GREEN ECONOMY IN BIOSPHERE RESERVE (GEBR) PROJECT SOCIO-ECONOMIC BASELINE SURVEY REPORT

FINAL REPORT SUBMITTED TO UNESCO

DAR ES SALAAM OFFICE

BY

THE CENTRE FOR CLIMATE CHANGE STUDIES

UNIVERSITY OF DAR ES SALAAM

MAY 2014

i

Acknowledgements

Development of this report received support from various institutions and individuals.

Research team would like to express their heartfelt gratitude to authorities and individuals

who contributed information and experience which lead to the finalisation of this study.

Heartfelt thanks go to the technical staff at Amani Nature Reserve, Tanzania Forest

Conservation Group (TFCG), and district officers in Muheza, Mkinga and Korogwe for their

logistical arrangements and technical guidance. Thanks go to officials who participated in the

key informant interview, village government officials as well as households who participated

and provided vital information during household interviews and focus group discussion.

Research team is indebted to village government officials and households in Kimbo,

Mashewa, Kisiwani, Foroforo, Makumba, Muzi Kafishe, Shebomeza, Kwelumbizi, Mtoni

Bombo, Kijango and Hemsambia villages for their information and effective participation in

focus group discussion and household interview.

Research team also acknowledges the financial support by UNESCO-Dar es Salaam Office,

which facilitated the undertaking of this baseline study.

ii

Executive Summary

United Nations Education, Science and Culture Organization (UNESCO) with a fund support

from Korea International Cooperation Agency (KOICA) developed the Green Economy in

Biosphere Reserve (GEBR) project to promote biodiversity and/or green business as a viable

tool for conservation while at the same time contributing to household livelihoods. The

baseline survey was conducted in order to analysing baseline data of the beneficiary

community which will serve as the benchmark for the implementation of the GEBR project

activities and the basis of measuring project impacts.

This baseline study was conducted in 11 villages surrounding the East Usambara Biosphere

Reserve (EUBR). Villages were selected basing on three interrelated criteria: administrative

units in order to ensure representation from the three districts surrounding EUBR (Muheza,

Mkinga and Korogwe Districts), set of drivers of deforestation and degradation; and past or

ongoing interventions to improve forest conservation and communities’ livelihoods.

Primary data were collected through Focus Group Discussion, Key Informant Interviews,

Household surveys and Direct Field observations. Secondary data were collated from

published and unpublished reports obtained from government, non governmental

organisations and private sector libraries as well as online searches. Theme-content analysis

and Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) were used for data analysis. Findings are

presented in various forms, including the use graphs, charts and tables.

About 78% (N=120) of the surveyed households were headed by men and only 22% (N=34)

households were headed by women. Males constituted 57 % (N=88) of the respondents and

females were 43%. About 35.7% (N=55) of the respondents were aged 51 years and above,

16.2% (N=25) were aged between 21 years and 30 years. Other respondents were aged

between 31 and 50 years. About 50.6% of respondents were born in the village and 49.4%

iii

outside of the studied villages. Most of the migration occurred before 1990s. Reasons for

migration included search for arable land, 47%, marriage 21%, following relatives 13%,

search for job 18%, and business reasons 1%. About 74% of the total respondents were

married, 11.7% widowed and 9.1% divorced. Household sizes ranged from 1 to 15 members.

It was also revealed that majority of the respondents were primary school leavers (96%), and

only 4% had passed through secondary education and vocational training.

Field survey findings indicated that important livelihood activities were crop production,

livestock keeping, fish farming, butterfly farming, bee keeping, tea plantation, spice making,

herbs and tree nursery and wood and wood products. Majority of households were found to

be engaged in single livelihood activity 70.7% (N=109). 12.3% (N=19) are involved in two

livelihood activities, 7% (N=12) in three and 2% (N=4) in four livelihood activities. Majority

of these activities earned a maximum average of Tshs.100, 000 per month. About 6.5% of

respondents indicated that the status of their activities was very good, 28% good and 66 %

struggling.

Study findings indicated that key natural resources in the area were land (70.8%), forest

(17.5%), rivers (6.5%), and natural spring and dams (5.1%). Majority of the respondents

(73.4%) were using available natural resources for farming activities. Other uses of natural

resources were collection of firewood (12.7%), fetching water for domestic use (8.2%),

beekeeping (2.5%), butterfly farming (2.5%), irrigation (1.3%), traditional herbs (0.6%) and

building poles (0.6%). Majority of the respondents (83.1%) were depending on firewood as

major source of heat energy.

Findings show that 88% of respondents use own farms for their livelihood activities while

12% use forest reserves for their activities. Key informants were of the opinion that adjacent

iv

villages are responsible for deforestation and forest degradation in the EUBR through

extraction and artisans/mining activities.

Various groups in the surveyed communities had equal access to natural resources for their

socio-economic activities. However, inheritance of family resources was mentioned to be

favouring men than women with such segregations highly depending on the setting of the

individual households. Social capital among respondents across the studied villages was

partly associated with the membership to community financial groups. Majority of the

respondents who were members to community financial groups had more than Tshs. 100,000

while others had amount ranging between Tshs. 50,000 and Tshs. 100,000 as well as less than

Tshs. 50,000. About 91.6% of the respondents in all studied villages reported to have no

saving at all, while 8.4% reported to have savings. These savings had estimated highest

amount of Tshs. 100,000. Access to microcredit in the surveyed villages was relatively

difficult with only 8.4% reporting to have accessed services related to credits. Majority of the

respondents were aware of existence of the green economies with some being engaged in

green business.

Respondents mentioned beekeeping, fish farming, spice farming, processing and selling and

butterfly farming as major activities relevant for green economies. Income from green

economy activities varied accordingly depending on the level of investment and capability of

the household to implement the activity. 72 % (N=111) reported to earn between Tshs.

50,000 and 100,000 per month from green businesses. About 26.6% were earning less than

Tshs. 50,000 and 1% were earning more than Tshs. 100,000 per month. About 61.7 %

perceived the status of their economic activities as struggling, 24.7% as good and 13.6 % as

very good.

v

Markets for the green business products varied across the study area. Majority of respondents

depended much on selling their produce to neighbours within and adjacent to their villages,

individual business people from the district, Tanga, Arusha and Dar es Salaam towns who

normally go to their villages for collecting spices and other farm and non-farm products and

researchers who visit their villages. Other buyers come from come from Moshi Town in

Kilimanjaro region. Respondents informed that there was no clear arrangement for accessing

markets for farm and non-farm produce. Other respondents, especially those involved in

butterfly farming reach their customers through an agent, mainly the Tanzania Forest

Conservation Group (TFCG).

Some identified challenges facing green economies are price fluctuation (50%), inadequate

capital (39.6%), lack of markets (26%), lack of transparency (25.3%), poor means of

transport (19.5%), effects of climate variability (7.8%) that affected normal production

patterns of the households and exacerbates more pressure on the biodiversity resources.

Other respondents (4.5%) indicated poor farm implements as another challenge affecting

their livelihoods.

Potential green economies activities in the study area include small scale based enterprises

such as beekeeping, butterfly farming, spice farming, spice making; and eco-tourism or

cultural industries such camping and canoeing activities, boat riding, site views, parachuting,

waterfalls and canopy walk. Key informants emphasized that joint efforts between

government institutions, non-governmental organisations including faith institutions, private

sector, and individuals will improve the performance of green business activities.

vi

Table of Contents

Acknowledgements ..................................................................................................................... i

Executive Summary ................................................................................................................... ii

List of Tables ............................................................................................................................ ix

List of Figures ............................................................................................................................ x

List of Abbreviations ................................................................................................................ xi

CHAPTER ONE: BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE ................................................... 1

1.1 Overview of Green Economies ............................................................................................ 1

1.2 Objectives of the Baseline Survey ....................................................................................... 5

CHAPTER TWO: METHODOLOGY .................................................................................. 6

2.1 Description of the Study Area .............................................................................................. 6

2.1.1 Climatic Condition ............................................................................................................ 7

2.1.2 Socio-Economic Activities ............................................................................................... 8

2.1.3 Demographic ..................................................................................................................... 8

2.2 Sample and Sampling .......................................................................................................... 8

2.2.1 Selection of Study villages................................................................................................ 8

2.2.2 Selection of Respondents ................................................................................................ 10

2.2.2.1 Selection of household interview ................................................................................. 10

2.2.2.2 Key Informants ............................................................................................................ 10

2.2.2.3 Focus Group Discussion .............................................................................................. 11

2.2.3 Data collection methods .................................................................................................. 11

2.2.3.1 Interviews ..................................................................................................................... 11

vii

2.2.3.2 Focus Group Discussion .............................................................................................. 11

2.2.3.3 Direct Field Observation .............................................................................................. 12

2.2.4 Data Analysis .................................................................................................................. 12

CHAPTER THREE: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION ...................................................... 13

3.1 Respondents Characteristics .............................................................................................. 13

3.1.1 Household Heads ............................................................................................................ 13

3.1.2 Age .................................................................................................................................. 13

3.1.3 Sex................................................................................................................................... 14

3.1.4 Marital Status .................................................................................................................. 15

3.1.5 Household size ................................................................................................................ 15

3.1.6 Education ........................................................................................................................ 16

3.1.7 Reasons for Migration..................................................................................................... 17

3.1.8 Type of house .................................................................................................................. 18

3.1.9 Engagement in Economic activities ................................................................................ 19

3.1.10 Natural Resources ......................................................................................................... 23

3.1.11 Utilization of natural resources ..................................................................................... 24

3.1.12 Access to Natural Resources ......................................................................................... 26

3.2 Social capital ...................................................................................................................... 26

3.3 Financial capital ................................................................................................................. 28

3.3.1 Savings/debt .................................................................................................................... 28

3.3.2 Credit............................................................................................................................... 28

viii

3.4 Household Engagement in biodiversity businesses ........................................................... 30

3.4.1 Types of Green Businesses ............................................................................................. 30

3.5 Markets for the green business products ............................................................................ 31

3.6 Challenges facing livelihood activities .............................................................................. 32

3.7 Opportunities for Green Economies in the area ................................................................. 33

3.7.1 Small scale technology- based enterprises ...................................................................... 33

