Issue 2 (202)/2025

ALSE and ACS Style
Chirwa, B.R.; Phiri, A. Contribution of community forest management groups to effective forest conservation. A case study of the Mwamba Community Forest in Kasama, Zambia. Journal of Applied Life Sciences and Environment 2025, 58 (2), 215-231. https://doi.org/10.46909/alse-582173

AMA Style
Chirwa, B.R.; Phiri, A. Contribution of community forest management groups to effective forest conservation. A case study of the Mwamba Community Forest in Kasama, Zambia. Journal of Applied Life Sciences and Environment. 2025; 58 (2): 215-231. https://doi.org/10.46909/alse-582173

Chicago/Turabian Style
Chirwa, Brenda Romazi, and Ackim Phiri. 2025. “Contribution of community forest management groups to effective forest conservation. A case study of the Mwamba Community Forest in Kasama, Zambia.” Journal of Applied Life Sciences and Environment 58, no. 2: 215-231. https://doi.org/10.46909/alse-582173

Contribution of community forest management groups to effective forest conservation. A case study of the Mwamba Community Forest in Kasama, Zambia

Brenda Romazi CHIRWA¹ and Ackim PHIRI^2*

¹Forest Department, Kasama, Northern Province, Zambia; email: brendakalumbi@gmail.com

²Zambia Forestry College, Mwekera, Copperbelt, 10101, Zambia

*Correspondence: ackimphiri2020@yahoo.com

Received: Feb. 17, 2025. Revised: May 06, 2025. Accepted: May 09, 2025. Published online: Jun. 19, 2025

ABSTRACT. Forests play vital roles in the survival of people globally. Despite their usefulness, the loss of forests has not slowed. Hence, various approaches have been used to enhance their management. Effective forest management is key to food security and stability of national economies. The quest for efficient and sustainable management of forested areas has led to the surge in research exploring the involvement of local people in forest management. This study aimed to assess the contribution of community forest management groups in effective forest conservation. Several research questions were asked to explore the subject: What are the approaches used to sustainably manage the Mwamba Community Forest and how effective are they? What challenges are faced to achieve sustainable forest management? What strategies are used to overcome the challenges faced in managing forests in a sustainable manner? This study targeted 127 household respondents living around the Mwamba Community Forest, together with key informants. The mixed approach of qualitative and quantitative research methodologies was used. Questionnaires were administered to collect data from respondents. The variable parameters were analysed using Excel and IBM SPSS statistic 26. The effectiveness of the approaches in managing the natural resources in the forest were confirmed by 84% of the respondents, but 11% disagreed, and 5% were indecisive. The study also revealed various forest management activities being practiced, such as woodlot management, beekeeping, and gardening. The study recommends that the government build capacity in the local communities through training, financial empowerment, and incentives.

Keywords: community forestry; contribution; deforestation; forest groups; sustainability.

 

INTRODUCTION

According to McCullum (2000), the last 20 years have been characterised by a major shift towards greater participation by stakeholders, including local communities, in forest and woodland management worldwide. This comes after the realisation that many of the problems associated with the depletion of natural resources are mainly due to public exclusion from the conservation agenda and the associated removal of ownership (McCullum, 2000). This phenomenon occurs in Zambia. According to ILUA, (2025a) and the Food and Agriculture Organisation (2005), increased deforestation across the country has been revealed. There has been increasing deforestation levels in Zambia over recent years, ranging 79,000–150,000 ha per annum (ILUA, 2025b). Hence, the government is likely to face serious challenges in ensuring sustainable forest resource utilisation and management. Therefore, several items have been adjusted and revisited in Zambia to generate forestry programmes that are relevant to the current demands of the people. As noted by McCullum, (2000), “conservation is for the people, by the people and about the people.” From this statement, it is apparent that the forestry programmes should have people at their centre.

Several researchers have noted, with concern, the effects of cutting down trees for farming and charcoal production (Chirwa et al., 2014; Jew et al., 2016; Syampungani et al., 2009). The Zambian government suffered several setbacks that manifested the failure to slow down or improve forest management. By 1998, a strategy was put in place to revise the 1973 Forestry Act. This was done to incorporate the concepts of Joint Forest Management (JFM) to allow participation of local people and other stakeholders in the sector (Ministry of Lands and Natural Resources 2010). The shift is believed to be a more viable way to sustainably manage forests efficiently. Therefore, with the legal framework adjusted to facilitate the 1998 National Forestry Policy, it becomes essential to study the problems and prospects that characterised the implementation of the new policy.

