honey beeswax and other bee products. The project is expected to work on three district of Rufiji, Kibondo and Kigoma. The government in collaborating with the Government of Belgium has prepared an identification study, which was submitted to the Belgian Government in July 2004.

Beekeeping in Tanzania has a great potential of contribution to poverty reduction through income generation to the beekeepers and the government, creating employment to the community and improving biodiversity. It is our duty and responsibility to support community to utilize this potential to improve livelihood.

PERSONAL PERSPECTIVES AND CONCLUSION
We have seen different efforts done by the Government to manage the forest and make use of the forests which may benefit the whole community, we also saw some strategies reduce the problem, but more plans and strategy to deal with the problem are needed as it was indicated also that there are many problem which arise from the process. The following points have also to be put into consideration in order to help efforts of the central Government and village government utilize the forests and bee keeping business for the benefits of their community:
Good policies on forests and bee keeping protection have to be established.
As per Titsworth that timber trade has many connections with the Executives. The natural resources taken should be in some way benefit all community for example those who cut trees in the Southern part of Tanzania for logs and timber should have done something bigger for the whole community not building houses for village leaders only as Jack Titsworth said that some leaders gain political power through timber trade, as a means to gain elevation in status promotion and/or financial gain.
As discussed above, it seems that the legal- judicial organization are either unable or not allowed to implement their mandates, or are complicit in mis-governance, The government should make sure that the rules are followed and in general good governance should be practiced, for example, The big tons of logs which are transferred to other countries and the government gets a small percent revenue and sometime got nothing because of some readers involving themselves in different kind of corruption, like embezzlement, fraud and soon.
As it was indicated above that rural people are disproportionately affected, although their leadership is strengthened, the masses are disempowered. For this case the decision made must involve those who will be affected by the action.
The village must form their own bi-laws which will help them to keep the record of what have been harvested from the natural resources and also guide on how, who, when and where to harvest. Forecasting on what will be the effects of the project in the future, and sometime find protective measures. For example if they agree that a company which cuts trees in a certain area, should be told to plant other trees or provide means for the community to do so on their behalf.
Training, projects, seminars should be conducted to make people aware of the importance of forests and bee keeping in their life as lack of knowledge and understanding, capacity and willingness to implement existing policies within the legal framework seems to one of the problem that hinders the community as a whole to benefit from the forest products.
The government must make sure that the records for what is exported are well recorded and kept, managed and disseminated to those who are concerned or need them.
For the case bee keepers they must be educated on how to process, pack, and quality assurance so that they gain more customer and become competent in the world market.
The government have to support the small industries which make furniture’s by training the group members and financing them so that they improve the quality of the furnitures. The government also can protect its internal industries by increasing importing charges.


























REFERENCES
Agrawal, A. & J. Ribot, 2000 Accountability in Decentralisation: A Frame work with South Asia and West African Cases. The Journal of Developing Areas. Volume 33 No.4: 473-502.

Ahlback A. 1. ]988 Forestry for Development in Tanzania. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, International Rural Development Center.

Abdallah, J. M. 2001. Assessment of the impact of non-timber forest products utilization on sustainable management of Miombo woodlands in Urumwa Forest Reserve, Tabora, Tanzania. A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Forestry of Sokoine University of Agriculture. 99 p.

Abdallah, J. M. 2006. Economic and productive efficiency analysis of tobacco and impact on the Miombo woodlands of Iringa region in Tanzania. A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy of Sokoine University of Agriculture. Morogoro, Tanzania.

Abdallah, J. M. & Sauer, J. 2007. Forest Diversity, tobacco production and resource management in Tanzania.

Ahlbäck, A. J. 1995. Mobilizing rural people in Tanzania in tree planting: why and how?

Ahlbäck, A. J. 1986. Industrial plantation forestry in Tanzania – Facts, problems and challenges. Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism, Forestry and Beekeeping Division, Dar es Salaam.

Ahlbäck, A. J. 1988. Forestry for development in Tanzania. Working Paper 71. Uppsala.

Alden Willy L. 1997, Villagers as forest managers and govt. ‘Learning to let go’ he case of Dum-Haitemba and Magori Forest in Tanzania London; Institute of international Development (forest participation series; no. 9)


Adams W. & Hulme D (2001) conservation and community changing Narratives, policies and practices in Africa conservation, in Africa wild lime and livelihoods; The promise and performance of community conservation, edited by D Hulme & Murphrea MW, Oxford; James Currey.