3.7.1.1 Beekeeping ................................................................................................................... 33

3.7.1.2 Butterfly Farming......................................................................................................... 34

3.7.1.3 Spice farming and spice making .................................................................................. 34

3.7.2 Eco-tourism/Cultural Industries potentials ..................................................................... 34

3.7.2.1 Camping ....................................................................................................................... 34

3.7.2.2 Canoeing/Boat riding ................................................................................................... 35

3.7.2.3 Site Views .................................................................................................................... 35

3.7.2.4 Parachuting .................................................................................................................. 36

3.7.2.5 Canopy Walk ............................................................................................................... 36

3.7.2.6 Water Falls ................................................................................................................... 37

3.8 SWOC Analysis of Green Businesses ............................................................................... 38

CHAPTER FOUR: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION ................................. 42

4.1 Conclusion ......................................................................................................................... 42

4.2 Recommendation ............................................................................................................... 42

References ................................................................................................................................ 44

Appendices ............................................................................................................................... 45

ix

List of Tables

Table 1: Selected Study Villages in Muheza District ................................................................ 9

Table 2: Selected Study Villages in Korogwe District .............................................................. 9

Table 3: Selected Study Villages in Mkinga District................................................................. 9

Table 4: Sample Households ................................................................................................... 10

Table 5: Age of the Respondents ............................................................................................. 13

Table 6: Trends of Migration and Age .................................................................................... 14

Table 7: Respondents Years of Migration ............................................................................... 14

Table 8: Sex of the respondents ............................................................................................... 15

Table 9: Marital status of the respondents ............................................................................... 15

Table 10: Respondents’ household size ................................................................................... 16

Table 11: Household sizes in the studied villages ................................................................... 16

Table 12: Respondents’ level of education .............................................................................. 17

Table 13: Year of migration ..................................................................................................... 18

Table 14: Type of respondent’s houses ................................................................................... 19

Table 15: Respondents Activities ............................................................................................ 19

Table 16: Households activities in the studied villages ........................................................... 20

Table 17: Number of household socio-economic activities in the studied villages ................. 21

Table 18: Respondents view on second socio-economic activities ......................................... 22

Table 19: Natural resources and its importance in household income .................................... 24

Table 20: Sources of heat energy for households .................................................................... 25

Table 21: Respondents responses on the membership to community financial groups .......... 29

Table 22: Perceived income per month from of household economic activities ..................... 30

Table 23: Perceived status of household economic activities .................................................. 31

x

List of Figures

Figure 1: Reasons for migration .............................................................................................. 18

Figure 2: Respondents view on the status of their socio-economic activities ......................... 23

Figure 3: Respondents views on the use natural resources ...................................................... 24

Figure 4: Respondents views on the membership to community financial groups ................. 27

Figure 5: Respondents views on membership to community groups ...................................... 27

Figure 6: Respondents views on the amount of savings .......................................................... 29

Figure 7: Respondents view on challenges facing Green Business ......................................... 33

xi

List of Abbreviations

ANR Amani Nature Reserve

EUBR East Usambara Biosphere Reserve

GEBR Green Economy Biosphere Reserve

KOICA Korea International Cooperation Agency

SACCOS Savings and Credit Cooperatives

TaTEDO Tanzania Traditional Energy Development Organisation

TFCG Tanzania Forest Conservation Group

UNDSD United Nations Division for Sustainable Development

UNEP United Nations Environmental Programme

URT United Republic of Tanzania

VICOBA Village Community Bank

WWF World Wide Fund for Nature

1

CHAPTER ONE

BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE

1.1 Overview of Green Economies Green economy is one of the recent evolving concepts in the field of natural resources

management and development approaches. In its simplest expression, a green economy can

be thought of as one which is low carbon, climate-compatible development pathways,

resource efficient and development which is socially inclusive. UNEP (2011) considers green

economy as the strategy towards the improved human well-being and social equity, while

significantly reducing environmental risks and ecological scarcities. UNEP (ibid) also

conceptualises green economy in the context of natural resources and socio-economic

development approaches that is concerned with fairness and inclusiveness or as one which

increasingly invests in environmental technologies such as renewable energy, and natural

capital such as productive soil, forests and water resources. Study by UNEP (ibid) further

emphasized that investments in green economies have to be catalysed and supported by

targeted public expenditure, policy reforms and regulation changes.

Globally, the concept has become important tool for decision making in aspects pertaining to

natural resources management and development policy, which gained momentum after the

United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20). The Rio +20 decided that

green economy should drive economic growth, poverty eradication, employment and decent

work for all, whilst maintaining the healthy functioning of the Earth’s ecosystems (UNDSD,

2013). The policy has become one of the important pathways towards sustainable

development (UNEP, 2011). Since the beginning of the 21st century, especially in recent

years, many countries have been keen on developing green industries as a major means to

restructure their economies. Likewise, according to UNDSD (2013), policy makers in many

countries have given higher priority to “green” concepts and ideas and adopted “green

2

policies” with a view to promoting long-term development in the post-economic crisis era. It

is widely recognized that green economy provides opportunities to improve resource

efficiency, reduce pollution, increase market demand and create new jobs. As such, it

represents an important point of convergence between environmental protection and

economic growth. Green economy policy is now leading natural resources and development

policies in various countries, with ultimate goal of implementing green economy policies

(UNEP, 2012).

The diversity of Tanzania’s natural resources, especially forest and woodland provide

wildlife habitat, unique natural eco-system and biological diversity and water catchment. The

resources also provides an excellent climatic conditions for a wide range of green economy

products such as fruits that include pineapples, passion, citrus, mangoes, peaches, pears and

bananas. Other opportunities provided by the diversity of natural resources include

favourable climatic condition for the production of spices that include black, sweet and hot

peppers, chillies, ginger, onion, vanilla, garlic, onion, cinnamon and cardamom (UNDP,

2012; Lusekelo, 2013).

Green economy policy has been implemented through various socio-economic approaches. It

encompasses livelihoods activities which are environmental friendly and contributes to the

livelihoods of local communities. These may include spice farming, beekeeping, butterfly

farming, and vegetable and/or gardening (UNEP, 2011). Spice farming in the Eastern

Usambara and other parts of the country such as Zanzibar has been identified as potential in

contributing to national efforts in poverty reduction, with more unemployed groups who are

mainly youths and women will have greater opportunity of being engaged in income

generation activities (ITC, 2001; Adam and Evelyne, 2007). Until recently, though in small

quantities, farmers have been involved in spice farming through intercropping with other

3

crops including banana, citrus, and a variety of tree crops (pawpaw, coconut, mango, etc)

(Adam and Evelyne, 2007). Spice farming including traditional herbs is also included in most

discussion of global supply and demand trends for spices.

Butterfly farming is another green economy activity which is practiced in the Eastern

Usambara Mountains. Amani has established links with European pharmaceutical

corporations that purchase butterfly pupae, providing a substantial source of income for local

farmers. According to Theron (2003), the East Usambara Mountains are home to around 400

species of butterfly. However, only some of these species are suitable for butterfly farming

and live export. Generally, buyers in the live exhibit market prefer butterflies that are large,

colourful, and active. Butterflies that fly too fast, like the genus Charaxes are not popular

with the live exhibit market, but can be very popular with the dealers in dead stock who have

similar preferences for size and colour, but are not concerned about behaviour. Overtime,

according to Theron (2007), sales from butterfly farming have increased each year from

$20,000 USD in 2004 to $50,000 USD in 2006. Theron (2007) further explained that about

sixty-five percent of the project’s earnings go directly to about 300 member farmers and 7%

accrue to a village government development fund, which is controlled by the elected

committee of butterfly farmers and used for projects like school buildings. Baseline income

surveys conducted in 2003 and subsequent sales data indicates that participating households

have increased their annual income by about 20% (Theron, 2007).

Green economy is also related to eco-tourism activities for its potential to simultaneously

support conservation and the sustainable development of local communities (Ross and

Wall, 1999). Community based ecotourism has become popular as a means of supporting

biodiversity conservation all over developing countries. It is based on the idea that

ecotourism can generate economic benefits to local people and therefore increase local

appreciation of nature conservation (Kiss, 2004). However, there are numerous debates on

4

the concept of eco-tourism since the term was first coined in the 1980s (Goodwin, 1996).

Despite of these controversies, eco-tourism activities (e.g. night walks, campsites, visits to

butterfly farms, and bird watching) have been contributing to the revenue for communities

within the Amani Nature Reserve, with funds also being re-invested in conservation activities

(UNDP, 2012). Until recently, local communities of the Amani buffer zones, which form part

of East Usambara Biosphere Reserve (EUBR), were receiving approximately USD 4,000 per

year, which was equivalent to 20% of the tourist revenues (Ohanna, 2008; UNDP, 2012).

The study by UNDP (2012) revealed that mushroom farming is also promoted in the Eastern

Usambara as part of the green economy approaches. The purpose of the activities, according

to UNDP (2012), is to create alternative income generating activities and thus reducing

pressure on forest resources for their livelihoods and fuel wood from the reserve. Other

activities sites by UNDP (2012) that are being promoted in Amani Nature Reserve include

agro-forestry activities in the reserve buffer zone, to sustainably manage forest products and

to reduce local dependency on biodiversity within the reserve (UNDP, 2012). Beekeeping is

also practised in various villages bordering Amani Nature Reserve (Lusekelo Philemon,

2013).

Given potentials in the East Usambara Nature Reserve, UNESCO is envisaging implementing

country green economy project in the biosphere reserves (GEBR) under the support of Korea

International Cooperation Agency (KOICA), which aims at poverty reduction, biodiversity

conservation and sustainable development in Sub-Saharan Africa. The project is intending to

create opportunity to the communities living around biosphere reserve in the East Usambara

biosphere reserve. Through the implementation of the project beneficiaries have been

empowered to conserve biodiversity resources in EUBR and other ecosystem in the country.

5

Addition to that community engagement in other livelihood activities has significantly

reduced their direct dependence on natural resources.

1.2 Objectives of the Baseline Survey The objective of the baseline survey was to analyse baseline data of the beneficiary

community which will serve as the benchmark for the implementation of project activities

and the basis of measuring project impacts.