The government of Zambia is currently implementing projects in Central, Copperbelt, and Northern Provinces, with the new approach following the 1998 National Forestry Policy. Some of these projects include beekeeping, mushroom cultivation, fish farming, and tree planting. These practices are being taught to people in various communities to reduce their heavy dependence on the available forest resources. This offers alternative livelihood activities that reduce pressure on the available forest resources. The practice of JFM in Zambia’s forest resource management has challenges in the sense that people do not fully have the rights to benefit and manage the resources effectively. Vyamana (2009) revealed that community forestry is a better way of managing forest areas because benefits are visible, whereas they are not easily noticed in JFM. Further, Bwalya (2007) hinted that numerous residents in protected areas were ignorant of the rules associated with JFM as an approach in forest management. Additionally, Phiri (2009) revealed the dissatisfaction of the people living adjacent to forest areas due to lack of benefits from JFM, for example, the inability to make decisions instrumental in managing forest ecosystems by the communities themselves. Rishi (2007) hinted that community forest management helped in changing the habits and mind set of the people in various forested areas.

Diansyah et al. (2021) suggested the need to promote community forest management to realise sustainable forest management. Additionally, Rao et al. (2019) noticed a change in the interdependence of man and forests with the passage of time; as such, the forestry sector needs to develop new policies. Bixler (2014) indicated that the new approach to managing and combatting the degradation of forested areas was the use of social forestry. It was further noted by Giam (2017) and Kaimowitz Angelsen (1998) and that forest resources play a vital role in the lives of people despite its loss. Literature has shown that reducing deforestation and improving the lives of the local people is a policy issue that needs serious attention (ITTORRI, 2025). Hence, social forestry groups have emerged as a key strategy in the fight against forest degradation, proposing a model where the responsibility of managing local forest resources is shared with various stakeholders such as communities that are dependant on forest resources for survival. Despite their potential, the effectiveness of these groups in promoting sustainable forest management and conservation practices remains under scrutiny (Sishekanu, 2020).

The current study was intended to produce information that will be useful in forest management plans. The information gathered may be used by educational institutions, and it may aid to transform views and behaviours and in decision-making by our policymakers. The study aimed at assessing the contribution that community forest management groups make for effective forest conservation. To help find answers that meet our objective, the following research questions were considered: How effective are the approaches used in managing forest resources sustainably? What challenges were faced to achieve sustainable forest management within the Mwamba Community Forest? What are the appropriate strategies to employ in effective forest conservation?

 

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The Mwamba zone in northeastern Kasama District of Northern Province, Zambia, was the study area. The main activities undertaken in the study area are peasant farming involving cash crops such as maize and vegetables and the rearing of livestock. The communities surrounding the forest are largely impoverished, surviving on less than a dollar per day. The community comprises a cluster of villages headed by village headmen. The research focused on the members of the Community Forestry Management Group and the surrounding households. It focused on assessing the approaches applied in effective management of forest reserves. Hence, the Department of Forest, together with local community leadership such as forest officers and headmen, were cardinal in this study because of their critical role in spearheading and giving technical help on forest management.

At the centre of this study were measurable data and in-depth insights from community members. We employed a mixed-methods research approach that combines qualitative and quantitative methods to ensure a comprehensive understanding of the subject matter. The qualitative method was used to explore the local community’s perceptions, challenges, and strategies regarding forest management. Data collection was done using key informant interviews with local leaders, forest officers, and other experts in sustainable forest management to gain an understanding of strategies, challenges, and methods used in managing the community forest. These interviews provided a deeper understanding of the local management processes and challenges beyond what can be quantified. Additionally, respondents were put in some groups to facilitate focus group discussions.

Sampling design

Random sampling was used to allow different groups within the population to be carefully represented. Key informants were selected purposively based on their involvement in forest management activities. The target population for this study included all individuals living around the forest and key informants. The key informants were selected based on their role in forest management and their knowledge. The total household estimate was 550, and 0.05 was the tolerance error. Hence, 127 households living around the forest area were picked for the study. This number was chosen to ensure that the sample accurately represented the larger population. In addition, practical aspects also played a vital role in determining sample size due to resource scarcity as conducting surveys involves time and cost. Therefore, sample size was computed using the Taro Yamane formula (Equation 1):

where n = sample size, N = population size, and e = error tolerance.

Data analysis

Quantitative and qualitative data analyses was applied in the study. In the quantitative data analysis, descriptive statistics such as frequency (percentages) and median were calculated. Data cleaning was done to ensure no missing or incorrect responses were used in the final analysis. Additionally, qualitative data gathered from key informants through interviews was transcribed, coded and analysed. Themes were assigned based on recurring patterns or ideas related to forest management strategies, challenges, and perceptions. Additionally, SPSS software was used in coding the results as well as identifying key themes to be used.

