13 

 

 

FOREST MANAGEMENT IN DANGILA WOREDA, ETHIOPIA: 

BIRD EYES VIEW ON AGAMENGI COMMUNITY FOREST 

 

 

Gedifew Sewenet YIGZAW 

Bahir Dar University, Department of Governance and Development Studies, , Ethiopia, sgedifew2010@gmail.com 

 

Article history: 

Accepted 25 March 2019 

Available online 30 April 2019 

 

Keywords:  

Causes;  

Degradation;  

Fuel Wood;  

Resource;  

Status 

A b s t r a c t 

This study highlights the overall current performance of Agamengi forest management. Descriptive 

survey method was employed in this study. A total of 182 respondents from 2183 households were 

selected through simple random sampling technique. Questionnaire, key informant interview and 

focus group discussions were mainly employed as data collection tools in this study. This desirable 

sample size was determined by using Yamane‘s statistical sample size determination formula. The 

major findings of this study revealed that the status and management of Agamengi forest in the last 

30 years was much dense and there was proper management of the forest. However, the current forest 

status is degraded and the forest management is poor mainly due to rapid population pre ssure, high 

demand for fuel-wood, farmland expansion, charcoal making and inadequate implementation of 

forest laws. This study recommends that all concerned stakeholders should work together to keep 

and maintain the quality of the Agemengi forest through applying re-afforestation and afforestation 

methods. 

  

 

 

Introduction  

Development for the most part bases on the utilization and 

management of environmental resources, like natural forests. 

Globally, forest management with an emphasis on participatory 

approaches and local benefits has become a phenomenon around 

the world (Agrawal & Gupta, 2005; Nilsson, 2005).  

 

According to FAO (2009), Ethiopia loses about 141,000 hectares 

of forest each year. The main agents of deforestation in Ethiopia 

include agricultural expansion, the inappropriateness of land-use 

patterns, the underlying social forces, overgrazing, consumption 

of firewood and charcoal, fodder collection and forest fire. 

Besides these, poverty and rapid population growth are also seen 

as the main causes of forest depletion. Besides these, Girma 

(2005) noted that forest fires, encroachment of forest reserves, 

livestock grazing, and timber and firewood collection by the local 

people have also significantly contributed to deforestation.  

 

Experiences made in Ethiopia have also shown that participatory 

forest management approaches can play a key role in reversing 

the ongoing process of forest degradation. However, Mulugeta 

and Melaku (2008) noted that the current trend of natural resource 

exploitation in Ethiopia is unsustainable and it has led to land 

degradation, loss of fresh water bodies and decline of 

biodiversity. Hence, the forestry sector is facing the challenge of 

balancing utilization with conservation which requires 

appropriate forest policy and laws; strong and stable institutional 

set up, and strong forest related research backing. The status, 

management and economic benefits of the forest is not so far 

being studied. Therefore, the overall objective of this study is to 

give bird eyes view on the management of Agamengi forest in 

Dangila woreda, Ethiopia.  

 

1. Methods  

A descriptive survey research method was applied to have rich 

and clear information on forest management and conservation 

efforts of the government and the involvement of adjacent 

community. In this study, transect walk, key informant interview, 

focus group discussion and questionnaire survey as primary data 

collection techniques were mainly used. 

Concerning respondent selection, based up on the degree of 

proximity to the Agamengi forest resource, a total of 182 

desirable sample size from 2183 households using Yamane 

mailto:sgedifew2010@gmail.com


 

 14 

(1967) statistical sample size formula was determined and simple 

random sampling method was used for selecting these 

respondents in this study. Finally, the quantitative data were 

cleaned, coded and entered into Microsoft excel software 

application to generate figures. The quantitative data were 

analyzed using simple descriptive analytical techniques, mainly 

percentages. Data collected through open-ended items; responses 

of key informant interviewees and focus group discussion were 

analyzed through narration. 

 

2. Major Findings 

2.1. The Past Status and Management of 

Agamengi Forest 

 

The figure 1 below clearly shows the status and proper 

management of the Agamengi forest resource in the last 30 years.  

 

 

Figure 1. Past status of Agamengi forest 

 

As it has shown in figure 1, 70% of the sample farmers responded 

that the status and management of Agamengi forest in the last 30 

years was much dense and the people were responsible to manage 

the forest appropriately. Moreover, these respondents agreed that 

the forest land coverage in the last thirty years was in an excellent 

condition due to good management of the forest by the adjacent 

community.  

 

1.1. Current Forest Coverage and Management status 

 

Concerning the current forest coverage, majority respondents 

perceived that the current forest status is excessively degraded 

and the forest management is poor due to population pressure and 

high demand for fuel wood.  

The key-informant interview held with model farmers shows that;  

 

The status of the Agamengi forest have 

been under tremendous pressure from an 

increasing human population and their 

ever growing demands for shelter, land for 

cultivation and demand for fuel wood, 

timber and other forest products necessary 

for the livelihood. Besides this, the result 

revealed that the local communities had no 

awareness regarding the sustainable use of 

forest resource. They were only applying 

their indigenous knowledge for forest 

protection rather than integrating their 

knowledge with scientific way which was 

being important to ensure environmental 

sustainability.  

 

Yohannes, a model farmer, who had lived over 50 years around 

the forest, narrated that:  

 

The Agamengi forest was the main source 

of food for us in the last 30 years. It was 

very much dense forest during the past 

regimes because the then government was 

very much sensitive in protecting and 

managing forest resources. The forests 

were mainly state forests. Agamengi forest 

was the home of bio-diversity in the past 

century. There were so many wild animals 

like, tiger, lion, Gazelle…etc. and 

indigenous dominant tree species in the 

forest in the last 30 years; however, these 

fauna and flora are almost disappeared 

today. The forest recently becomes the 

home of human population and livestock 

due to fast population growth, livestock 

rising, farmland expansion and demand for 

fuel-wood. It was observed that some 

farms were close to the forest and even 

shares border with the forest too. 