6

CHAPTER TWO

METHODOLOGY

2.1 Description of the Study Area

The Usambara Mountains situated in Tanga region North-East of Tanzania are part of the

series of the eastern arc Mountains in Africa (WWF, 2006). The eastern arc chain of

mountains that begins in the north with the Taita hills in Kenya and continues south with the

Pare, Usambara, Nguu, Nguru, Uluguru, Ukaguru, Malundwe, Rubeho, Udzungwa and

Mahenge in Tanzania (Sayer, 1991; WWF, 2006). Traditionally the mountains are divided

into two main blocks, West and East Usambaras, which are separated by the North-South

running Lwengera Valley. The East Usambara Mountains are situated in northeastern

Tanzania within 40 km of the coastal town of Tanga between 4O48’-5O13’S and 38O 32’-

38O48’E.

The East Usambara Mountains are among the areas in Tanzania where a concern for

environmental degradation is relatively higher compared to the Western part of the Usambara

Mountains. The degradation is largely attributed to rapid population growth, which result

into high demand for agricultural land, communities’ involvement in non-environmental

friendly economic activities such as mining and timber extraction. East Usambara Mountains

form part of the chain of isolated mountains stretched in an arc around eastern Tanzania. The

arc comprises the Pare, Kilimanjaro, East and West Usambara series of mountains.

According to Hamilton and Smith (1989), the East Usambara alone covers about 1300km² by

area, and it is located between several administrative districts, including Muheza, Mkinga and

Korogwe (WWF, 2006).

This study was conducted in 11 villages located within the East Usambara Biosphere

Reserve. The villages were selected from Muheza, Korogwe and Mkinga districts. The East

7

Usambara Biosphere Reserve is part of the Eastern Arc Mountain Range which is considered

one of the twenty five biodiversity hot spots in the world (Rantalla et al., 2011). Biological

significance of the East Usambara has been compared to the Galapagos Islands (Burgess, et

al., 2007). The Eastern Usambara Biosphere Reserve (EUBR) is covering a total area of

about 90,000 hectares; the major ecosystem type being tropical Sub-montane rainforest

(Burgess, et al., 2007).

2.1.1 Climatic Condition

The East Usambara Mountains rise sharply to over 1000m and peak at 1500m above sea level

and have unusual high rainfall and low temperatures at higher altitudes, possibly due to their

proximity to the sea (Hamilton and Smith, 1989). The study by WWF (2006) shows that

rainfall is monsoonal, with a wetter south-easterly monsoon rainfall patterns, raining mainly

from April to October and a drier north-easterly monsoon starting from November to March.

WWF (2006) further indicated that rainfall peaks in the area correspond to the movement of

the Inter Tropical Convergence Zone. Annual mean rainfall increases with altitude from

1200mm in the foothills to over 2200 mm in the highest areas annually. The annual average

rains vary between 1000mm to 2000mm (Mwanyoka, 2006).

Temperatures drop with altitude. The lowland mean temperatures are typical for their

altitude, in contrast to the abnormally cool climate of the uplands (ibid). These rains help to

regulate the volume of water in the Zigi River which is the principal source of water for the

Tanga City with a population of around 250000 people. The Amani Division, which is part of

EUBR, enjoys annual rainfall of 1945mm, the humidity being very high with an annual mean

temperature of 20.8C. IUCN (2003) states that rainfall in the Zigi Catchment is bi-modal,

however its distribution varies from 1,000 to 2,000 mm. Yearly average rainfalls is estimated

at 1200 to 1400mm (Mwanyoka, 2006).

8

2.1.2 Socio-Economic Activities

Forest resources of the East Usambaras are important for driving socio-economic activities of

the local population in and around the Biosphere reserve (WWF, 2006). Forest provides

medicinal plants, fuel wood, building materials, mushrooms, fruits and vegetables and a

regular supply of water. Other important activities conducted in the forest area beekeeping,

butterfly farming and eco-tourism, all of which are potentially important sources of income

for local communities (ibid).

2.1.3 Demographic

The East Usambara Mountains are fairly densely populated, and lie within the more densely

populated North of Tanzania. Burgess et al. (2007) reported that the area supports more than

155,000 people living around the biosphere reserve with their main source of livelihood being

small scale farming and cattle breading. Likewise, Mwanyoka (2006) emphasised that the

population is growing rapidly and this is attributed to natural increase (high birth rates) and

in-migration. Mwanyika (ibid) added that in-migration is so high with an increasing number

of people coming in from west Usambaras and areas further afield. This in-migration is

related to favourable climatic conditions for crop production and mining activities.

2.2 Sample and Sampling 2.2.1 Selection of Study villages

This study was conducted in 11 villages which were selected in a participatory manner, with

a discussion between ANR officers and researchers (Table 1, 2 and 3). The selection was

based on mixture of number of criteria which were set by ANR and research team in order to

get the best representation of the target villages adjacent EUBR. Criteria which guided

selection of the study villages were administrative units, set of drivers of deforestation and

degradation and basing on interventions to improve forest conservation and communities’

9

livelihoods. A criterion of administrative units was used in order to ensure that villages from

three districts (Muheza, Korogwe and Mkinga) are represented in the study.

Drivers of deforestation and forest degradation were also used in the selection of villages. It

enabled researchers to select villages which were reported by ANR officers to be facing high

deforestation and forest degradation emanating from human activities. The villages were also

selected for the purpose of recommending interventions to address such challenges can be

proposed.

The third criterion was based on the environmental conservation in the EUBR villages.

Selected villages under this criterion were those which were reported to have no

interventions. The villages were selected in order to come up with a suggestions of

interventions, those which with interventions which can complement the GEBR mission.

Table 1: Selected Study Villages in Muheza District S/N ISSUES WARD VILLAGE 1. Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES) Kisiwani Mashewa 2. Butterfly Farming Kisiwani Kisiwani 3. Mining, Timber Extraction, Illegal Carving, Bush

Fires, Illegal logging, Charcoal and Settlement Potwe Kimbo

4. Tea Production Amani Shebomeza 5. Gardening and Spice production Zirai Kwelumbizi Source: Field Survey Data, 2014

Table 2: Selected Study Villages in Korogwe District S/N ISSUES WARD VILLAGE

1. Mining, Timber Extraction, Illegal Carving, Bush Fires, Illegal logging, Charcoal and Settlement.

Magoma Kijango

2. Siltation, Fishing, Eco tourism, Canoeing Kizara Folofolo

4. Fishing, Eco-Tourism and Canoeing Kerenge Makumba

Source: Field Survey Data, 2014 Table 3: Selected Study Villages in Mkinga District S/N ISSUES WARD VILLAGE 1. Mining, Timber Extraction, Illegal Carving, Bush

Fires, Illegal logging, Charcoal and Settlement. Kigongoi Hemsambia

2. Bosha Muzi Kafishe 3 Daluni Mtoni Bombo Source: Field Survey Data, 2014

10

2.2.2 Selection of Respondents

2.2.2.1 Selection of household interview

Household was used as a sample unit as well as a unit of analysis for this study as presented

in Table 4 below.

Table 4: Sample Households Sn Name of Village Total Households Sample 1 Foroforo 248 12 2 Hemsambia 250 12 3 Kijango 240 13 4 Kimbo 260 13 5 Kisiwani 250 12 6 Kwelumbizi 281 14 7 Makumba 251 12 8 Mashewa 276 14 9 Mtoni Bombo 273 14 10 Muzi Kafishe 360 18 11 Shebomeza 414 20 Total 3103 154 Source: Field survey data, 2014

A sample size of 5% of all households in each village under study was selected randomly for

interview. A total number of 154 household interviews were conducted involving 73

households in Muheza district, 37 households in Korogwe district, and 44 households in

Mkinga district. The household members from the project villages were interviewed to

collect baseline information on natural resources management, livelihoods activities and their

engagement in green economy activities.

2.2.2.2 Key Informants

Key informants were selected purposively. At least 2 members from relevant institutions

encompassing technical staff and officials from government, private sector, nongovernmental

organisation and community based organisations were interviewed. This included officers

from Muheza district, Korogwe and Mkinga district. Other key informants were selected

from EUBR, and Tanzania Forest Conservation Group (TFCG).

11

2.2.2.3 Focus Group Discussion

One focus group discussions were held for 1-2 hours in each studied village. The discussions

comprised of 10-12 participants comprising of men and women. Participants for focus group

discussions were selected randomly for the purpose of ensuring representation of respondents

and collect data which are biased free, and thus be used validation of information collected

through household questionnaire.

2.2.3 Data collection methods

This study employed both qualitative and quantitative methods of data collection. Secondary

data was collated from published and unpublished reports obtained from government, non

governemrntal organisations and private sector libraries as well as online searches. Primary

data were collected through the use of household interviews, key informant interviews, focus

group discussion and field observations.

2.2.3.1 Interviews

Interviews were held to households in the selected villages and key informants from relevant

institutions. Key informants were selected from various institutions that included: officials

from EUBR, Districts Community Development Officials, Tanzania Forest Conservation

Group (TFCG) officers, and village government officials. Face-to-face interviews to selected

households were conducted using semi-structured questionnaire. These were interviewed in

order to gather detailed information on various activities that are being conducted in the area,

including community engagement in natural resources management and green economy

activities (Appendix 1 &3).

2.2.3.2 Focus Group Discussion

Focus Group Discussion (FGD) through an interactive group setting where participants were

free to talk with other group members were conducted. FGDs comprising of between 10-12

12

participants in each studied village were held. The discussions comprised of selected

household members, sub-village leaders, village government officials, influential people,

prominent people, and in some villages, religious leaders were included. The purpose of the

discussions was to collect information related to natural resources management, community

livelihoods and their engagement in green economy activities. A checklist of questions that

was used to guide this process throughout the discussions is shown in Appendix 2

2.2.3.3 Direct Field Observation

Observation method was used to note the actual activities undertaken at household and

village level, including natural resources available as well as their potentials in the green

economy. It included analysis of physical landscape, vegetation, soils, and village structures

in relation to various green economy and livelihood options. The information collected was

useful in triangulating data collected through the Focus Group Discussion and interviews.

