




































Agriculture and Food 

Sciences Research 
ISSN: 2411-6653 
Vol. 2, No. 1, 25-31, 2015 
http://www.asianonlinejournals.com/index.php/AESR 

  

 

* Corresponding Author 

 

 

25 

 

A Comparative Evaluation of the Economic Contributions 

and Uses of Strychnos cocculoides and Schinziophyton 

rautanenii Fruit Trees to Poverty Alleviation in Mile 20 

Village of Namibia 
 

Selma N. Elago
1* 

--- Lisias T. Tjaveondja
2
 

 
1,2

Okahandja National Forestry Research Centre, Okahandja, Namibia 

 

Abstract 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License 

Asian Online Journal Publishing Group 

 

Contents 
1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................................... 26 

2. Materials and Methods ............................................................................................................................................................. 26 

3. Results ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 28 

4. Discussion ................................................................................................................................................................................... 29 

5. Conclusion .................................................................................................................................................................................. 30 

6. Acknowledgement ..................................................................................................................................................................... 30 

References ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 31 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In Namibia, plant foods including indigenous fruits are amongst the most important non-timber forest 

products. Indigenous fruits constitute an important source of livelihood for the people of Rundu Rural 

West constituency and as such this study compared two species: Strychnos cocculoides and 

Schinziophyton rautanenii and assessed which species contribute more to the households‟ cash income 

and food source so as to encourage its promotion. The study further assessed the traditional and other 

uses of Strychnos cocculoides and Schinziophyton rautanenii fruits and products. The study focused on 

Mile 20 Village in the Kavango region of Namibia. The study adopted an emergent, exploratory, and 

inductive qualitative approach and a triangulation method comprising of self-designed household 

survey questionnaire, interview and observation methods were employed in gathering data. To get the 

target sample from the three hundred households‟ population, the village was stratified into four zones 

of North, South, East and West. Simple random sampling was used to select thirty-one households 

from all the zones. The study findings indicates that Strychnos cocculoides contribute to households‟ 

cash income only, while Schinziophyton rautanenii contribute both to cash income and to food. Chi-

square test showed that there is significant differences (P≤0.05) in the sources of the contributions of 

households cash income (Χ
2
 = 36.516, df = 6, P=0.001) as well as the contributions of Schinziophyton 

rautanenii to cash income and food source (Χ
2
 = 11.645, df = 1, P=0.001).The results further indicate 

a wide range of products can be obtained from these two fruit trees species. Some of these products are 

identified as medicinal, firewood, crafts and oil. 
 
Keywords: Strychnos cocculoides, Schinziophyton rautanenii, Indigenous fruits, Livelihood, Cash income, Namibia. 

 

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/


Agriculture and Food Sciences Research, 2015, 2(1): 25-31 

 

 

 

 

26 

 

1. Introduction 
Rural people have been eating indigenous fruits, nuts and tubers for millennia and those foods still form a high 

proportion of the diet of some people, especially in poorer households. In Namibia, plant foods are amongst the most 

important non-timber forest products. More plant foods are available in Northern and North-astern Namibia, mainly 

because this is where most species that bear fruits occur.  Of all the tree species in Namibia, 157 species (35%) have 

been recorded as being used for food in one form or another [1]. Namibia is a country at South of the Sahara located 

in Southern Africa with a size of 852,418 km
2
 and with a population of about 2 million at a rate of 1.87%  from 2005 

to 2010  [2]. Majority (68%) live in the rural areas where most people earn a living from agriculture [3]. Namibia is 

not a forest-rich country, most of the country‟s territory (65%) covered by sparsely wooded savannah and denser 

woodlands of 20% occurring in the wettest regions in the North-east of the country [4]. Community forests in 

Namibia are central to promoting sustainable and participatory forest governance and enhancing livelihoods in 

communal land areas like Mile 20 [4]. Communal land in Namibia covers 26 million hectares, representing 36% of 

total land cover [4]. 