 

RESULTS

Respondents information

A summary of the biodata of the respondents (Table 1) provided reference information on the varying demographic variables. The majority of respondents were men. The age of respondents was 20 years and older. The fewest respondents had a tertiary education, wheres nearly half of the respondents had completed their primary level of education. About one-third of the of the respondents had a secondary education level only. The highest number of respondents were in the age group 30–39 years old, followed by the group 40–49 years old. Fewer respondents were in the group aged 20–29 years old, and the fewest were in the group of 50 years old and older.

 

Table 1
Biodata summary of the respondents from the population living around the Mwamba Community Forest and key informants

Characteristics	n = 127	%
Gender
Men	91	71.7
Women	36	28.3
Education level
Tertiary	23	18.1
Secondary	41	32.3
Primary	63	49.6
Age distribution
20-29	24	18.9
30-39	43	33.8
40-49	42	33.1
50 and above	18	14.2

 

Effectiveness of approaches

Among the 127 respondents, 84% acknowledged that the approaches being used were effective in the management of forest resources whereas 11% disagreed, and 5% were indecisive.

Approaches practiced

The Mwamba Community Forest executive members and surrounding communities were asked to mention specific activities carried out in the forest that promote sustainable management. Therefore, various economic activities related to community forest management (CFM) were recorded (Figure 1). One of the most appreciated approaches was natural regeneration, where trees have the ability to regrow after being cut down in a forest area. This refers to the natural capacity of many tree species in native forests to regenerate without human intervention. Local communities support this process by avoiding interference with the natural growth of these trees. Most of the trees found in the natural forest have this ability to grow again without man’s intervention, the local people support this by not interfering with their growth, followed by beekeeping. Gardening was equally practiced as much as agrosilvopastoral activity. The least practiced activity was woodlot establishment.

 

Indicators of management efforts

The indicators of CFM refer to local practices that demonstrate the implementation of community forestry in a given area. These are sustainable activities, such as woodlot establishment, that reduce pressure on natural forests and provide alternative sources of income (Figure 2).

These are some of the practices that are being practiced in the community area to provide social-economic benefits to the local people. However, these activities should not be destructive to the forests found in the area. They are practiced to act as an alternative source of income for the people instead of destroying the forest. For example; woodlot establishment (local people can collect firewood here and not the forest, they can also cut some poles for fencing and constructing purposes). This revealed that natural regeneration represented more than half of CFM practices. This was then followed, in order, by caterpillars, bee foraging, and, lastly, mushrooms.

Caterpillars and mushrooms are gathered from the forest and are considered important non-wood forest products (NWFPs) that provide food and income without harming forest ecosystems. While some mushrooms can also be cultivated, most are collected from the wild during the rainy season, as is commonly practiced in Zambia’s protected areas. Gathering caterpillars is a benefit that local people have, where they can go into the forest pick or collect some of these insects and use them for food. This it is a common practice in most protected forest areas.

 

 

 

Caterpillars and mushrooms are considered as Non-Wood Forest Products and are part of the primary benefits people get from the forest, while maintaining the health ecosystem of the forest. Additionally, we have wild mushrooms that are found in various forests across Zambia. These grow naturally, without human intervention. They normally grow in the rain season, hence local people are usually busy during this period collecting wild foods, like mushroom, caterpillars, honey and fruits. But, these mushrooms can also be cultivated, of course not all of them only certain types, however one needs skills to do this.

Challenges

Despite different activities taking place in the Mwamba community forest, we discovered that nearly half of the community had wrong perceptions about community forest management (Figure 3).

The next greatest challenge was financial constraints to do the activities, followed by high dependence on charcoal and firewood as energy sources. Some respondents saw the community’s failure to observe rules set by the group as a challenge. The least noted challenge was the problem of unequal benefit-sharing.

Mitigation strategies

Our study revealed that almost two-thirds of the respondents strongly believed that agricultural extension services or education are key to sustainable forest management (Figure 4). Other respondents emphasised the need to promote community policing and vigilance, which was followed by establishment of woodlots that would act as a buffer to the forest reserve. A few respondents suggested the promotion of a cost benefit-sharing mechanism and financial empowerment.

 

DISCUSSION

Respondent information

Men were a majority in the responding community group. One of the reasons is a cultural issue that hinders women from participating. This agrees with the findings of Pokharel et al. (2007) and Sunderlin et al. (2005) who revealed that the livelihood activities in the community are influenced by gender and market linkages. The skills for men and women are different in the forest communities, and therefore the duties are managed differently by the sexes (Bechtel, 2010; Brown, 2011; Rocheleau and Edmunds, 1997).

