Local inhabitants’ use of forests in Kasyoha-Kitomi forest landscape Kim Raben Natural Resources and Poverty Unit The Danish Institute for International Studies October 2006

Example of a local inhabitant’s perception of the poor in Maskati village They live in houses built by mud. Houses are thatched by grasses. They can’t manage more than ½ hectare of land. They eat one meal a day and face hunger for three months each year. They are always indebted and therefore most of what they harvest is used to pay back debts. They work as casual laborers Some are involved in charcoal burning and selling of fire wood. They have not completed their contributions to village water project. They eat boiled food because they cannot afford to buy cooking oil.

Poverty indicators Causual labouring Animal ownership Land ownership Non-agricultural sources of income Children’s schooling Marital status and age Hiring agricultural labourers Food security Quality of diet Housing quality Dressing Health status

Poverty levels in in PEMA intervention areas Greater equity in Tanzania than in Uganda Greater size of the less poor group and much smaller size of the poorest group in Tanzania

Who owns the land?

Non-agricultural sources of income

The majority of local inhabitants benefit from forests in the landscape

But they benefit from different types of forests!

… and they benefit in different ways!

Forests do not only provide benefits

The poor are less informed and do not participate

Conclusions from Kasyoha-Kitomi Forest Landscape 2/3 of the households benefit from forests in the landscape. The poor are more dependent on benefits from the forest reserve compared to the less poor and the better-off who benefit more from forests on public land and private forests. Better-off, less poor and poorest benefit in different ways. Forests are not only a source of benefits but also pose risks, especially among the poorest. The poorest do participate less in decision-making on forest management.