In the early 1990s the government of Namibia placed great emphasis on a more sustainable and equitable 

approach to the exploitation of natural resources which included the forestry sector [4]. The development of forestry 

was one of the main strategic directions of poverty reduction and economic growth that resulted in the increase of the 

country‟s gross domestic product (GDP) [5, 6]. The Namibian economy is dominated by mining. However, 

Agriculture, Fisheries and Tourism sectors also contribute significantly to the national economy. Forestry for 

instance contributes more to the informal and subsistence activities. Non Timber Forest Products (NTFPs) play an 

important role in the local economy of the Namibian people. The direct and indirect contribution of NTFP to national 

economy during 2004 was estimated to be N$ 619,459,000 (U$ 77,432.375) [1]. For these reasons commercial and 

personal harvest of forest products has being increasing every year because the products derived from forest and 

trees are important sources of cash income and employment for the rural poor. For example, Strychnos cocculoides 

harvested in Kavango have been used to produce a liqueur which has been exported to South Africa [1]. 

Indigenous fruits constitute an important source of livelihood for the people of Rundu Rural West constituency. 

The local people in this constituency depend on indigenous fruits in their day-to-day life and also contribute to 

household income. Indigenous fruits (IF) have currently received considerable interest from various stakeholders, 

due to their economic and nutritional values [7]. NTFPs are now globally recognized for their contribution to 

improved rural livelihood by providing food, nutrition and medicine, and by generating employment, revenues and 

foreign exchange earnings. The forestry sector social inputs lies in its fuel-wood and NTFPs contribution, which are 

the main origin of domestic energy for the majority of people, and an important source of food security and income 

generation. As revealed by Ramadhani [8], there is a substantial amount of trading and consumption of Uapaca 

kirkiana and Strychnos cocculoides indigenous fruits in both rural and urban areas of Zimbabwe and these fruits 

reduce poverty by 30% and generate income above the poverty line throughout the year. Dagmar [9] also proved that 

majority of rural household benefits from consumption and sale of indigenous fruits. Ekane [10] in his study on the 

socio - economic impacts of forest products revealed that forest resources are a major source of livelihood for forest 

dwellers or people living in most rural areas. 

Rural poor people live in marginal lands, far from economic growth points, such that during off-cropping season 

they have no other sources of income generating activities rather than harvesting and selling indigenous fruits. The 

government programs has focused more on timber production and overlooked commercial production of indigenous 

fruits. The socio-economical contribution of individual indigenous fruit trees has not been looked at properly 

although it is well-known that indigenous fruits play a significant role in many rural people‟s livelihoods. Indigenous 

fruits were said to be very important to Rundu rural west community especially during years of drought, when the 

harvest of people‟s staple food is low, they rely on indigenous fruits for their survival. There is therefore the need to 

assess the socio-economic impact of indigenous fruits in order to help the Government to improve the status of local 

people. It is against this background that this study was conducted as part of a broader study in order to assess and 

justify if the rural community derive their main source of cash income from the sale of indigenous fruits. The study 

has compared two species: Strychnos cocculoides and Schinziophyton rautanenii and assessed which species 

contribute more to the households‟ cash income and food source so as to encourage its promotion. The study further 

assessed the traditional and other uses of Strychnos cocculoides and Schinziophyton rautanenii fruits. 

 

2. Materials and Methods 
2.1. Description of Indigenous Fruit Tree Species 

2.1.1. Strychnos Cocculoides 
Strychnos cocculoides is a small tree ranging from 2 to 8 meters high. It is mostly found on deep sand in North-

eastern Namibia, elsewhere occurring in Northern South Africa, Zimbabwe, Zambia, Botswana, Malawi and Angola. 