2.2.4 Data Analysis

Data collected using semi-structured questionnaires were coded, summarised and analysed

using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS). Data collected through focus group

discussion and key informant interviews were summarised basing on the study objectives and

themes. Summarised information was then subjected to theme-content analysis technique in

order to generate information which was used to answer key research questions. Findings are

presented in various forms, including the use graphs, charts and tables.

13

CHAPTER THREE

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

3.1 Respondents Characteristics

3.1.1 Household Heads

This study found that most of the household heads across the studied villages were men. The

survey findings showed that out of 154 households surveyed, about 78% (N=120) households

were headed by men and only 22% (N=34) households were headed by women. This implies

that majority of the households in the study area are headed by men. This is linked to the fact

that most of the communities in Tanzania, including the study area are Patrilineal.

3.1.2 Age

Field survey findings revealed that there were variations of age for respondents interviewed.

As shown in Table 5, about 35.7% (N=55) of the respondents were aged 51 years and above,

whereas about 16.2% (N=25) were aged between 21 years and 30 years. Other respondents

had ages ranging from 31 to 40 years, and 41 to 50 years.

Table 5: Age of the Respondents Age Group Frequency Percent

21-30 31-40 41-50 51+

Total

25 16.2

34 22.1

40 26.0

55 35.7

154 100.0

Source: Household survey data, 2014

Such variations in the age group from the sampled population in the biosphere reserve

provide baseline perception on potential activities that can be implemented by various

segments of the population. This is linked to the fact that different age groups possess

different levels of activeness, mobility, endurance, flexibility and experience, which are

important elements for the implementation of socio-economic activities as well as attributes

14

to natural resources management. Field survey findings further indicated that most of the

migrants had ages above 41 years (Table 6).

Table 6: Trends of Migration and Age Age

Group Place of Birth Total

In the village Outside the village 21-30 20 5 25 31-40 23 11 34 41-50 21 19 40

51+ 14 41 55

78 76 154

Source: Household survey data, 2014

As indicated in Table 7, household survey findings further indicated that most of the

migration occurred before 1990s. This corresponds to the findings from the focus group

discussion that most of the migrants came into their villages during villagization programme.

It was also mentioned by focus group discussion that recent migration has been largely

attributed to the presence of socio-economic opportunities around the EUBR.

Table 7: Respondents Years of Migration Year of Migration

Place of Birth Total In the village Outside the village 1950-1970 0 17 17 1971-1990 0 38 38 1991-2010 0 21 21 2011+ 0 2 2 N/A-Born in the Village 76 0 76 78 76 154 Source: Household survey data, 2014

3.1.3 Sex

This study found that majority of the respondents interviewed males. It was found that about

57 % (N=88) of the respondents were males while 43% of the respondents interviewed were

females. However, there were also variations of the respondents’ composition. As shown in

Table 8, there were disparities in gender of the respondents that were interviewed across the

studied villages.

15

Table 8: Sex of the respondents Village Sex

Male Female Total Foroforo 11 1 12 Hemsambia 6 6 12 Kijango 10 3 13 Kimbo 7 6 13 Kisiwani 7 5 12 Kwelumbizi 9 5 14 Makumba 7 5 12 Mashewa 7 7 14 Mtoni Bombo 7 7 14 Muzi Kafishe 12 6 18 Shebomeza 5 15 20 Total 88 66 154

Source: Household survey data, 2014

3.1.4 Marital Status

Out of 154 respondents 114 were married, this is equivalent to 74% of the total respondents.

11.7% were widowed and 9.1% are divorced. Table 9 below shows the marital status of the

respondents and their respective percentage.

Table 9: Marital status of the respondents Category of Marital Status Frequency Percentage Single 6 3.9Married 114 74Divorced 14 9.1Widowed 18 11.7Separated 2 1.3Total 154 100

Source: Household survey data, 2014

3.1.5 Household size

This study found that there were variations of household sizes across the study area. Field

survey findings indicated that majority of the respondents reported that their household sizes

ranged from 1 to 5 people (Table 10).

16

Table 10: Respondents’ household size Number of people Frequency Percent

1-5 70 45

6-10 63 41

11-15 21 14

Total 154 100 Source: Household survey data, 2014 Field survey findings further indicated that household sizes varied between the studied

villages. As illustrated in Table 11, villages that had large sizes of households above 10

people were Makumba, Hemsambia, Kimbo, Kwelumbizi, Mashewa, Mtoni Bombo,

Kisiwani, Muzi Kafishe and Shebomeza. According to the household survey findings,

Foroforo and Kijango reported to have a maximum of 10 people per household. However, it

was not established clearly reasons behind variations of the household size among the studied

villages.

Table 11: Household sizes in the studied villages

Village

Total number of household members 1-5 6-10 11-15

Foroforo 6 6 0

Hemsambia 5 4 3

Kijango 5 8 0

Kimbo 4 6 3

Kisiwani 5 6 1

Kwelumbizi 8 3 3

Makumba 2 5 5

Mashewa 7 5 2 Mtoni Bombo 6 6 2

Muzi Kafishe 5 12 1

Shebomeza 17 2 1

Total 70 63 21 Source: Household survey data, 2014

3.1.6 Education

This study found that majority of the respondents interviewed were primary school leavers,

with very few individuals having passed through secondary education and vocational

training. Field survey findings showed that about 96% of the respondents across the study

17

area were primary school graduates. As indicated in table 12, other respondents were

secondary school and vocational training graduates.

Table 12: Respondents’ level of education Level of education Frequency Percentage Primary school graduate 148 96 Secondary school graduate 5 3 Vocational training graduate 1 0.6 Total 154 100

Source: Household survey data, 2014

Analysis of findings indicated that education level is a vital tool that ensures diversity to

different livelihood options, ranging from on-farm and off-farm activities. Basing on the

household survey findings, it is likely that most of the respondents are depending on on-farm

activities for their livelihoods. This is linked to the fact that most of the off-farm activities

such as business and formal employment require skills that goes hand in hand with education

beyond secondary school level. Nevertheless, it is important to note that when devising

strategies for improving livelihoods of the communities in the Biosphere reserve, one should

plan for different livelihood options in order to encompass different categories of education.

This is also an indication that strategies to improve communities’ livelihoods should be

accompanied with intensive awareness raising programmes.

3.1.7 Reasons for Migration

Field survey findings also showed that most of the reasons for migration were linked to the

search for arable land. Other reasons for migration were marriage, following relatives, search

for job, while others were migrated due to business reasons.

18

Marriage21%

Search for arable land

47%

Following relatives

13%

Search for job18%

Business1%

Figure 1: Reasons for migration Source: Field survey data, 2014

About 71% of the respondents reported that they migrated into the studied villages between

1971 and 1990. It was also found that about 30% of the respondents migrated to the current

villages from 1991 to date (Table 13).

Table 13: Year of migration Year of Migration Frequency Percentage1950-1970 17 221971-1990 38 491991-2010 21 272011+ 2 3Total 78 100 Source: Field Survey data, 2014

3.1.8 Type of house

Analysis of the types of respondents’ houses was undertaken during the survey. Field survey

findings indicated that majority of the respondents were living in mud houses roofed by iron

sheets. As indicated in table 14 below, about 52% of the respondents were living in houses

with mud under iron sheets, while other respondents were living in houses with bricks under

iron sheets and mud under thatch. This reflects the economic variations among the studied

households. It implies that those who were living in better houses (e.g. bricks under iron

sheets) were economically better-off compared to those who had poor houses (e.g. mud under

thatch).

19

Table 14: Type of respondent’s houses Categories of houses Frequency Percent

Bricks under iron sheets 35 22.7

Mud under iron sheets 80 51.9

Mud under thatch 39 25.3

Total 154 100.0 Source: Field survey data, 2014

3.1.9 Engagement in Economic activities

Household survey findings revealed that most of the respondents were being involved in

various socio-economic activities including crop production, business, livestock keeping, and

waged labour for subsistence and income. As indicated in Table 15, about 75% of the

respondents reported that farming activities which encompassed food crop production and

spice farming was their major economic activity. Farming activities was reported as the major

economic activity undertaken by most members of the surveyed household.

Table 15: Respondents Activities Activities performed Frequency Percent

Waged labour 8 5

Business 30 19

Farming (food crop production and spice farming) 116 75

Total 154 100 Source: Household survey data, 2014

As illustrated in table 16, this study further found that, on average, most of the households

had one socio-economic activity for both food production and income generation.

20

Table 16: Households activities in the studied villages

Fish farming

Butterfly farming

Beekeeping

Tea plantatio

n

Spice making

Herbs and tree

nursery

1 2 3 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 4 120 0 0 0 1 0 0 8 4 120 0 1 0 0 0 0 10 2 130 0 0 1 0 1 1 12 1 0 130 1 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 2 0 120 0 0 0 1 0 0 6 2 4 140 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 1 120 0 1 0 0 1 0 8 1 3 140 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 2 140 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 1 181 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 4 201 1 2 1 2 2 1 109 19 12 4 154

wood and

wood product

s Total

Number of Actitivities

Source: Household survey data (2014)

Findings from household survey across the study village also indicated that on average, most

of the households in Foroforo had high number of socio-economic activities followed by

Kwelumbizi and Mashewa (Table 17)

21

Table 17: Number of household socio-economic activities in the studied villages

Activities

Studied villages wage/ salary Trading

farming (food crop production and spice farming

Livestock keeping

Fish farming

Butterfly farming Beekeeping Tea

plantation Spice

making

Herbs and tree

nursery

wood and

wood products

Number of Activities

Total 1 2 3 4

Foroforo 0 4 8 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 4 12

Hemsambia 0 2 10 7 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 8 4 12

Kijango 0 1 12 11 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 10 2 13

Kimbo 0 1 11 7 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 12 1 0 13

Kisiwani 2 4 6 8 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 2 0 12

Kwelumbizi 0 1 13 12 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 6 2 4 14

Makumba 1 3 8 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 1 12

Mashewa 0 2 12 10 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 8 1 3 14

Mtoni Bombo 1 0 13 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 2 14

Muzi Kafishe 3 1 14 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 1 18

Shebomeza 1 11 8 8 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 4 20

Total 8 30 115 105 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 109 19 12 4 154 Source: Household survey data, 2014

22

Household respondents reported that on average, farming activities were also contributing to

household income. In this regard, about 60% reported that they were getting less than Tshs.