Effectiveness of approaches

Information from the key informants indicated that the approaches were working as a means of effectively managing the forest resources. The effectiveness of management approaches was significant, since most respondents indicated that the programme was effective. The high percentage indicates strong support and satisfaction among participants, suggesting that the initiatives in place are meeting their objectives and positively impacting the community. Various factors were noted to have led to effectiveness of these approaches in the management of community forestry. Some of these were the right to governance and sharing of benefits (Baynes et al., 2015; Gregorio et al., 2015; Macqueen, 2013). To ensure effectiveness in the approaches being implemented, Pagdee et al. (2007) emphasised the need for enhanced methods of monitoring initiatives. Kongkeaw et al. (2019) noted that social forestry was a success in Thailand. However, the percentage of respondents in our study who said the approaches were not effective was small (11%). This indicates that while there are some concerns, they do not represent a wide-spread sentiment within the community.

Approaches practiced

Our study revealed that natural forest regeneration was the most significant activity contributing to the health status of the forest. It is vital to rely on natural regeneration as it restores forest ecosystems, maintains ecosystem balance, and ensures long-term sustainability of the available natural resources.

 

 

 

Murali et al. (2006) found that sacred areas are rich in biodiversity. Beekeeping represented a significant portion of the community’s economic engagement. Several benefits are obtained from apiculture, such as honey, propolis, and beeswax.

A significant number of households were involved in this sustainable practice, which can in-turn promote the conservation of biodiversity and food production through agriculture. These benefits corroborate the hypothesis of Blomley et al. (2008) who indicated that community forestry varies from time to time as behavioural change occurs in people.

Agrosilvopastoral practice combines agriculture, forestry, and livestock management. While it was less prevalent than beekeeping in our study, it still plays a role by enhancing sustainability in land use. Chokkalingam et al. (2006) and Calderon and Nawir (2006) noted several products can be harvested from forested areas, such as fruits, honey, and vegetables. The establishment and management of woodlots was also one of the important forest management approaches despite a low level of practice. It is crucial for sustainable timber production and can provide resources for fuelwood without depleting natural forests.

All of the community forest management activities are very beneficial to the local communities in Mwamba community forestry. Arnold (2001) suggested several types of relationships between various forest users and the community, mentioning the need to establish woodlots for societal resilience. Deforestation has affected many forested areas in Zambia due to the demand for charcoal, unplanned settlements, and farming activities. Our findings agree with those of Chenje et al. (1998) who observed impressive growth in development in the district of Shurugwi in Zimbabwe. Madebwe and Madebwe (2005) highlighted that human activities lead to biodiversity loss. Income levels of households influence decisions made by the local people to some extent. For example, the needs of rich people and those of the poor may be widely different in some cases, such that where others may be interested in protecting forest ecosystems, others may be seeing resources for their own benefit (Ota et al., 2020).

Furthermore, the presence of income-generating activities such as beekeeping, establishment of woodlots, agrosilvopastoral practices, and natural forest regeneration on individual farms contribute to sustainable forest management in the Mwamba community forest reserve. These activities are similar to those noted by Redford and Stearman, (1993) who highlighted that some activities were not very good in promoting conservation efforts of forested areas. Chenje et al. (1998) showed that these activities influence the conservation of the natural resources in different ways. Various authors have indicated the dynamism of forest management approaches around the globe (Couillard et al., 2009; Odera, 2004; Poffenberger, 2000).

According to Ota et al. (2020), biodiversity has potential to greatly support alternative livelihood activities without compromising the conservation measures being implemented. This agrees with our findings on the roles of beekeeping and woodlot establishment that have served well in the forested area. According to the World Bank (2004), there is such great demand for forest products that people in rural areas can enjoy better incentives if they engage in effective forest protection practices. Based on our study, the people living around the Mwamba connumity forest had sources of income from these activities, and, at the same time, the activities provided raw materials, hence reducing pressure on the forest reserve. Benson (2001) observed that community-based natural resource management attempts to permit rural dwellers to manage and benefit from the available forest resources.

Our study revealed a vital relationship between approaches used in managing forest resources and sustainable natural forest management. A collective total of 84% respondents indicated that forest management approaches in Mwamba community forest were effective because they promoted natural forest regeneration and brought back caterpillars that were not available previously and made available various kinds of mushrooms. This is a clear indicator of the effectiveness of the community forest management approach used in managing the Mwamba community forest.

Our study also revealed a strong relationship between sustainable forest management and the community forest management plan. Management plans have made it possible to manage natural forest reserves as they provide a basis for monitoring activities aimed at sustainable forest utilisation and management of various key resources. Also, management and operational plans have baseline data from an inventory that indicates the natural resources available in the forest and clearly outlines the numerous silvicultural activities such as enrichment planting, fallowing, firebreak maintenance, and prescribed burning. This implies that the forest is managed by the community by using the forest management practices that enhance regeneration as well as continuity of trees.