The fruits are globose in shape dark green when young and yellow to orange when ripe. Strychnos‟, meaning 

„deadly‟, is an ancient Greek name given to a certain poisonous member of the Solanaceae family. Linnaeus, who 

founded the genus Strychnos on the Indian species S. nux-vomica, which yields strychnine, possibly associated the 

deadly qualities of both groups when he named the genus. The fruit of this species is popular in North-eastern 

Namibia, and are frequently sold along the road and in informal markets in towns and villages. The fruits can also be 

fermented into alcoholic drink locally known as “kashipembe”. The fruit ripen between April and August and are 

about the size of oranges. Strychnos ripen best on the tree. Fruits are harvested when fruit skin turns yellow or when 

they taste sweet (russeted types, but most are picked earlier and ripe in storage). Ripe fruit is eaten fresh or is used to 

prepare alcoholic drink. Furthermore, it used for medicinal purposes of which the unripe fruit can be pounded and 

mixed with water. This mixture can be used to treat snake bites, ear pain, and swellings. The leaves of the tree can be 

wrapped around the neck for treating neck pain, and the roots can be eaten to treat stomach ache in children. The 



Agriculture and Food Sciences Research, 2015, 2(1): 25-31 

 

 

 

 

27 

 

roots from a young tree can be used for treating chest pain; coughing and stomach ache [11]. The wood of the tree is 

not highly valued and therefore not really used for anything. 

 

2.1.2. Schinziophyton Rautanenii 
Schinziophyton rautanenii (formally known as Ricinodendron rautanenii) is a medium to large deciduous tree 

growing to a height of 12 meters. Schinziophyton rautanenii belong to the Euphorbiaceae family and were declared a 

protected species in Namibia in 1952 [1]. It is distributed across Northern Namibia, growing on deep Kalahari sands. 

It is dominant and most abundant species in the Kavango region. The fruits ripe on the tree from November to 

February and fall down when fully matured, from March to May. It is left drying on the ground (March-May) before 

been collected. The fruits can be harvested from May to August. The bark is smooth, yellowish to yellow-grey, with 

pieces peeling off to expose a yellowish under bark. The fruits of this tree species serve multiple purposes, for 

example the pulp of the fruits can be made into porridge, the peel and flesh can be used for the production of hot 

fermented alcoholic drink locally known as “kashipembe”. The nuts can be finely crashed and added to the 

meat/vegetables to make a tasty soup. The nuts yield a high quality yellow oil of which about 60% is used for food 

and cosmetics [1]. The species is also used for medicinal purposes. The bark of the Schinziophyton rautanenii tree is 

used for treating stomach aches, sleepless night, fever, back pain and some rare traditional diseases. If people are 

really sick they can sit in a bath of stamped bark and water. The wood is used for making canoes, and carving crafts 

and utensils. 

 

2.2. Description of the Study Area  
The study was conducted in Rundu Rural West constituency in Kavango region, North East of Namibia. 

Kavango region is one of the thirteen political regions in Namibia and lies between 18.00
o
E and 22.00

o
E and 17.09

o
 

and 18.01
o
S. Within the region there are other constituencies namely Kahenge, Kapako, Mashare, Mpungu, Mukwe, 

Ndiyona, Rundu rural East and Rundu urban. The population is estimated to be 26 622 while that of the whole region 

is estimated at 202,691 [3]. The study specifically focuses on Mile 20 Village within the constituency. Mile 20 is 

located approximately 32 km south of Rundu, along the Rundu-Grootfontein main road. Kavango region has an 

average annual rainfall of 550 mm, which increases slightly from southwest to northeast. The first rain falls in 

September or October and the late rains in May. Eighty percent of the rain falls between December and March, 

where the maximum rainfall in 24 hours can be 100-120mm [12]. Animal husbandry and Horticulture is playing an 

increasing role in the economic lives of the Kavango people [1]. Another important economic activity is fishing, 

which provides a substantial source of protein to the people. The most important crops are pearl millet (Pennisetum 

glaucum), sorghum and maize. Ground nuts, beans, pumpkins, and tobacco are cultivated on a smaller scale [1]. The 

site was selected based on the highly abundant and marketing potential of Strychnos cocculoides and Schinziophyton 

rautanenii. Most of the local people in the study area are engaged in indigenous fruits collection and marketing. 

Furthermore the area is easily accessible and the community had been visited in 2003 by the fruit tree improvement 

specialist program in the Directorate of Forestry (DoF) in collaboration with the Food Agriculture Organization 

(FAO).  