50,000 per year, while 23% were getting between Tshs. 50,000 and Tshs. 100,000. The

analysis of household findings also indicated that only 17% of the respondents were able to

attain average of more than Tshs. 100,000 per year.

Other activities reported by respondents were livestock keeping, beekeeping, tree nurseries,

butterfly farming, fish farming, and spice processing and selling. About 68.2% of the

households surveyed mentioned livestock keeping as their second important socio-economic

activity (Table 18). Households respondents reported that livestock kept were mainly cattle,

goats, sheep and others were being involved in poultry keeping activities. The respondents

mentioned that they were using livestock for both food and income generation.

Table 18: Respondents view on second socio-economic activities Households second socio-economic activity Frequency Percent

Waged labour 4 2.6

Business 8 5.2

Farming (food crop production and spice farming) 30 19.5

Livestock keeping 105 68.2

Beekeeping 4 2.6

Spice processing and selling 3 1.9

Total 154 100.0 Source: Household survey data, 2014

About 58.4% of the household respondents indicated that on average, livestock keeping could

enable them to obtain less than Tshs. 50,000 per year, while 34.4% reported an average of

Tshs, 50,000 to Tshs. 100,000 per year, and only 7.1% reported that average income from

livestock keeping was above Tshs. 100,000 per year.

Household survey findings further indicated that most of the activities performed by the

respondents were not performing well. About 65.6% of the respondents reported that they

were struggling in their activities, partly due to inadequate capital, poor farm implements,

23

lack of reliable markets and the changing climatic condition. About 6.5% indicated that the

status of their activities was very good and the remaining portion of respondents reported that

the status of their activities was good (Figure 2).

Very good6%

Good28%

Struggling66%

Figure 2: Respondents view on the status of their socio-economic activities Source: Household survey data, 2014

The survey also found about 25% of the respondents were being involved in off-farm

activities such waged labour and business in order to generate income. Focus group

discussion and key informant interview indicated that most of the off-farm activities were

being undertaken by men as compared to women.

3.1.10 Natural Resources

Field survey findings revealed various types of natural resources in the studied villages. Some

of the key natural resources mentioned by household respondents were land (70.8%), forest

(17.5%), rivers (6.5%), and natural spring and dams (5.1%). Household respondents further

reported that available natural resources were being utilised for various purposes as presented

in Table 19 and discussed in the subsequent subsection.

24

Table 19: Natural resources and its importance in household income

Natural resources utilised Household activities

Very Important

important Less important

Various Wage/ salary 4 3 1 Various Trading 5 16 9 Land Farming (food crop production and

spice farming 28 64 23

Forest Wood and wood products 1 0 0 Land Livestock keeping 24 61 20 Forest Beekeeping 2 0 0 Land/forest Herbs and tree nursery 2 0 0 Land/forest Spice making 1 1 0 Land Tea plantation 1 0 0 Total 68 145 53 Percentage 44.16 94.16 34.42

Source: Household survey data, 2014

3.1.11 Utilization of natural resources

Household survey findings found that majority of the respondents (73.4%) were using

available natural resources for farming activities. As indicated in figure 3, other respondents

mentioned firewood, water for domestic use, beekeeping and butterfly farming, irrigation,

medicine and building poles.

Agriculture

Firewood

Water for

domestic use

Beekeeping

Butterfly

farming

Irrigation

Building material

s

Medicine Total

Series1 113 20 13 4 4 2 1 1 158Series2 71.5 12.7 8.2 2.5 2.5 1.3 0.6 0.6 100.0

020406080

100120140160180

Figure 3: Respondents views on the use natural resources Source: Field survey data, 2014 Household survey findings further indicated that most of the respondents’ activities were

being practised in their own farms, and only few respondents reported to be using forest

25

reserves for their activities. About 88% reported to use own farms for their activities while

12% reported to use forest reserves for their activities. Findings from focus group discussion

indicated that forest reserves were being used for environmental friendly activities and

activities which had no detrimental effects to the forest reserve. It was mentioned by both

household survey respondents and focus group discussion participants that forest reserves

were used for beekeeping and collection of local herbs. However, findings from key

informant interview indicated that there some illegal activities such as timber extraction and

artisans/mining activities, which were not mentioned during household survey and focus

group discussion due their legal implications. Household findings on the sources of heat

energy indicated some household activities such as charcoal making and firewood collection

could contribute to the deforestation and degradation of forest resources (Table 20).

Table 20: Sources of heat energy for households

Villages charcoal firewood kerosene

Foroforo 0 12 0

Hemsambia 2 9 1Kijango 3 10 0Kimbo 4 8 1Kisiwani 2 10 1Kwelumbizi 1 13 1Makumba 2 10 1Mashewa 3 11 0Mtoni Bombo 0 11 0Muzi Kafishe 2 16 0Shebomeza 2 18 0Total 21 128 5Percentage 13.6 83.1 3.2

Sources of Heat Energy

Source: Household survey data, 2014

Key informants added that adjacent communities were degrading EUBR through timber

extraction, firewood collection and carvings.

26

3.1.12 Access to Natural Resources

This study found that various groups in the surveyed communities had equal access to natural

resources for their socio-economic activities. It was reported by household respondents that

men, women, poor and rich people had equal opportunities in the access of natural resources.

Access to resources by men was supported by 82.5% of the respondents and access to natural

resources by women was supported by 84.4% of the respondents. Equally, focus group

discussion and key informant interview reported that there was no segregation to the access o

natural resources among the poor and rich given that all resources were owned through

customary, laws and bylaws which do not segregate human beings. However, during focus

group discussion there was concern from women which is no equal treatment in owning

natural resources between man and woman. The concern was largely attributed to the

inheritance of family resources. It was further clarified that such segregation does not apply

at community level, rather depends on the setting of the individual households. This implies

that despite the fact that there is no segregation in the access to natural resources at

community level; however, individual households may constitute some elements which

segregate women in the access of natural resources.

3.2 Social capital

This study found that social capital among respondents across the studied villages was partly

associated with the membership to community groups. However, majority of the respondents

in the studied villages were not members to community groups. As indicated in Figure 4,

only 28% of the respondents reported to be members of the community groups.

27

Yes28%

No72%

Figure 4: Respondents views on the membership to community financial groups Source: Field survey data, 2014 As illustrated in figure 5, household survey respondents reported that some of the community

groups in their villages were characterised by women groups, men groups especially those

focusing on beekeeping, Savings and Credits Cooperatives (SACCOS) and Village

Community Bank (VICOBA).

3%

5%4%

16%

72%

SACCOS

Women groups

Men groups for beekeeping

VICOBA

Not members to community financial groups

Figure 5: Respondents views on membership to community groups Source: Field survey data, 2014 Discussions with focus group participants on community groups indicated that most of the

groups were formed voluntarily without formal procedures and proper documentation. It was

mentioned by focus group discussion participants that most of the groups had a mixture of

men and women, and were formed on the basis of neighbourhoods to ease assisting each

other during hardship. It was also clarified by the focus group discussion participants that

the groups have been emerging and disappear partly due to lack of awareness and mission

guiding the formulation and operationalization of their groups.

28

3.3 Financial capital

3.3.1 Savings/debt

This study found majority of the respondents were not members to the saving and/or debit

organizations (e.g. VICOBA). According to the household survey findings, about 91.6% of

the respondents in all studied villages reported to have no saving at all, while about 8.4% of

the respondents across the studied villages reported to have savings. However, according to

the focus group discussion participants, these savings had small balance, with an estimated

highest amount to be Tshs. 100,000. Focus group discussion participants reported that for

those men who do, they had individual bank accounts. Focus group discussion participants

also added that women with individual savings often use informal saving approaches, by

keeping their money in a box within their home, or in bank accounts. It was further clarified

by focus group discussion participants that women occasionally have savings within a self-

help group where they maintain a group bank account.

3.3.2 Credit

This study found that access to microcredit in the surveyed villages was relatively difficult. It

was found that only few individuals (8.4% of the respondents across the studied villages),

encompassing women and men were being engaged in microcredit activities. As shown in

Table 21 below, it was further revealed through household survey findings that there were

variations of membership among the studied villages. According to the household survey

findings, there were no respondents who were members to community financial groups in

Kijango, Makumba and Mtoni Bombo villages (Table 21).

29

Table 21: Respondents responses on the membership to community financial groups

Yes No

Foroforo 2 10 12Hemsambia 1 11 12Kijango 0 13 13Kimbo 2 11 13Kisiwani 1 11 12Kwelumbizi 1 13 14Makumba 0 12 12Mashewa 3 11 14Mtoni Bombo 0 14 14Muzi Kafishe 1 17 18Shebomeza 2 18 20Total 13 141 154

Do you have saving/ debt

Village

Total

Source: Household survey data, 2014

Household survey findings further indicated that majority of the respondents who were

members to community financial groups had more than Tshs. 100,000, while other had

amount ranging between Tshs. 50,000 and Tshs. 100,000 as well as less than Tshs. 50,000

(Figure 7).

1 Less than 50,000

2 Between 50,000 and 100,000

3 More than 100,000

4 Not members to community financial groups

Figure 6: Respondents views on the amount of savings Source: Field survey data, 2014

Discussions with key informants and focus group discussions showed that low number of

respondents with membership to community financial groups were largely associated with

lack of start-up capital to put down as deposits, high interest rates charged and stable income

generation that can sustain membership contribution to the group and loan repayment.

30

3.4 Household Engagement in biodiversity businesses

3.4.1 Types of Green Businesses

Majority of the respondents were aware of existence of green economies. The Focus group

discussion findings revealed that some communities were actually engaged in green business.

The mentioned green economies were beekeeping, fish farming, spice farming, processing

and selling and butterfly farming. However the importance of these businesses to household

income lagged behind farming and livestock keeping. As illustrated in Table 22, household

respondents indicated that income from household socio-economic activities, including the

green economy activities, varied accordingly depending on the level of investment and

capability of the household to implement the activity.