Abdallah J. M. and Monela GG Department of Forest Economics, Faculty of forestry and Nature conservation, A working paper if the finish Forest Research Institute-Moh MIOMBO-Agarawel & Ribot (2000).

Alden Willy & Denies PA (2001) from uses to custodians: changing relations between people and the state in Forest Might in Tanzania. Washington DC; World Bank Environment and social Development unit, Africa Region www.eldis.org/static/DOC 8796.htm

Bakengesa, S. 1997. Adoption of rate and effect of improved stoves on forests in Shinyanga District. A special project report submitted in partial fulfilment for the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Science in Forestry, Sokoine University of Agriculture, Morogoro Tanzania. 53 p.

Berry, L. & Berry, E. (1969): Land Use in Tanzania, BRALUP Research Paper No.6, University of Dar es Salaam.

Biesmeijer, K. (1992). Beekeeping and biodiversity: Socio bees as pollinators in the tropics. In Proceeding of the second NECTAR seminar 9Edited by Beetsma, J.). 28 August 1992 International Agricultural Center, Wageningen, Netherlands, pp 140: 43-59

Desanker, P. V., Frost, P. G. H., Frost, C. O. Justice, C. O. & Scholes, R. J. (eds.). 1997, The Miombo network: framework for a terrestrial transect study of land use and land-cover change in the Miombo ecosystems of Central Africa, IGBP Report 41, The International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme (IGBP), Stockholm, Sweden. 109 p.

Dewees, P. A. 1994. Social and Economical Aspects of Miombo Woodland Management in Southern Africa: Options and Opportunities for Research.

Dubins, O. 1999, Assessing local resilience and getting roles night in collaboration forest might; Some current issues and a potential tool, with special reference to sub Saharan Africa, in proceedings of an int. workshop on pluralism and sustainable forestry and rural Devt, Rome 9-12 Dec. 1997: 49-83

Dorken Axel (Aug 1995-Dec 2008), Forest Policy Advisory services, GTZ World wide.

FAO 1981. Forestry and rural development, FAO, Rome. Forestry Paper No. 26.

FAO 2000. World Forest Resources Assessment FAO, Rome.

FAO 2003. Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations Database FAO (1989). The Economic Significance of Tobacco. Committee on Commodity Problems, February 1989.

FBD 2006. Participatory Forest Management in Tanzania – Facts and Figures. Extension and Publicity Unit
Forestry and Beekeeping Division Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism. July 2006.
Forestry and Beekeeeping Division: Tanzania Forestry Action Plan 1989/90-2007/08;
Forestry Beekeeping Division (1998): National Forestry Policy;
Forestry and Beekeeeping Division (1996) Land use and Land cover maps;
Forest Policy and Economics 9 (5): 421–439.

Hough, J. (1992): Serengeti Regional Conservation Strategy. Paper presented at Workshop on Strategies for Sustainability in Africa, Lake Baringo Island Camp, 23-25 Nov 1992. IUCN, Switzerland.

Holmes 1995, Natural Forest handbook for Tanzania; Forest policy, planning and utilization, roll 11. Morogoro, TZ; Sokoine University of Agriculture, Faculty of Forestry

Iddi, S. 2002. Community Involvement in Forest Management: First Experiences from Tanzania. The Gologolo Joint Forest Management Project. A Case Study from the West Usambara Mountains. Proceedings of the International Workshop on Community Forestry in Africa. April 26 – 30, 1999. FAO/FTPP/GTZ/Republic of Gambia, Banjul. p. 153–162.

IFAD (Undated) Why Women Should be Included in Village Natural Resource.

FAO1991. Non-wood Forest Products: The Way Ahead. No. 67. Rome: FAO.

J. M. Abdallah and G. G. Monela; Department of Forest Economics, Faculty of Forestry and Nature Conservation, Sokoine University of Agriculture, Box 3011, Chuo Kikuu, Morogoro, Tanzania

Kajembe, G. C. & Mgoo, J. S. 1999. Evaluation Report on Community-Based Forest Management Approach in Babati District: A case of Duru-Haitemba village Forest Reserve. Orgut Consulting AB (Unpublished).

Kajembe GC, Nduwaming J. and Luoga E. J. ( ), the impact o community based forest might and joint forest mighton the forest resources base and local people livelihoods. Case studies from TZ; CASS/PLAAS occasional paper series.