The use of management and operational plans in sustainable management of natural forests is uncommon according to Makumba (2002) who observed that nearly all forests in Zambia are being managed without proper management plans. This hampers the implementation of effective conservation measures. The difference is a result of the different places and times the researchers carried out their research. Although Makumba (2002) drew a general conclusion on how forest reserves are managed without management plans in Zambia, his findings have become outdated because of community forest management groups that have come on board since. The findings of our research corroborate the conclusion of Johnson (2015) who confirmed that forests must be regulated and monitored to promote its sustainable use.

Indicators of management efforts

Our study revealed that natural regeneration is considered by the local community as crucial for maintaining biodiversity and ensuring sustainable forest ecosystems. The high percentage of this indicator reflects a commitment to allowing forests to recover naturally, which can lead to healthier ecosystems over time. Furthermore, the noted presence of caterpillars means that the role caterpillars play in forest ecosystems is essential. It was also key as an indicator of biodiversity richness and diversity. However, it is not as dominant as natural regeneration but still recognised as an important part within the CFM practices, potentially indicating healthy food webs and ecological balance. Additionally, bee foraging was another vital indicator in the forest. This is one activity that has also promoted beekeeping in the area. Lastly, mushrooms indicated lesser emphasis on species diversity within CFM strategies. However, they are still vital in nutrient cycling thereby creating a health ecosystem. The low response percentage could mean that fewer households were doing mushroom cultivation, or their presence was not much appreciated.

Hence, these indicators highlight a strong reliance on natural regeneration within the community while also recognizing other biological components such as caterpillars and mushrooms. The percentages also suggest areas where much emphasis should be pointed out for overall forest management strategies. For instance, our results suggest that empowering the community through sensitisation and extension services is key in overcoming existing challenges related to CFM. The study revealed a vital relationship between approaches used in managing forest resources and sustainable natural forest management. A collective total of 84% respondents indicated that forest management approaches in Mwamba community forest were effective because they promoted natural forest regeneration, brought back caterpillars that were not available previously, and made available various kinds of mushrooms. This is a clear indicator of the effectiveness of the community forest management approach used in managing Mwamba community forest.

Therefore, devolution of power to communities living near the forests brings about ownership to the local communities as opposed to a state-centred approach. The Mwamba community forest reserve has shown signs of recovery because there has been active participation of the people in the protection and management of the forested areas. Our findings support Agrawal and Gibson (1999) who confirmed that decentralizing natural resource management through community-based natural resource management incorporates local communities into guardianship of their immediate environment and creates a useful tool for natural forest management. Furthermore, several researchers confirm that community forestry has great potential to improve the lives of the citizens in different countries (Dev et al., 2003; Pokharel et al., 2007; Gautam, 2009).

Challenges

The challenge of equal benefit-sharing has been observed by several researchers (Songorwa, 1999; Brown, 2002; Phiri, 2024). A mismatch has been reported on what the conservationists perceive as benefits of community forestry (Brown, 2002). In our study, failure to observe rules was a notable challenge, indicating that some members do not adhere to established guidelines. This hinders the efforts in resource management. Moreover, it was pointed out that the focus of some of the local initiatives was on benefits to be realised and not conservation, which is counterproductive (Songorwa, 1999; Brown, 2002). The biggest challenge was wrong perceptions, especially on misunderstandings about benefits. This can lead to resistance against progressive and sustainable initiatives. Financial constraint was another crucial challenge experienced in the area. This affects many community members’ abilities to invest in sustainable practices, hence deterring them from effectively engaging in the protection of the forested areas around them. This challenge is enhanced by unequal benefit-sharing that is experienced in the area. This is something that can lead to conflict and dissatisfaction (Phiri, 2024). One of the challenges revealed high dependence on charcoal and firewood as energy sources. The reliance on these energy sources poses sustainability issues as they contribute to deforestation if not managed properly. These challenges illustrate that perceptions and financial limitations are critical barriers that need addressing for effective management and implementation of forest protection measures (Redford and Stearman, 1993). A challenge noted in managing community forestry was poorly designed and implemented management plans for the protected areas (Baynes et al., 2015; Laerhoven, 2010; Larson et al., 2010). Van Schaik et al. (2002) noted that stakeholders not having alternative livelihood sources was a huge challenge in as far as effective forest management was concerned.

Mitigation strategies

We found that many respondents believe that community policing and vigilance is a good strategy for sustainable management. The majority strongly agreed that community vigilance may yield positive results in forest management. This implies that when community members take part in management and protection of the forest, there is sustainable management of the resources because they understand that they stand to gain more when it is properly managed and are the ones to lose when the forest is not managed properly. Also, the promotion of equal sharing of benefits came out strongly among the respondents. Finally, there was a suggestion of financial empowerment in the communities.