 

 
Map of Namibia showing study area 

 

2.3. Research Design and Data Collection 

The study adopted an emergent, exploratory, and inductive qualitative approach. The reason for choosing this 

approach is that qualitative research certainly excels at generating variables that are very detailed, has special value 

for investigating complex and sensitive issues and is good when one really want to achieve a deep understanding of 

the issue under study [13]. To harness the needed information, a triangulation method comprising of self-designed 

household survey questionnaire, interview and observation methods were employed in gathering data from the 

respondents. The researchers also conducted documents review and also collected qualitative information from 

forestry experts in the Kavango region to complement the other methods. The questionnaire sought to capture data on 

the use of indigenous fruit trees as well as their role within the household system in the study area. The questionnaire 

consisted mainly of close-ended questions which required the respondents to tick their best option. To get the target 

sample from the three hundred households‟ population, the village was stratified into four zones of North, South, 

East and West. Simple random sampling was used to select thirty-one households from all the zones.  The 

questionnaire was administered to all the residents in the household after which focus group discussions were used to 

gain insight into participant‟s view on the subject under consideration. Household heads were purposefully 



Agriculture and Food Sciences Research, 2015, 2(1): 25-31 

 

 

 

 

28 

 

interviewed. In addition, physical observation was also done in order to have a clue on the socio-economic impact of 

indigenous fruit trees in the study area. All the households sampled were involved in indigenous fruits collection and 

sales. Research assistants from Hamoye Forestry Office and the authors collected the needed data. The data obtained 

from all the sources were evaluated using, content analysis, cross-tabulations, descriptive statistics and graphs. 

 

3. Results 
3.1. Demographic Description  

From the analysis, it was observed that the respondents who represented the households, 74% were females and 

26% were males. In terms of age, 14 were 18-30 years, 10 were in the age group of 30-50 years while 7 were 

between 50-80 years. Occupation wise, the respondents were mainly farmers and their dependents were mostly 

children, husband and housewives. The survey also indicated that 21 respondents have 1-10 dependents in their 

family, while 8 had 10-20 family members. The highest family size was 20-30 which was reported by 2 respondents. 

 

3.2. Comparison of Strychnos Cocculoides and Schinziophyton Rautanenii Contribution to 

Households’ Cash Income and To Food 
To compare Strychnos cocculoides and Schinziophyton rautanenii contribution to household‟s cash income and 

to food, data have been analysed quantitatively to bring out the extent of socio-economic contribution in the Mile 20 

village. From Figure 1, all (100%) of the respondents reported that Strychnos cocculoides contribute more to 

household cash income and not to food.  In contrast 80.6% of the respondents stated that Schinziophyton rautanenii 

contributes more to household cash income while 19.4% stated that it contributed to food. 

 

 
Figure-1. Distribution of the contribution of fruits to household cash income 

 

Figure 2 shows income and livelihood change percentages. The figure shows that 51.6% of the household 

members stated that the income earned is enough to sustain their families while 48.4% respondents felt that the 

income is not enough.  Chi-square test showed no significant differences (P>0.05) in the respondents by the 

households members (Χ
2
= 0.032, df =1, P 0.857). However all household respondents reported that there is a change 

in their livelihood. From the figure it is clear that there has been a general improvement in the socio-economic well-

being of the respondents.  

 

 
Figure-2. Distribution of income and livelihood change 

 

3.3. Chi-Square Test (Χ
2
) 

Chi Square was used to expressed the probability to accept that the groups have different distributions if p < 

0.05; or p < 0.01 by comparing the results obtained with the theoretical results for cross-tabulations. The Chi Square 

tells us whether the frequency distributions in the various columns are similar in shape, or are different. We 

determined whether the Chi Square value is what would be expected by chance alone, or not, and with what 

probability. Table 1 shows results of the cross-tabulation between sources of cash income. 