Kajembe GC & Kessy, JF 200 Forest Might in Ummwa Forest Reserve Tabora, Tanzania; A process in the making in Forest, chief and peasants in Africa; Local might of natural resources in TZ Zimbabwe and Moque edited by & Virtanan & M. Nummelin, University of Joesman Finland. Silve Carelica, 34:141-58

Kajembe GC, Shemweta DTK, Luoga EJ & Nduwamungu J. 2004b; Incentives for sustainable forest might in Tanzania in proceeding of the IFRT East Africa regional conference on institutions, incentives and conflicts in forest might. A perspective edited by DTK Shemweta EJ Luoga, GC Kajembe & SS Madoffe: 92-105. Conference held at Moshi Tanzania 12-23rd Jan. 2004.

Kajjembe GC; Nmbinu, EL Shemweta DTK; Luoga EJ & Mwaipopo CS, 2004. The impact of rules in forest conservation in Tanzania case of Kwizu Forest Reserve, same district, Kilimanjaro.


Melisa Thaxton, Integrating population, health and Environment in Tanzania.

Kajembe, G. C. Duwamungu, J. N. & Luoga, E. J. 2000. The impact of community-based forest management and joint forest management on forest resource base and local peoples’ livelihoods: Case studies from Tanzania. Commons Southern Africa occasional paper series No. 8.

Kowero, G. S. & O’kting’ati, A. 1990. Production and trade in products from Tanzania’s natural forests.

Kiwhele, D.V.N. (1991). Paper presented on Annual seminal of R & D advisory committee on Natural resources Research. 4 July, 1991. Dar es Salaam, MNRT. Pp 54.4

Little, P. 1994. The Link Between Local Participation and Improved Conservation: A Review of Issues and Experiences. In: Western, D. & Wright R. (eds.). Natural Connections: Perspectives in Community- Based Conservation. Island Press,

Luoga, E. J. 2000. The effect of human disturbances on diversity and dynamics of eastern Tanzania Miombo arborescent species. A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Science, University of the Witwaterrand, Johannesburg in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Chapter 5: 1–20.
Ministry of Tourism, Natural Resources and Environment (1994): National Environment Action Plan.
Mapolu, M. (2005). Beekeeping in Tanzania; An Overview.
Mwakatobe A, and Mlingwa, C, The status of Tanzanian honey Trade – Domestic and International Markets (unpublished)

Misana S.B.; C.J. Sawio; F. Shechambo; & S. Mchome. 1997. Strategies for Village Land Management for Resource Conservation in Selected Villages in Tanzania. Research Report,University ofDar es Salaam.

Mlay, C. (1997). Opening remarks. In: Processing of the Workshop on Low productivity of honey and beeswax in East Africa (Edited by NWRC). 19-21 MAY 1997, A.I.C.C. Arusha, Tanzania, pp79:8-9.

Mwakatobe, A.R. (2001). The Importance of Homegardens on Beekeeping Activities in Arumeru District, Arusha-Tanzania. Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Management of Natural Resources for Sustainable Agriculture of Sokoine University of Agriculture.pp 147.
Ministry of Tourism, Natural Resources and Environment (1994): National Environment Action Plan.
Mwalyosi, R.B. (1991): Integrated Resource Management Strategy for Lake Manyara Catchment
Mwalyosi, R. & Mohamed, S. (Eds) (1992): A Resource Assessment Strategy for Lake Manyara Catchment Basin, Tanzania. Proceedings of a Workshop, Arusha, Tanzania. Institute of Resource Assessment, University of Dar es Salaam.

Mwandosya, M.K. (1990): Environmental Aspects of Energy Resources in Tanzania. In: Proceedings on National Conservation Strategy for Tanzania, National Environmental Management Council, Tanzania, pp 263-281.

Milinski, M. & Semmann, D. 2002. Reputation helps solve the “tragedy of the commons”. Nature 415: 424–426.

Misana, S. B. 1988a. Agricultural development versus environmental conservation in Tanzania: the case of tobacco production. The African Review 15: 1–10.

Misana, S. B. 1988b. The Shrinking Forests and the Problem of Deforestation in Tanzania. Journal of Eastern African Research and Development 18: 108–118.

Misana, S., Mung’ong’o, C. & Mukamuri, B. 1996. Miombo Woodlands in the Wider Context: Macro-Economic and Intersectoral Influences. In: Campbell, B (ed.). The Miombo in Transition: Woodlands and Welfare in Africa. CIFOR. Bogor. p. 73–99.
Mwandosya, M. J., Luhanga, B. E. & Mahanyu, M. 1997. Current status and the regulatory framework of electricity in Tanzania. In: Mwandosya M. J., George, F. M. & Young, P. (eds.). Competition policy and utility regulation. 20–22 January 1997, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.