Mitigation initiatives would help to reduce illegal exploitation of forest resources in protected areas. However, the people still have a view that the forests can be best protected through community policing by selected Honorary Forestry Officers who live among them. These findings concur with those of Berkes (2004) who confirmed that community forest management method is the right one in the management of the ecosystems, the reason being that the local people know how to take good care of the resources because they are the users. There has been an increase in farming activities in most protected areas and little is done to protect them (Mark and Kudakwashe, 2010). Large pieces of forested areas are cleared for farming practices. Our findings are no different because the Mwamba community lost forested land to agriculturally related land uses. Therefore, agricultural extension education is key to sustainable forest management. When the community is educated on the best agriculture practices, the country will not lose much of its forest cover. Furthermore, establishing woodlots in communities surrounding the forest may act as a buffer to the forest reserve as the community will have fuel wood and raw materials such as poles, hence the forest will be spared.

 

CONCLUSIONS

The results of our study highlight the significant role of community forestry management groups in ensuring sustainable forest management at the local level. Strengthening partnerships and collaborative efforts between the community, government, and other stakeholders to mobilise resources and expertise, so as to improve forest management practices, ensures long-term sustainability. Furthermore, our study revealed the challenges in managing natural resources, such as misconceptions of community forest management, which could hinder the overall effectiveness of the initiative, lack of sufficient financial resources, and disparities in how benefits from the forest are distributed among the local people. Hence, there is need to promote government support and training through policy intervention, raising awareness and promoting financial empowerment in the community.

 

Author contributions: Conceptualization, methodology, analysis, data curation, writing, review: BRC and AP. All authors declare that they have read and approved the publication of the manuscript in this present form.

Funding: There was no external funding for this study.

Acknowledgments: An extended to our families, friends for their moral and financial support.

Conflicts of interest: There was no conflict of interest.

REFERENCES

Agrawal, A.; Gibson, C. Enchantment and disenchantment: the role of community in natural resource conservation. World development 1999, 27 (4), 629-649. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0305-750X(98)00161-2

Arnold, J.E. Forests and People: 25 Years of Community Forestry. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Rome, Italy. 2001.

Baynes, J.; Herbohn, J.; Herbohn, J.; Smith, C.; Fisher, R.; Bray, D. Key factors which influence the success of community forestry in developing countries. Global Environmental Change 2015, 35, 226-238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.09.011

Bechtel, J. Gender, poverty and the conservation of biodiversity: A review of issues and opportunities. MacArthur Foundation Conservation White Paper Series, MacArthur Foundation, 2010, pp. 52.

Benson, D. Wildlife and recreation management in private lands in the united states. Wildlife Society Bulletin 2001, 29 (1), 359-371. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3784021

Berkes, F. Rethinking community based conservation. Conservation biology 2004, 18 (3), 621-630. https://doi.org/10.1111j.1523-1739.2004.00077.x

Bixler, R.P. From community forest management to polycentric governance: assessing evidence from the bottom up. Society and Natural Resources 2014, 27, 155-169. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2013.840021

Blomley, T.; Pfliegner, K.; Isango, J.; Zahabu, E.; Ahrends, A.; Bargess, N. Seeing the wood for the trees: an assessment of the impact of participatory forest management on forest condition in Tanzania. Oryx 2008, 42 (3), 380-391. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0030605308071433

Brown, K. Innovations for conservation and development. The Geographical Journal 2002, 168 (1), 6-17. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-4959.00034

Brown, P.H.C. Gender, climate and REDD+ in the Congo Basin forests of Central Africa. International Forestry Review 2011, 13 (2), 163-176.

Bwalya, B. Katanino Joint Forest Management Area, Masaiti District. Zambia: Challenges and Opportunities. MSc Thesis. University of Zambia. May 2007. http://dx.doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.29584.25605

Calderon, M.M.; Nawir, A.A. An evaluation of the feasibility and benefits of forest partnerships to develop tree plantations: case studies in the Philippines, CIFOR Working Paper No.27. Bogor, Indonesia, Center for International Forestry Research, 2006, 72p.

Chenje, M.; Sola, L.; Paleczny, D. The State of Zimbabwe’s Environment Government of Zimbabwe, Ministry of Mines, Environment and Tourism. Harare, 1998.

Chirwa, P.W.; Syampungani, S.; Geldenhuys, C.J. Managing southern African woodlands for biomass production: the potential challenges and opportunities. In Bioenergy from Wood, Managing Forest Ecosystems 1^st Edition. Seifert T., Springer Dordrecht, Netherlands, 2014, pp. 67-87.