 
 



Agriculture and Food Sciences Research, 2015, 2(1): 25-31 

 

 

 

 

29 

 

Table-1. Source of cash income 

Source of cash income 

Observed 

 N 

Expected  

N 

Residual 

 

Indigenous fruits  16 4.4 11.6 

Formal employment 4 4.4 -.4 

Casual 2 4.4 -2.4 

Pension 3 4.4 -1.4 

Farming 2 4.4 -2.4 

Wages & salaries 3 4.4 -1.4 

Others 1 4.4 -3.4 

Total 31   

 
Table-2. Chi-square test of Source of cash income 

 Source of cash income 

Chi-Square 36.516 

Df 6 

Asymp. Sig. .000 

 

Chi-square test (Table 2) shows that there is significant differences (P≤0.05) in the source of the contributions of 

households cash income (Χ
2
= 36.516, df =6, P=0.001). 

Table 3 shows results of the cross-tabulation between cash income and food source. 

 
Table-3. Cash income and food source contribution of Schinziophtyton ratautanenii 

 Observed N Expected N Residual 

Cash income 25 15.5 9.5 

Food source 6 15.5 -9.5 

Total 31   

 
Table-4. Chi-square test of Cash income and food source contribution of 

Schinziophtyton ratautanenii 

  Cash income and food source contribution 

Chi-Square 11.645 

Df 1 

Asymp. Sig. .001 

 

Chi-square test shows that there is significant differences (P<0.05) in the contributions of Schinziophyton 

rautanenii to cash income and food source (Χ
2
= 11.645, df =1, P=0.001). 

 

3.4. Traditional and Other Uses of the Fruits  
To assess the traditional and other uses of Strychnos cocculoides and Schinziophyton rautanenii fruits at the 

household level is the third objective of this study. The data for this objective has been analysed quantitatively and 

presented in Table 5 which revealed that 18 respondents obtain medicinal products from Strychnos cocculoides tree 

while 24 respondents obtain from Schinziophyton rautanenii. About 10 respondents use Schinziophyton rautanenii 

for fuel wood. Other 31 respondents revealed that they make crafts and tools from Schinziophyton rautanenii.  

 
Table-5. Traditional uses of the indigenous fruits 

Purpose Tree species 

Uses 

Number of respondents 

S. cocculoides S. rautanenii 

 M
ed

ic
in

e
 

Leaves  8  

Roots  8  

Bark  1 15 

Oil   9 

Medicine/ other 1  

 W
o

o
d

 

Firewood  10 

Making crafts  31 

Making tools  31 

Fencing   

Others    

 

4. Discussion 
4.1. Comparison of Strychnos Cocculoides and Schinziophyton Rautanenii Contribution to 

Households’ Cash Income and To Food  
Indigenous fruits constitute an important source of livelihood for the people of Rundu Rural West constituency. 

The local people in this constituency depend on indigenous fruits in their day-to-day life and also contribute to 

household income. The findings show that all the households‟ respondents were of the view that Strychnos 

cocculoides contribute only to household cash income and not to food. In contrast 80.6% of the respondent‟s stated 

that Schinziophyton rautanenii contributes to household cash income, while few respondents (19.4%) stated that it 

contributes to food. However, in terms of cash income contribution, both fruit trees species contributes significantly 

and there is no significant difference between the contributions of the species.  The reason why all the respondents 

were of the view that Strychnos cocculoides contribute only to household cash income may be attributed to poor 



Agriculture and Food Sciences Research, 2015, 2(1): 25-31 

 

 

 

 

30 

 

storability of the fruits. Therefore the fruits are sold as soon as they are collected, whereas Schinziophyton rautanenii 

has good storability hence consumed in period of food shortage. Households mainly collect Strychnos cocculoides 

fruits for marketing purposes. In addition the fruits are also sold in urban areas across the country whereas 

Schinziophyton rautanenii fruits are mostly sold at local markets in the region. These results are contrary with the 

study of Dagmar [9] that revealed that Strychnos cocculoides is more important for home consumption during food 

shortage and not for household cash income. The main reason for this contradiction may be because Dagmar [9] 

conducted the study in Zimbabwe and he was comparing Uapaca kirkiana, Strychnos cocculoides and Parinari 

curatefollia. In his findings Uapaca kirkiana fruits were more important in generating cash income than others.  