Table 22: Perceived income per month from of household economic activities

Activity Less than

50,000 50,000-100,000

More than 100,000

Wage/ salary 0 22 1

Trading 18 11 1 Farming (food crop production and spice farming) 26 92 0

Wood and wood products 0 1 0

Livestock keeping 18 87 0

Beekeeping 0 2 0

Herbs and tree nursery 0 2 0

Spice making 1 1 0

Tea plantation 0 1 0

Fish farming 1 0 0

Butterfly farming 0 0 1

41 111 2 Source: Household survey data, 2014

Discussion with key informants and focus group participants indicated that the performance

of green business activities was poor partly due to lack of financial resources to invest in the

activities, inadequate awareness on proper management of some of the activities such as

beekeeping, and lack of awareness on proper procedures to acquire area in the forest reserve

for beekeeping activities. Key informant interview also clarified that it was difficult to

quantify income from green business activities due to poor performance and since some of

31

the activities were practised on trial and error basis among households in and around EUBR.

As presented in Table 23, findings from Focus Group Discussion and Key Informant

Interview corresponded to household survey findings whereby majority of the respondents

(61.7%) were of the opinion that they were struggling to improve productivity of their

household activities.

Table 23: Perceived status of household economic activities Activities Status

Very good

Good Struggling

Wage/ salary 2 2 4

Trading 5 8 17

Farming (food crop production and spice farming 14 28 73

Wood and wood products 0 0 1

Livestock keeping 13 28 64

Beekeeping 0 0 2

Herbs and tree nursery 0 0 2

Spice making 1 0 1

Tea plantation 0 0 1

Fish farming 0 0 1

Butterfly farming 1 0 0

Tea plantation 1 0 0

Total 21 38 95

Percentage 13.6 24.7 61.7 Source: Household Survey Data, 2014

3.5 Markets for the green business products

This study found there were various levels of market sources for green economy products

across the study area. It was reported FGD respondents that they depend much on selling

their produce such as spices to neighbours within and adjacent to their villages, individual

business people from the district, Tanga, Arusha and Dar es Salaam towns who normally go

to their villages for collecting spices and other farm and non-farm products and researchers

who visit their villages. According to the FGD and household survey findings, other business

people were coming from Moshi Town in Kilimanjaro region for collecting and/or spices.

Household survey findings further indicated that there was no clear arrangements for

32

accessing markets for farm and non-farm produce. According to the findings from

discussions at household level and FGD, apart from local markets from their villages and

adjacent town centres, depending on the type and quantity of produce, individual households

were also able to contact their customers in the village, district, region and neighbouring town

centres and cities. Other respondents, especially those involved in butterfly farming, were of

the opinion that they were able to reach their customers through an agent, mainly the

Tanzania Forest Conservation Group (TFCG). Furthermore, findings from household survey

indicated that about 96.8% of the respondents across the study area reported that they

depended on personal efforts to secure markets for spices and honey, while only 3.2%

reported that they were using agents. According to the focus group discussion and key

informants interview, the use of agents was largely associated with butterfly farming.

3.6 Challenges facing livelihood activities

Field survey findings found several challenges that were affecting communities in and around

the EUBR in their efforts to implement green business activities. Household respondents

mentioned that some of the key challenges for green business were price fluctuation (50%),

inadequate capital (39.6%), and lack of markets (26%), lack of transparency (25.3%), poor

means of transport (19.5%), effects of the changing climate (7.8%) that exacerbates more

pressure on the biodiversity resources and poor farm implements (4.5%) (Figure 7).

Inadequate capital 23%

Lack of markets

15%

Lack of transparency

15%

Price fluctuation

29%

Poor means of transport

11%

Climate change 4%

Poor farm implements

3%

33

Figure 7: Respondents view on challenges facing Green Business Source: Field survey data, 2014

Therefore, for sustainability purposes, the design of interventions for GEBR project has to

consider strategies for counteracting these challenges.

3.7 Opportunities for Green Economies in the area

Analysis of field survey findings showed that the East Usambara Biosphere Reserve (EUBR)

can be utilised through a number of green economies activities. Key informants and focus

group discussions mentioned that communities in and around EUBR can benefit through

small scale based enterprises such as beekeeping, butterfly farming, spice farming, spice

making; and eco-tourism or cultural industries such camping and canoeing activities, site

views, parachuting and canopy walk. Key informants emphasized that joint efforts between

government institutions, non-governmental organisations including faith institutions, private

sector, and individuals will improve the performance of green business activities.

3.7.1 Small scale technology- based enterprises

3.7.1.1 Beekeeping

Discussions with household respondents, focus group discussion participants and key

informants indicated that beekeeping is one of the important activities that can improve

communities’ livelihoods and promote biodiversity conservation in and around the EUBR. It

was mentioned by key informants that although currently there is no active involvement of

villagers in beekeeping activities, it has a potential to contribute significantly to the

conservation of biodiversity and/or natural resources and communities livelihoods in and

around EUBR if well promoted. It was informed by FGD and KII that implementation of

beekeeping activities can be succeed through the formulation of community groups, ranging

from 5-10 members, and an average of 5 beehives per member.

34

3.7.1.2 Butterfly Farming

Butterfly farming was one of the activities mentioned by majority of the key informants,

FGD participants and household respondents in the studied villages. The respondents

mentioned that butterfly farming can improve income generation and thus reduce pressure on

natural forest resources. However, during focus group discussion, it was mentioned that lack

of transparency on the markets for butterflies hinders the effectiveness of butterfly farming

business. Therefore, they recommended that initiatives to improve transparency on the

business should be given priorities. Women engaged in butterfly farming in Shebomeza

village were also interested in establishing some small scale industries for making ornaments

from butterfly wings. This will enhance markets for butterflies reduce dependency on one

agent (TFCG) for markets. However, the industry is no longer operating due to lack of funds

for purchasing raw materials and was under the same agent, (TFCG).

3.7.1.3 Spice farming and spice making

Spice farming and spice making were also recommended by majority of the respondents

during household survey, focus group discussion and key informants interviews. Key

informants interview recommended that spice farming is crucial for both household

livelihoods and biodiversity conservation. Key informants interview further emphasized that

spice farming can only be sustainable if farmers can be trained on spice processing and

marketing skills. It was also recommended by focus group discussion participants that

provision of processing machines, and packaging materials can improve spice business and

thus increasing household income and contribute to biodiversity conservation.

3.7.2 Eco-tourism/Cultural Industries potentials

3.7.2.1 Camping

Key informants interview revealed that camping is one of the environmental friendly

activities that can be promoted in order to improve livelihoods of local communities and

35

biodiversity conservation. It was also emphasized that camping activities can also promote

utilisation of other tourist attractions sites such as parachuting, canopy walk and site views.

For sustainability purposes, implementation of this activity has to be accompanied by the

development of exit strategy which will set framework of management after the phase.

3.7.2.2 Canoeing/Boat riding

Canoeing and/or boat riding were one of the activities recommended by key informants at

Amani Nature Reserve technical staff. The informants suggested that the activities can be

effectively be implemented in Foroforo and Makumba villages, where there is a dam which

be utilised for canoeing and boat riding. The dam can also be used by villagers for fishing

activities. However, it was mentioned by key informants at Amani Nature Reserve that

canoeing and boat riding as well as fishing activities can be effectively undertaken if there is

improvement of water level through the control of siltation. Basing on the discussion with

key informants and FGD, it is recommended that implementation of this activities be

spearhead by LGAs and Tanzania Forest Service Agency (TFS) through EUBR office.

However, GEBR can provide necessary support (financial and materials) as an enabling

environment for the canoeing and boat riding investments.

3.7.2.3 Site Views

Technical staff at Amani Nature Reserve office mentioned site views as one of the activities

that can promote eco-tourism in EUBR. It was mentioned that site views can be effectively

developed at Mbomole, Kiganga and Ngua villages which are within and around the EUBR.

Key informants were of the opinion that site views can promote eco-tourism and thus

contributing to the conservation of biodiversity in the EUBR. In this regard, it is

recommended that GEBR builds on the ongoing initiatives by EUBR by providing material

and financial support. It is also emphasized that adjacent LGAs be encouraged to utilize the

ecotourism opportunities. However, GEBR support should be based on agreeable business

36

plan which encompasses SMART (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Reliable and Time

Bound) exit actions.

3.7.2.4 Parachuting

Key informants interview at Amani Nature Reserve office identified parachuting as one of

the important tourism activities given the landscape of the EUBR. It was mentioned that

some of the areas suitable for parachuting activities include Rutindi peak. It was further

emphasized that Nature reserve office has started identifying how such opportunities can be

utilised in order to promote eco-tourism and generation of income which can further be

invested in biodiversity conservation. In this regard, it is recommended that GEBR builds on

the ongoing initiatives by EUBR by providing material and financial support. However,

GEBR support should be based on agreeable business plan which encompasses SMART

(Specific, Measureable, Attainable, Reliable and Time Bound) exit actions.

3.7.2.5 Canopy Walk

Canopy walk is one of the potential opportunities for eco-tourism in the EUBR given forest

canopies in the area. Interview with technical staff at Amani Nature Reserve indicated that

canopy walk can be used to attract tourists in the area. During the interview with technical

staff at Amani Nature Reserve revealed that utilisation of canopy walk has been integrated in

the conservation and eco-tourism programme. However, it was indicated that inadequate

funds has been a barrier to utilize canopy walk for eco-tourism. In this regard, it is

recommended that GEBR builds on the ongoing initiatives by EUBR by providing material

and financial support. However, GEBR support should be based on agreeable business plan

which encompasses SMART (Specific, Measureable, Attainable, Reliable and Time Bound)

exit actions.

37

3.7.2.6 Water Falls

Waterfalls sites are some of the sites in the EUBR that can be developed for eco-tourism.

Officials at Amani Nature Reserve office mentioned that Pacha falls, Chemka and Derema

falls provide opportunities for the development of eco-tourism in and around the EUBR.

According to the informants, development of waterfalls sites in conjunction with other tourist

sites can promote tourism activities and thus contributing to the improvement of

communities’ livelihoods and biodiversity conservation. In this regard, it is recommended

that GEBR builds on the ongoing initiatives by EUBR and LGAs by providing material and

financial support. However, GEBR support should be based on agreeable business plan which

encompasses SMART (Specific, Measureable, Attainable, Reliable and Time Bound) exit

actions.