Chokkalingam, U.; Carandang , A.P.; Pulhin, J.M.; Lasco, R.D.; Peras, R.J.; Toma, T. One Century of Forest Rehabilitation in the Philippines: Approaches, Outcomes and Lessons. Editors Unna Chokkalingam, Antonio P. Carandang, Juan M. Pulhin, Rodel D. Lasco, Rose Jane J. Peras, Takeshi Toma, Centre for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), Bogor, Indonesia, 2006, 132p.

Couillard, V.; Gilbert, J.; Kenrick, J.; Kidd, C. Land rights and the forest peoples of Africa-historical, legal and anthropological perspectives, Overview: analysis and context. Forest Peoples Programme, Moreton-in-Marsh, UK 2009.

Dev, O.P.; Yadav, N.P.; Springate-Baginski, O.; Soussan, J. Impacts of community forestry on livelihoods in the middle of Nepal. Journal of forest and livelihoods 2003, 3 (1), 64-77.

Diansyah, W.; Abas, A.; Sakawi, Z. A systematic review on community forest management in Southeast Asia: Current practices and impacts on biodiversity conservation and livelihood quality of local communities. Human Ecology Review 2021, 27 (1), 3-21. http://dx.doi.org/10.22459/HER.27.01.2021.01

Gautam, A.P. Equity and livelihoods in Nepal’s community forestry. International Journal of Social Forestry 2009, 2, 101-122.

Giam, X. Global biodiversity loss from tropical deforestation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2017, 114 (23), 5775-5777. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1706264114

Gregorio, N.O.; Herbohn, J.; Harrison, S.R.; Pasa, A.; Fernanandez, J.; Tripole, R.; Polinar, B. Evidence-based best practice community-based forest restoration in Biliran: integrating food security and livelihood improvements into watershed rehabilitation in the Philippines, In Enhancing Food Security Through Forest Landscape Restoration: Lessons from Burkina Faso, Brazil, Guatemala, Viet Nam, Ghana, Ethiopia and Philippines, Editors Kumar C., Saint Laurent C., Begeladze S., Calmon M., Publisher IUCN, Gland, Switzerland, 2015, pp.174 – 217

ILUA. Integrated Land Use Assessment 2005–2008. http://zmb-nfms.org/portal/static/loc/en/html/ilua-I.html (accessed on 21 February 2025a).

ILUA. Phase II – Report for Zambia. The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and the Forestry Department, Ministry of Lands and Natural Resources. https://docslib.org/doc/4834501/integrated-land-use-assessment-phase-ii-zambia-biophysical-field (accessed on 21 February 2025b).

ITTORRI. International Tropical Timber Organisation and Rights and Resources Initiative. Tropical forest tenure assessment. Trends, Challenges and Opportunities. https://www.itto.int/files/itto_project_db_input/3003/Technical/TS-37.pdf (accessed on 21 February 2025).

Jew, E.K.; Dougill, A.J.; Sallu, S.M.; O’Connell, J.; Benton, T.G. Miombo woodland under threat: consequences for tree diversity and carbon storage. Forest Ecology and Management 2016, 361, 144-153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2015.11.011

Johnson, H.I. Tropical Forestry Paper. 30 ed. Oxford Forestry Institute: University of Oxford, 2015.

Kaimowitz, D.; Angelsen, A. Economic Model for Tropical Deforestation, 1^st ed. Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor, Indonesia, 1998.

Laerhoven, F.V. Governing community forests and the challenge of solving two-level collective action dilemmas-a large-N perspective. Global Environmental Change 2010, 20 (3), 539-546. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.04.005

Larson, A.M.; Barry, D.; Dahal, G.R.; Colfer, C.P. Tenure change in the global south, In Forests for People: Community Rights and Forest Tenure Reform. Editors Anne M. Larson, Deborah Barry, Ganga Ram Dahal and Carol J. Pierce, ColferEarthscan Publications, London, U.K., 2010, pp 3-18.

Macqueen, D. Enabling conditions for successful community forest enterprises. Small-scale Forestry 2013, 12 (1), 145-163. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11842-011-9193-8

Madebwe, V.; Madebwe, C. An exploratory Analysis of the Social, Economic and Environmental Impacts on Wetlands: The case of Shurugwi District, Midlands Province, Zimbabwe. Journal of Applied Sciences Research, INSInet Publication 2005, 1 (2), 228-233.

Mai, Y.H.; Mwangi, E.; Wan, M. Gender analysis in forestry research: Looking back and thinking ahead. International Forestry Review 2011, 13 (2), 245-258. https://doi.org/10.1505/146554811797406589

Makumba, I.N. Tropical Secondary Forest Management in Africa: Realityand perspectives. Zambia Country Paper, Nairobi, Kenya, 9-13 December 2002. http://www.fao.org/3/J0628E/J0628E66.htm

Mark, M.; Kudakwashe, M. Rate of land use /land cover changes in Shurugwi district Zimbabwe: drivers for change. Journal of sustainable development in Africa 2010, 12 (3).