 

Similarly, Focus group discussions (FGDs) held with eight local 

development committee members concerning the post 1990’s 

forest status revealed that: 

 

There were no guards hired by the 

government or by the community so as to 



 

 15 

improve the sustainability of Agamengi 

forest resource. As a result, there was free 

roaming of livestock, cutting of trees for 

sale and charcoal making inside the forest. 

Moreover, the government did not give 

full legitimacy practically to the 

communities to control deforestation. In 

theory, the forest is assumed to be in the 

hands of the community but still there is 

strong government control.  

 

From this one can infer that the Agamengi forest is not currently 

managed properly and the management system is very poor. This 

poor status of forest management led to forest degradation and 

exploitation. Therefore, the concerned bodies and other 

stakeholders should contribute their efforts to rehabilitate the 

forest for sustainable use.  

 

Majority of the respondents ranked carelessness of forestry 

experts or lack of forest experts’ work commitment towards 

sustainable forest management as the primary reason for poor 

conservation and management of Agamengi forest, followed by 

lack of community awareness (21%). Poor implementation of the 

forest laws is ranked third. Lack of skills by local development 

agents and absence of forest guards are also the additional reasons 

for the current poor management of the forest. 

 

2.2. Perceived Causes of Agamengi Forest 

Destruction  

 

This study identified greater demand for charcoal making, fuel-

wood collection, greater number of livestock, farm land 

expansion and population growth, unintentional bush burning, 

lack of community awareness, demand for house construction and 

inadequate forest legislation as major perceived causes of forest 

degradation.  

 

 

Figure2. Perceived major causes of Agamengi forest degradation  

 

As it has shown in figure 2, Fuel wood is the most common and 

major household energy source for home based activities. 

Because of lack of modern electric energy supply and bio-gas, 

majority of the households are dependent on fuel wood for 

household cooking. From these stand point, about 32.4 percent 

replied the greater demand of the people for fuel wood as the main 

perceived cause of Agamengi forest degradation.  

 

On the other side, about 20.9 percent of respondents identified 

expansion of agricultural land and population pressure as the 2 nd 

major cause of forest destruction. Moreover, demand for charcoal 

making, livestock rising, lack of community awareness, 

inadequate forest legislation, cutting trees for house construction 

and unintentional bush firing as additional causes of forest quality 

decline.  

 

One key informant forest management expert narrated about 

inadequacy of forest legislation as a cause of forest destruction: 

 

There were strong government forest laws 

and legislations formulated for ensuring 

sustainable forest management and to 

assure active community participation in 

forest conservation. However, there is 

discrepancy between formulated laws and 

their actual implementations. The existing 

laws are like; ‘’toothless dog.” Local 

communities have no room to participate 

in forest management. There is still 

centralized forest management system. As 

a result, inadequate forest laws, 

legislations and inadequate land policies 



 

 16 

are mentioned as perceived causes of 

forest destruction. 

 

Besides, key informant interview held with local community 

development and forest management committee also mentioned 

scarcity of land, poor economic conditions and rapid population 

growth as other causes of forest destruction. They also added that 

free roaming of livestock into the forest caused great damage to 

the forest by fueling soil erosion since the forest is mountainous.   

 

Conclusion   

The study revealed that the status and management of Agamengi 

forest in the last 30 years was much dense and the people were 

responsible to manage it appropriately. However, the current 

forest status is much degraded and the forest management is poor. 

This poor status of forest management led to forest degradation 

and exploitation. High population pressure, greater demand for 

fuel wood, inadequate implementation of forest laws, cutting of 

trees for sale and charcoal making inside the forest were 

identified as causes of forest degradation. Finally, this may cause 

the climate change and lose of biodiversity. Hence, the 

government and the community should work together to improve 

forest sustainability and full legitimacy should be given to the 

communities.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

References 

1. Agrawal A. & Gupta K. (2005). Decentralization and 

Participation: The governance of Common Pool 

Resources in Nepal’s Terai. World Development, 33 

(7), 1101-1114. 

2. Aklilu A., Feyera S. & Tsegaye B. (2004). Impact of 

Participatory Forest Management Practice in Adaba-

Dodola Forest Priority Area of Oromia, Ethiopia. 

Ethiopian Journal of Natural Resource, 6: 89–109. 

3. Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) (2009). 

State of the World’s Forests. Rome: FAO.  

4. Girma A. (2005). Rehabilitation and sustainable use 

of degraded community forests in  the Bale 

Mountains of Ethiopia. Inaugural Dissertation. 

Albert-Ludwigs-University,  Freiburg im 

Breisgau, Germany. 

5. Mulugeta L. & Melaku B. (2008). Participatory Forest 

Management Best Practices, Lessons Learnt and 

Challenges Encountered: The Ethiopian and 

Tanzanian Experience Farm–Africa/SOS-Sahel, 

March 2008. Africa/SOS-Sahel.  

6. Nilsson, S. (2005). Experiences of policy reforms of 

the forest sector in transition and other countries. 

Forest Policy and Economics 7, 831–847. 

 

 

 

 

 


	Introduction
	1. Methods
	2. Major Findings
	2.1. The Past Status and Management of Agamengi Forest
	2.2. Perceived Causes of Agamengi Forest Destruction
	Conclusion
	References