Morgan, W.T.W. (1969): East Africa: Its Peoples and Resources. Oxford University Press; 312 pp.

Mohamed, S.A. and Mwalyosi, R.B.B. (1991): Country Environmental Profile - for Evaluation of the Special Grant for Environment and Development - Phase II. Report to NORAD, 30 pp + Five Maps.

Mtingwa Rehema; Communications and Campaign Manager Mama Misitu Email: r.mtingwa@tnrf.org

Morgan, W.T.W. (1969): East Africa: Its Peoples and Resources. Oxford University Press; 312 pp.

Neumann R.P. ] 993. African Rights and Colonial Forest Policy in Tanzania. A paper presented at the annual meeting ofthe African Studies Association Boston USA.

Ngaya, Y.M., Otsyina, R., Senkondo, E. and P. Mpuya (2005). Economic Survey on the Role of Beekeeping in Poverty Reduction and Environmental Conservation in Chunya, Songea and Nachingwea District in Tanzania.

Ntenga, G. (1976). Beekeeping Development programmes in Tanzania. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Apiculture in the Tropical Climates. IBRA, London, pp 207:147-154.

NBS (National Bureau of Statistics) 2002. Household Budget Survey 2001/02 Tanzania, Dar es Salaam 218 p.

Nduwamungu, J. 1996. Tree and shrub diversity in Miombo woodlands. A case study at SUA Kitulanghalo Forest Reserve, Morogoro, Tanzania.

Nsubemuki, L., Ramadhani, T., Nyakimori, Swai R. & Mziray, W. 1997. Status of use and marketing of Miombo of fruits in Tanzania. Paper presented to the planning workshop on domestication of indigenous fruits of the Miombo, Mangochi, Malawi, 2–5 June 1997.

Ostrom, E. 1999. Self-Governance and Forest Resources. CIFOR Occasional Paper No. 20.

Participatory Rural Appraisal Handbook (PRA) Pocs T. 1988, The Importance of Catchment Forests to Tanzania, SUA. Morogoro.

Professorial Inaugural Lecture. Report of the Independent Commission on Population and Quality of Life .1996. Caring for the Future: A Radical Agenda for Positive Chang, Oxford University Press.

Rani, K. U. (Undated). Empowering Women Through Natural and Social Resource.
School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, New Haven, Connecticut, pp 5-22 Forestry and Beekeeeping Division: Tanzania Forestry Action Plan 1989/90-2007/08
Seegeren, P., Mulder, V., Beetsma, J and Sommeijer, R (1996). Beekeeping in the Tropics. Agrodok Series N. 32 AGROMISA. Sixth edition. Wageningen Publisher, pp84:7.

Smith, F.G. (1958). The origin and function of the Beekeeping Division. Empire Forestry reviews 32 (92):pp 159-164.

Shivji I. G. 1998, Not Yet Democracy: Reforming Land Tenure in Tanzania. Haki Ardhi & IIED Dar es Salaam & London.

Skutsch M.M. 1985. Forestry by the People for the People - Some Major Problems in Tanzania's Village Afforestation Programme. International Tree Crops Journal 3 : 147 -170

Temu, A. B. 1979. Fuelwood scarcity and other problems associated with tobacco production in Tabora region, Dar es Salaam. Record No. 12. Division of Forestry, University of Dar es Salaam, Morogoro, Tanzania. 22 p.

Temu R. P. C. & Chihongo, A. 1998. Field survey of wild and under utilised edible plants of Ruvuma region, Tanzania. COSTECH Dar es Salaam. 46 p.

Temu, R. P. C. & Msanga, H. P. 1994. Available information and research priorities for indigenous fruit trees in Tanzania. In: Proceedings of the regional conference on indigenous fruit trees of the Miombo ecozone of Southern Africa, Mangochi, Malawi, January 23–27 1994. p. 106–111. ICRAF, Nairobi.

Trawick, P. B. 2001. Successfully governing the commons: Principles of social organization in an Andean irrigation system. Human Ecology 29: 1–25.


TFAP, (1989) Ministry of lands, Natural Resources and Tourism. Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. pp12.

Tanzania Forest Resources Management Project: Preparation Mission. Report Tanzania, (1990)

Tanzania National Parks (1991): Serengeti National Park Management Plan, 1991-1995. Wildlife Division, Ministry of Natural Resources, Tourism & Environment, Tanzania.