38

3.8 SWOC Analysis of Green Businesses

Sn Activity Strength Weakness Opportunities Challenges Remarks 1 Beekeeping Environmental friendly

activity that can promote biodiversity conservation and income generation among participating households in and around EUBR Readiness of villagers

to engage in beekeeping

Potential for

engagement of women and men engagement in beekeeping

Informal groups have no support from government, private and nongovernmental organisation

Inadequate awareness on beekeeping activities

lack of facilities for

beekeeping activities

There is informal groups that can be promoted

Suitable forest area for beekeeping activities

support from LGA and Amani Nature Reserve office for promoting beekeeping

Readily local and

international market for bee products

Require financial and material support to implement this activity Investment in awareness raising is also important and require financial and material support

Beekeeping is important for environmental conservation and provides opportunities for alternative income generation among local communities Strengthening capacity and formalisation of existing groups, and formulation of new groups for beekeeping can promote beekeeping activities Provision of facilities and equipment for beekeeping such as beehives can promote beekeeping activities in the area Sustainability of beekeeping activities depend on needs assessment and proper accounting of income and development of appropriate investment plan

2 Butterfly Farming

Environmental friendly activities for income generation and contributes to biodiversity conservation

Engagement of communities in butterfly activities

Lack of transparency on the sources of market and price for butterfly business causes of blames among participating households

Require start-up funds which is a challenges

There is individual families and groups who are engaged in the activity that be supported through GEBR project

support from Tanzania Forest Conservation Group (TFCG) and

Inadequate knowledge on markets and lack of materials for butterfly farming Variation of climatic condition is emerging to be

Butterfly farming is important for income generation and contributes to environmental conservation Existing individual households and groups can be supported so that other community members to learn

39

potential for engagement of women and men in butterfly farming

in most households Require special skills

for undertaking such activity

Amani Nature Reserve provides opportunity for promoting butterfly farming

There is market at international market

critical challenge to butterfly farming

and engage in the butterfly farming Support for butterfly farming may encompass start-up funds, pesticides, entrepreneurship skills, access to markets, facilities and equipment for butterfly farming

Transparency in market opportunities for butterfly farming may have significant contribution to the sustainability of butterfly farming

3 Spice farming Contributes to environmental conservation

Generates income for households

Both men and women can be engaged in spice farming

Inadequate knowledge Inadequate financial

and material support Lack of

entrepreneurship skills

Favourable climatic condition for spice farming

Readiness of communities in and around EUBR for engagement in spice farming

Support from LGAs and Amani Nature Reserve office

Local and potential international market for spice products

Limited knowledge on spice farming

Important for improvement of household income and biodiversity conservation Awareness raising is important tool for improvement of spice farming activities Up-scaling lessons from farmers can be important for spice farming business

4 Spice making Provides value addition for spice products

Potential for local and international markets

potential for engagement of women and men in butterfly farming

Require processing facilities which is a challenge in most households

Require start-up funds which is a challenges in most households

Require special skills for undertaking such

Communities in EUBR are using local traditional knowledge to process and market spice products. Thus improvement of local communities entrepreneurial skills, financial and technical support can promote spice

Lack of appropriate technology on proper processing of spices Lack of modern packaging materials

Provision of appropriate processing technology will improve spice products for local and international markets Entrepreneurship skills is an important tool for promotion of spice products Provision of packaging

40

activity making activities Poor access to marketing information Lack of reliable markets for spices

materials and skills will improve spice products and attract local and international markets Few groups and individual households who are currently engaged in spice making can be supported so that other community members to learn and engage in the business

5 Camping Environmental friendly activities for income generation to adjacent households and participating institutions

Promotes other tourist sites and

Provides off-farm employment opportunities for both men and women

No evidence of how it can perform even though Roman Catholic has started camping sites, and Amani Nature Reserve has identified the activity for promoting eco-tourism

May require start-up funds to set up infrastructures and facilities

Roman Catholic has started investing in camping activities

Amani Nature Reserve office has identified camping as one of the key activities to be promoted for eco-tourism

Heavy investment on camping facilities and services may require significant amount of funds

Camping is important for revenue and biodiversity conservation Require analysis of environmental assessment to avoid detrimental effects to the environment Require time and investment in facilities and infrastructures Require clear plan on how local communities will be involved

6 Canoeing/Boat riding

Promotes environmental conservation

Potential for income generation

Potential for tourist attractions

Potential for other livelihoods activities such as shops, and fishing for business and subsistence

Siltation to the dam is a major barrier for this activity

Performance of this activity require investment in infrastructures and facilities to attract tourists

Adequate funds is required for investing in entrepreneurship programmes

There is a dam in Foroforo village which can be improved for canoeing and boat riding.

The dam can also be used for other livelihood activities such as fishing

Heavy investment on canoeing facilities, infrastructures, and services may require significant amount of funds.

Important for eco-tourism, analysis of investment costs and its potential in contributing to tourism is required

7 Site Views Potential for promoting biodiversity

May require adequate funds for setting up

There is a number of site views which can be

Heavy investment on site view

Important green economy activity, but if not well

41

conservation Potential for

complementing other tourist sites

infrastructures to enable tourists to enjoy site views

Need to invest in advertisement in order to promote the activity

promoted and used for eco-tourism

facilities, infrastructures, and services may require significant amount of funds.

implemented, benefits to adjacent communities can be marginal. Therefore, its importance to the local communities will need a clear framework for their involvement

8 Parachuting Potential for contributing to the performance of other tourism

Require special skills for undertaking such activity

Require adequate for investing in infrastructures and facilities

Require investment in the advertisement and promotion

There are several landscape peaks which can be promoted for parachuting and thus improving tourism activities in the EUBR

Heavy investment on parachuting infrastructures, facilities and services may require significant amount of funds.

Important green economy activity for revenue and biodiversity conservation. However, requires investments for facilities, infrastructures and skills that cannot be reached by most adjacent communities

9 Canopy Walk Potential for contributing to other tourism activities

Potential for contributing to environmental conservation

Require careful assessment to avoid environmental impacts in the creation of pathways

Require adequate funds for advertisement and promotion

There is favourable canopy environment for establishing canopy walk infrastructure

Support from Amani Nature Reserve office as one of the activities which can be used eco-tourism activities

Heavy investment on canopy walk infrastructures / facilities and services may require significant amount of funds.

Highly recommended activity for income and biodiversity conservation. However, environmental impact assessment can provide proper framework for monitoring ecological change

10 Water Falls Potential for contributing to environmental conservation

Potential for contributing to the performance of other tourism activities

Require adequate funds for advertisement and promotion

There is favourable and adequate number of waterfalls which can be improved for eco-tourism activities

Support from Amani Nature Reserve office for promoting eco-tourism through the utilisation of waterfalls sites

Heavy investment on the facilities and services necessary for utilising waterfalls may require significant amount of funds.

Highly recommended activity for income and biodiversity conservation.

42

CHAPTER FOUR

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

4.1 Conclusion

This study concludes that local communities in and around Amani Nature reserve have

been/are engaged in green businesses. This was partly linked to the awareness of local

communities about green economy businesses. The respondents also indicated their

involvement in some green economy activities such as beekeeping, spice farming, processing

and selling and butterfly farming. Despite these potentials of green economy, it was reported

by respondents that there was poor performance of green business due to lack of financial

resources to invest in the activities, inadequate awareness on proper management of some of

the activities such butterfly farming, and lack of awareness on proper procedures to acquire

area in the forest reserve for beekeeping activities. This study also revealed that the East

Usambara Biosphere Reserve (EUBR) is also potential for other green economies activities,

mainly for eco-tourism and livelihoods of communities in and round the Biosphere reserve.

Therefore, it is important that available opportunities be utilised in order to improve local

communities’ livelihoods and contribute to biodiversity conservation.

4.2 Recommendation

This study recommends enhancement of the following green businesses in the study area. Beekeeping is recommended for its income and biodiversity conservation. It is

practised by a good number of people although at a small scale level. It requires

relatively low start-up funds and can be done in groups in order to accommodate

relatively large number of communities. Strong support from Amani Nature Reserve

office and other institutions, both government and nongovernmental organisations,

and availability of local and international market gives room for beekeeping to be one

of the activities that has to be support and promoted.

43

Butterfly farming is recommended for its role in promoting local communities income

and contribute to biodiversity conservation. Favourable climatic condition, local

communities’ engagement and participation of nongovernmental organisation in the

business provides avenues for being successful if financial and materials as well as

technical support are provided.

Spice farming and spice making is recommended for both household livelihoods and

biodiversity conservation. A good number of people are engaged in the business

although in a very small scale level. Awareness raising, provision of processing

machines and packaging materials can improve spice business at local and

international market and thus increasing household income and contribute to

biodiversity conservation.

Camping is also recommended for its potentials in contributing to livelihoods of local

communities and biodiversity conservation as well as its contribution to the

utilisation of other tourist attractions sites such as parachuting, canopy walk and site

views.

Site view is recommended since it is relatively cheap investment, with potentials to

contribute to the promotion of other eco-tourism activities and thus contributing to the

conservation of biodiversity in the EUBR.

Canopy walk is recommended for its potential contribution to eco-tourism and

presence of favourable forest canopies in the area. There is also strong support from

Amani Nature reserve officials.

Promotion of waterfalls sites for eco-tourism provides opportunities for the

development of eco-tourism in and around the EUBR. It is recommended for its

potentials in the promotion of other tourism activities and thus contributing to the

improvement of communities’ livelihoods and biodiversity conservation.