This study further reveal that half of the households investigated were of the view that the income generated is 

sufficient enough to sustain household family members while the other half felt that it is not enough. Even though 

some felt that the income is not enough, all the households respondents have experienced changed in their livelihood 

and well-being as a result of the income generated from the sale of indigenous fruits. With these cash income, some 

households within the village have been able to bring water pipe line in their homesteads. Some respondents pointed 

out that from the sale of indigenous fruits; they are able to purchase various kinds of goods. These goods include new 

clothes for their family members, buy households needs, variety of food types, cell phones etc. These respondents 

that were of the view of inadequate income encounter problems during indigenous fruits sale. Some of the 

respondents identify such problems as low pricing, competition in selling, lack of customers and lack of transport to 

transport the fruits to other marketing areas. One of the respondent states that the income she generate is not enough 

because fruits are only sold within a short season. The results show that forest resources are a major source of 

livelihood for people living in rural areas. The findings have proven that Strychnos cocculoides contributes 

significantly to household‟s cash income only, while Schinziophyton rautanenii contributes both to cash income and 

to food. 

 

4.2. Traditional and Other Uses of the Indigenous Fruit Trees 
People in the rural areas have access to a wide range of products from the indigenous fruit trees. Both Strychnos 

cocculoides and Schinziophyton rautanenii are multipurpose trees, fruits are the main products, but other products 

such as medicine, firewood, crafts, can also be obtained. The findings show that both species treat many different 

medical ailments. For example the unripe fruit of Strychnos cocculoides can be pounded and mixed with water, this 

mixture is used to treat snake bites and swellings. The liquid of the unripe Strychnos cocculoides fruit can be applied 

to treat ear pain and one can drink it to cure stomach ache. The bark of the Schinziophyton rautanenii tree is used for 

treating stomach ache, and some rare traditional diseases. If people are sick they can sit in a bath of stamped bark and 

water. All households‟ respondents confirm that the wood for Schinziophyton rautanenii can be used to make canoes, 

carving crafts and making utensils while the wood for Strychnos cocculoides is not important, therefore is not used 

for anything. The results are in line with the report of FAO [14] that reported that NTFPs contribute to the improved 

rural livelihood by providing other traditional products such as medicine and wood products. The results have proven 

right, the hypothesis that Strychnos cocculoides and Schinziophyton rautanenii fruits products have other important 

traditional uses at household level apart from income generation and food security.  

Currently, there is no policy implication in the utilisation of the indigenous fruits. NTFPs have the potential to 

diversify the rural economy and improve the rural household livelihood in terms of food security. Commercialisation 

of both species can give rural people a possibility to improve their economic situation and secure people‟s livelihood. 

Based on the observations and informal interview with the household respondents, Strychnos cocculoides and 

Schinziophyton rautanenii fruit trees are regarded as the most important fruits trees in the area. There is a need for 

the Ministry to improve the sale of Strychnos cocculoides and Schinziophyton rautanenii fruits, by encouraging the 

communities to supply more fruits to both rural and urban markets within the country. Therefore, this action will 

improve cash income of the rural people not only in Rundu Rural West Constituency, but also in other places within 

the country. 

 

5. Conclusion 
Namibia‟s forest resources constitute an important heritage which provides both economic and environmental 

benefits. Among the strategies used by the rural people to overcome food shortages, is the use of wild fruits from 

indigenous fruits trees. Strychnos cocculoides and Schinziophyton rautanenii are the most popular fruit species in 

Rundu Rural West Constituency - Kavango region and both indigenous fruit trees contribute significantly to their 

livelihood and household cash income and to households‟ food. The study compared the economic contributions and 

traditional uses of Strychnos cocculoides and Schinziophyton rautanenii fruit trees. The results show that forest 

resources are a major source of livelihood for people living in rural areas. The findings proved that Strychnos 

cocculoides contributes significantly to household‟s cash income only, while Schinziophyton rautanenii contributes 

both to cash income and to food. Chi-square test showed that there is significant differences (P≤0.05) in the source of 

the contributions of households cash income (Χ
2
 = 36.516, df = 6, P=0.001) as well as the contributions of 

Schinziophyton rautanenii to cash income and food source (Χ
2
 = 11.645, df = 1, P=0.001). Apart from the fruits, 

Strychnos cocculoides and Schinziophyton rautanenii also provide a wide variety of products. The two species 

provide other products such as medicine, firewood, craft and utensils. Wood for Schinziophyton rautanenii can be 

used to make canoes, carving crafts and making utensils while the wood for Strychnos cocculoides is not important 

and therefore is not used for anything. 