TFAP (1989): Tanzania Forestry Action Plan 1990/91-2007/08, Ministry of Tourism, Natural Resources and Environment, Dar Es Salaam.
Washington, D.C. p. 347–372.

United Republic of Tanzania. 1997, National Environment Policy. Government Printers, Dar es Salaam.

United Republic of Tanzania. 1998. National Forest Policy. Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism. Government Printers, Dar es Salaam.

URT, (1998). National Beekeeping policy. Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism
Center for International Development and Environment of the World Resources Institute. 1991.

Ubwani, Z. 2003. Experts Seek Power Tariff Changes in Tanzania. [http://www.nationaudio.com/News/EastAfrican/060999/Regional/Regional45.htm] site visited on 15th October 2003.

URT (United Republic of Tanznia) 2001. Tanzania National Forest Programme 2001–2010. Government printer. Dar es Salaam.
Van der Meulen, F. & Werger, M. J. A. 1984. Crown characteristics, leaf size and light throughfall of some savanna trees in southern Africa. South African Journal of Botany 3: 208–218.

Vanclay, J. K. 1993. Saving the tropical forest: needs and prognosis. Ambio 22 (4): 225–231.

Wahid, M. A. 1984. Technical package of practices to improve the efficiency of fuelwood use in the tobacco industry in Tanzania. Washington D. C. World Bank.

White, F. 1983. The vegetation of Africa, a descriptive memoir to accompany the UNESCO/AETFAT/ UNSO Vegetation Map of Africa (3 Plates, Northwestern Africa, Northeastern Africa, and Southern Africa). 1:5,000,000. UNESCO. Paris.

WWF-SARPO. 2001. Conserving the Miombo ecoregion. Reconnaissance Summary. WWF-Southern Africa Regional Programme Office, Harare, Zimbabwe. 24 p.


William Rugumamu; UTAFITI {New Series] Special Issue, A Forest Resources Co-Management Strategy for Tanzania: Vol. 4, 1998-2001: 117-130 A Study of West Usambara High Canopy Forests

World Resources Institute. 1994. Expanding Civil Society in African Environmental Reform (mimeo)

Wytt-Smith J. 1987. Problems and Prospects for Management of Tropical Moist Forests.
NEMC (1994): National Conservation Strategy and Action Plan. Draft. National Environmental Management Council, Dar es Salaam, 53pp.

















SOUTHERN NEW HAMPSHIRE UNIVERSITY
AND OPEN UNIVERSITY OF TANZANIA
COMMUNITY ECOMNON MIC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM




STUDENT NAME: MKWAZU, CHANGWA. M


PROGRAMME: MASTER DEGREE IN COMMUNITY ECOMINC DEVELOPMENT


COURSE TITLE: Sustainable responses to environment problems


CODE: ICD 506

INSTRUCTORS NAME: DR. SINDA


TERM PAPER


TOPIC: FACTORS AFFECTING FOREST REVENUE COLLECTIONS AND BEE KEEPING BUSINESS IN TANZANIA



E-mail: changwaleles@yahoo.com



LIST OF ACRONYMS
CBFM- Community Based Forign Management
DANIDA- Danish International Development Agency
EC- European Community
ERPs- Economic Recovery Programms
ESAPs- Economic and Social Action Programms
FBD-Forest and Beekeeping Department
IUCN- International Union for Conservation of Nature
FINNIDA- Finnish International Development Agency
GTZ- German Agency for Technical Cooperation
HADO- Hifadhi Ardhi Dodoma (Dodoma Soil Conservation Project)
HASHI- Hifadhi Ardhi Shinyanga (Shinyanga Soil Conservation Project)
IRDP- Integrated Rural Development Programme/Plan
IUCN- International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources
JFM- Joint Forest Management
KOTACO- Korea and Tanzania Corporation
NEMC- National Environment Management Council
NGO Non-Governmental Organisation
NORAD- Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation
ODA UK- Overseas Development Administration
PMO- Prime Minister's Office
RDD- Regional Development Director
RIDEP- Rural Integrated Development Programme
SIDA- Swedish International Development Agency
TAN-IRAN Tanzania Iran Corporation
TAF- Tanzania Association of Forests
TANU- Tanganyika African National Union
TFAP- Tropical Forestry Action Plan
TFCG-Tanzania Forest Conservation Group
TNRF-Tanzania Natural Resources Forum
TWICO- Tanzania Wood Industries Corporation
UEA- University of East Anglia
URT-United Republic of Tanzania
WCS-Wildlife Conservation Society
WWF-World Wide Fund for Nature

No comments:

Post a Comment