McCullum, H. Biodiversity of Indegenous Forests and Woodlands in Southern Africa. 2 ed. Harare: lUCN, 2000.

Murali, K.; Murthy, I.; Ravindranath, N. Sustainable community forest management systems: A study on community forest management and joint forest management institutions from India. International Review for Environmental Strategies 2006, 6 (1), 23-40.

Odera, J. Lessons learnt on community forest management in Africa. Report prepared for the project Lessons Learnt on Sustainable Forest Management in Africa. Royal Swedish Academy of Agriculture and Forestry (KSLA), . African Forest Research Network (AFORNET) and FAO, Nairobi, Kenya, 2004, pp. 76

Ota, L.; Mukul, S.A.; Gregorio, N.; Herbohn, J. Community based management of tropical forests: lessons learned and implications for sustainable forest management, In Achieving Sustainable Management of Tropical Forests, Burleigh Dodds Science Publishing, Cambridge, UK, Tropical forest and people research Centre- University of the Sunshine Coast, Australia, 2020.

Pagdee, A.; Kim, Y.S.; Daugherty, P.J. What Makes Community Forest Management Successful: A Meta-Study From Community Forests Throughout the World. Society & Natural Resources 2007, 19 (1). https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920500323260

Phiri, A. Assessing conflicts in forest management among different user groups: a case study of Mwekera forest reserve. Journal of sustainability and environmental management 2024, 3 (2), 78-84. https://doi.org/10.3126/josem.v3i2.71915

Phiri, M. Forest and Wood Science. MSc Thesis. Evaluation of the Performance of Joint Forest Management (JFM) Programme: Case of Dambwa Forest Reserve in Livingstone District, Zambia. MSc Thesis. Stellenbosch University, Zambia, 24 November 2009.

Poffenberger, M. Communities and Forest Management in South Asia. IUCN September 2000.

Pokharel, B.K.; Branney, P.; Nurse, M.; Malla, Y.B. Community forestry: conserving forests, sustaining livelihoods and strengthening democracy. Journal of Forest and Livelihood 2007, 6, 8-19.

Rao, R.J.; Veena Vishwanath, R.; Venkateshwaran, M.; Arthur, S.; Ramakrishnas. Community management of forests in India: its impact on environment and livelihood, In Environment and Sustainable Development, Serials Publications, New Delhi, India, 2019.

Redford, K.H; Stearman, A.M. Forest-dwelling native Amazonians and the conservation of biodiversity. Conservation Biology 1993, 7 (2), 248-255. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.1993.07020248.x

Rishi, P. Joint Forest Management in India: An Attitudinal Analysis of Stakeholders. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 2007, 51 (2), 345-354. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2006.10.009

Rocheleau, D.; Edmunds, D. Women, men and trees: Gender, power and poverty in forest and agrarian landscapes. World Development 1997, 25 (8), 1351-1371. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-750X(97)00036-3

Sekaran, U. Research methods for business: A skill buildings approach, 4^th ed. John Willey and Sons, New York, U.S.A., 2003.

Sishekanu, M. Evolution of forest law and regulation in Zambia from 1973 to 2015: analysis of the gap between text and context. Law Environment and Development Journal 2020, 200, 250-400.

Songorwa, A.N. Community-based wildlife management (CWM) in Tanzania: are the communities interested? World Development 1999, 27 (12), 2061-2079. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-750X(99)00103-5

Sunderlin, W.D.; Angelsen, A.; Belcher, B.; Burgers, P.; Nasi, R.; Santoso, L.; Wunder, S. Livelihoods, forests, and conservation in developing countries: an overview. World Development 2025, 33 (9), 1383-1402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2004.10.004

Syampungani, S.; Chirwa, P.W.; Akinnifesi, F.K.; Ajayi, O.C. The miombo woodlands at crossroads: potential threats, sustainable livelihoods, policy gaps and challenges. Natural Resources Forum 2009, 33 (2), 150-159. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-8947.2009.01218.x

VanSchaik, C.; Carel, Rijksen; Herman, D. Making Parks Work: Strategies for Preserving Tropical Nature. Island Press., Washington, 2002, 15-25.

Vyamana, V.G. Participatory Forest Management in the Eastern Arc Mountains of Tanzania: who benefits? International Forestry Review 2009, 11 (2), 239-253. https://doi.org/10.1505/ifor.11.2.239.

 

Academic Editor: Dr. Ilie BODALE

Publisher Note: Regarding jurisdictional assertions in published maps and institutional affiliations ALSE maintain neutrality.