44

References

Adam Akyoo and Evelyne Lazaro (2007). The Spice Industry in Tanzania: General Profile, Supply Chain Structure, And Food Standards Compliance Issues. DIIS Working Paper no 2007/8 Goodwin, H. (1996) In pursuit of ecotourism. Biodiversity and Conservation, 5, 277-291. ITC (2001) Product Profile: Spices and Culinary Herbs. UNCTAD Discussion Document. Brussels. Pp. 2-11. Kiss, A. 2004. Is community-based ecotourism a good use of biodiversity conservation funds? Trends in Ecology and Evolution 19: 232-237

Lusekelo Philemon, (2013) Villagers abandon fish farming, switch to beekeeping. Guardian News Paper. http://www.ippmedia.com/frontend/?l=55603 Accessed on 2nd May 2014

Ohanna K., Johari M.,Raymond K and Juhana N., (2008) Magoroto Mlinga Community Ecotourism Project (Mamcep) Ross, S. & Wall, G. (1999) Ecotourism: towards congruence between theory and practice. Tourism Management, 20, 123-132. Theron Morgan-Brown (2003), Butterfly Farming in the East Usambara Mountains. A report submitted to COSTECH Theron Morgan-Brown (2007), Butterfly Farming and Conservation Behavior in The East Usambara Mountains Of Tanzania. A Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of The University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science University of Florida

UNEP, FAO, IMO, UNDP, IUCN, World Fish Center, GRID-Arendal, (2012) Green Economy in a Blue World www.unep.org/greeneconomy and www.unep.org/regionalseas United Nations Development Programme (2012), Amani Nature Reserve, Tanzania. Equator Initiative Case Study Series. New York, NY United Nations Division for Sustainable Development - [UNDSD] (2013), A Guidebook to the Green Economy Issue 4: A guide to International Green Economy Initiatives United Nations Environment Programme [UNEP] (2011). Towards a Green Economy: Pathways Towards Sustainable Development and Poverty Eradication. http://www.unep.org/GreenEconomy/Portals/93...pdf Accessed on, Friday 02nd May 2014

Rantala, S., Lyimo, E., Powell, B., Kitalyi, A. and Vihemäki, H. (2011). Challenges and opportunities for collaborative landscape governance in the East Usambara Mountains, Tanzania. ICRAF Working Paper nr. 127 & CIFOR Working Paper nr 61. Nairobi & Bogor.

45

Appendices APPENDIX I: QUESTIONNAIRE FOR HOUSEHOLD SURVEYS 1. Household No…………………………......... 2. Date

……………………………………………

3. Village………………………………………. 4. Name of respondent

…………………………..

5. Age of respondent………………………….. 6. Gender: A ( ) Male B ( )

Female

7. Name head of

household………………………………………………………………………………

8. Gender head of household: A ( ) Male B ( ) Female

9. Interview is administered A. household head B. A close family member 10. His or her relationship to household head …………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 11. Place of birth of household head

A. In the village B. Outside the village

12. If outside the village, why did he/she move to the village? ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 13. Mention the year he/she arrived at the village …………………………………………………… 14. What is the ownership status of your house? A. Owner of the house B. Renter (If so how much is the rent?)..................................................... C. Provided by employer D. User not paying rent E. Other.................................................... F. I do not know

46

15. Type of house Bricks under tile Bricks under iron

sheets Bricks under thatch grass

Mud under iron sheets

Mud under thatch

47

Household Characteristics and Socio- Economic Status 16. Total number of household members------------ 17. Household members’ characteristics

No A. Name B.

Gender 1. Female 2. Male

C. Age

E Marital Status 1. Single 2. Married 3. Divorced 4. Widowed 5. Separated 999. I do not know

F Family member Level of education 1. Below school age 2. Primary School Student 4. Primary School graduate 5. Secondary school Student 6. Secondary school graduate 7. Vocational School Student 10. Vocational School Graduate 11. University Student 12. University Graduate 999. I do not know

G. Is the of the Household member involved in any activity which brings income to the family (For the last 3 months) 1.Yes 2. No 999. I do not know

I. If not working, please give reasons 11. If household member is not working, please mention the reason. 1.Retired 2.Student 3.Housewife 4.Cannot find a job 5.Pregnant 6.So ill that he/she cannot work 7.Too old 8.Too young 9.Handicapped 10.Does not want 11 Looks after house 12.Looks after elderly 13.Looks after children 14. Not allowed to work (e.g. female members) 15. Other (please specify) 998. Not applicable

J. Who is she/he working for? 1. His/her own business (gets all or a share of the profits) 2. Family business (Works with a wage) 3. Family business (unpaid) 3. Small enterprise (less than 10 workers) 4. Medium or large enterprise (More than 10 workers) State which industry (e.g. Spice processing) 5. Government 998. Not applicable 999. I do not know

48

18. Fill the following table, only for the livelihood activities practiced by a family member.

Activity Practiced by a

family member 1 (Yes) 2 (No)

Time started

J. Who is she/he working for? 1. His/her own business (gets all or a share of the profits) 2. Family business (Works with a wage) 3. Family business (unpaid) 3. Small enterprise (less than 10 workers) 4. Medium or large enterprise (More than 10 workers) State which industry (e.g. Spice processing) 5. Government 998. Not applicable 999. I do not know

Average monthly income from the activity 1. Less than 50000 Tshs 2. 50000> 100000 3. More than 100000

Status 1 very good 2 Good 3 Struggling

Importance in household income (1 important, 2 less important, 3 least important)

For Biodiversity business only (Activity 3 to 15), Where do you get the resources 1. Forest reserve 2. Community forest 3. Own farm 4. Other (Please mention)

1. Wage/salary 2. Trading 3. Farming 4. Livestock keeping 5. Wood and wood

49

products 6. Eco- Tourism 7. Fish farming. 8. Sugarcane

farming. 9. Butterfly farming 10. Local rafting 11. Beekeeping. 12. Herbs and tree

nursery 13. Spice Making 14. Tea Plantation 15. Logging 16. Other (please

mention)

50

19. For biodiversity products, how do you reach your customers? A. Personally B. Through community association C. Through an agent (mention the agent) D. Other (Mention)

20. If market reached through community association and/or an agent, how do you pay them? ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 21. Mention some challenges you face in biodiversity business? ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 22. Mention other natural resources found in your area which you think can be used to support your livelihood. Resource Use Access

1. Men 2. Women 3. Rich 4. Poor

23. A. What is your most preferred livelihood activity? ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………

B. Give reason …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………....................

51

24. Livestock : Do you have any of the following animals? Type Number Use

a. Food b. Cash c. Both d. Other (Mention)

No livestock N/A Chicken/ducks/guinea fowls Goats/Sheep Cows Pigs Donkey Other (Mention)

25. Financial capital: Do you have any of the following? Item Yes/No . Less than 50000 Tshs

2. 50000> 100000 3. More than 100000

Savings/debt Credit 26. Social capital: Are you a member of any community financial group A. Yes B. No 27. Mention that group. SACCOS Women group Men group VICOBA Other

(Mention) 28. Where do you get water (Multiple responses allowed in order of priority) River/Community Well or Pump Forest Reserve Private Well Private Pump Private Pump Private Pump

29. Where do you get building poles? (Multiple responses allowed in order of priority) Forest Reserve Farm Community Forest Own Trees Bought

30. Where do you get local medicine? (Multiple responses allowed in order of priority)

52

Forest Reserve Farm Community Forest Own Trees Ought

31. Where do you get heat energy? (Multiple responses allowed in order of priority) Type Response Source (Community ) Charcoal Fire wood Kerosene Saw dust Electicity Other (Mention)

32. Where do you get light? Kerosene Lamp Battery/Solar Generator TANESCO

33. Have you ever heard of energy saving stoves? A. Yes B. No 34. If yes, do you have energy saving stove? A. Yes B. No 35. If do not have but have heard of them, are they available in your village? A. Yes B. No C. I don't know 36. Where do you get the energy saving stove? ….................................................................................................................................................. 37. Values of forest products Product Cost Bunch of Firewood Dose of Traditional Medicines Single Building Pole Sack of Charcoal Litre of Local Honey Bunch of Firewood

53

38. Do you have any of the following? Resource Size Land for Subsistence Agriculture Forest farm Land for commercial agriculture

39. Is there any organization which is currently involved in biodiversity businesses in your area?

A. Yes B. No

40. If yes, please mention it and the work it does

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………....

41. Why do you think it is important to conserve our environments/forests?

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………...

54

APPENDIX II: CHECKLIST FOR FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION

1. Please, describe your village. (Probe the form of administration, environment condition,

level of development e.t.c)

2. Describe a typical day of a villager in your village (Probe typical day of a man and

woman, division of daily activities, roles of men and women in the society)

3. Describe the natural resources found in your area.

4. Do you think the resources are important to you? Do you think it is important that we

conserve the environment?

5. Do you have access to the resources? How do you utilize the resources? (Probe access to

resources by different social classes and gender, form of management)

6. Are you happy with the current access to the resources? What would you like to change?

7. How do people in your village earn their living? (Probe the division of labor by age,

gender).

8. How do you benefit from the natural resources found within/around your village? (Probe

the utilization of the resources for various livelihood activities including the biodiversity

businesses, Eco-tourism/Cultural Industries potentials including possible clusters)

9. Do you think it is possible to utilize our natural resources without causing problem to it?

How? (Study their awareness on the green businesses).

10. Do you think women should get equal access to resources and be involved in livelihood

activities as men (Probe women involvement in livelihood activities with an emphasis in

biodiversity businesses).

11. Where do you get the markets for the biodiversity products? (Probe, local, international

markets, how they reach their markets, charges for using agents if any and challenges in

accessing the markets)

12. How do you describe the earnings from biodiversity resource utilization/biodiversity

businesses? Is it enough to satisfy your family needs? If not enough, why do you think it

fails to earn enough earnings for the family? What do you think should be done to

improve the earnings from biodiversity businesses?

13. Suggest some businesses that you think can be done by using the natural resources around

village without compromising their sustainability (Probe opportunities for small

technology-based enterprises development).

55

APPENDIX III: CHECKLIST FOR KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEWS The interviews focused on the following areas. a. Brief description of the organization/institution activities b. Demography and political/administrative boundaries c. Natural resources found in the area, management and utilization of the resources. d. Organization/institution role/involvement in natural resources conservation and/or

community livelihood support. e. Access to natural resources by gender and social groups. f. Views on Green businesses: involvement, Importance, challenges, advice on way

forward. g. Views on potential markets for green economies products: Available markets, access and

limitations. h. Current policy and infrastructure support to green businesses i. Opportunities for small technology-based enterprises development with an emphasis in

biodiversity based green businesses, potential markets j. Eco-tourism/Cultural Industries potentials including possible clusters k. The capacity of local governments and various GEBR implementing organizations.