 

6. Acknowledgement 
The authors would like to thank the Namibia Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Forestry for funding this study. 

We are grateful to the Directorate of Forestry for granting us the opportunity to undertake this study. We extend our 



Agriculture and Food Sciences Research, 2015, 2(1): 25-31 

 

 

 

 

31 

 

appreciation to the people in the study area particularly the people of Mile 20 village, Rundu rural West constituency, 

Kavango region who took great interest in the study, shared their knowledge and patiently answered many questions. 

 

References 
[1] J. Mendelsohn and S. El Obeid, "Forests and woodlands of Namibia," Research and Information Service of Namibia, Directorate of 

Forestry, Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Forestry, Namibia, 2005. 

[2] UN, "Population growth rate of Namibia in 2005-2010. Population division of the department of economics and social affairs of the 

united nations secretariat, world population prospects: The 2010 revision." Available http:esa.un.org/undp/unpp/index.htm, 2010. 

[3] Central Bureau of Statistics, "Population and housing census 2001. National planning commission," Government of Republic 

Namibia, Report, 2001. 

[4] A. Benkenstein, S. Hengari, and W. Mbongo, "Community forests in Namibia: Ensuring sustainable local-level forest management. 

South African institute of international affairs (SAIIA), SAIIA policy briefing 119." Available www.saiia.org.za, 2014. 

[5] T. O. Oksanen, B. Pajari, and T. Tuomasjukka, "Forests in poverty reduction strategies: Capturing the potential," in European Forest 

Institute Proceedings No. 47.Tuusula, Finland, 2003. 

[6] J. E. Mbaiwa, The socio-economic and environmental impacts of tourism development on the Okavango Delta. North-Western 

Botswana, harry oppenheimer okavango research centre. Botswana: University of Botswana, 2002. 

[7] M. Chakanga, "Timber trade and timber industries in Namibia. Ministry of environment and tourism, directorate of forestry, 

Namibia," FAO Working Paper FP/30F, 2003. 

[8] T. Ramadhani, Marketing if indigenous fruits in Zimbabwe. Socio-economic studies on rural Development vol. 129. Kiel, Germany: 

Wissenschaftsverlag Vauk, 2002. 

[9] M. Dagmar, Economics of indigenous fruits tree crops in Zimbabwe. Germany: University of Hannover, 2004. 

[10] N. B. Ekane, "The socio economic impact of pronus Africana management in the Mount Cameroon region. Case study of the 

bukwango community," Master of Science Thesis, Department of Urban Planning and Environment, Royal Institute of Technology 

Stockholm, 2006. 

[11] M. C. Palgrave, Keith coates palgrave trees of Southern Africa, 3rd ed. Cape Town: Struik, 2002. 

[12] A. Erkilla and H. Siikonen, "Silvica Calerica 20 forestry in Namibia 1850-1990. University of Joensuu, faculty of forestry, Finland, 

1992 survey of research needs in Northern and Southern Namibia," Directorate of Forestry, Research Division, Forestry Research 

and Development Project, 1992. 

[13] A. D. Day, How to write and publish a scientific paper, 5th ed. Cambridge, United Kingdom, 2003. 

[14] FAO, Forest resource assessment 2005. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organistaion of the United Nations, 2005. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Views and opinions expressed in this article are the views and opinions of the authors, Agriculture and Food Sciences Research shall not be responsible or 

answerable for any loss, damage or liability etc. caused in relation to/arising out of the use of the content. 

 

http://www.saiia.org.za,/

