3.1 Frequencies of NTFPs captured per transect
The frequency assessment by NTFPs showed that there is no single dominant NTFPs in the forest reserve with the maximum single frequency of 60. Considering the diversity of NTFPs recorded, there a low rate of dominance by a single NTFPs, it is possible to conclude that the BFR is reach in NTFPs .
Figure 1: Frequencies of NTFPs captured per Transect
3.2 Major NTFPs in and around BFR (Table 2)
NTFPs Scientific name
|
Local name
|
Garcinia cola
|
Bitter kola
|
Irvingia Gabonensis
|
Bush mango
|
Piper nigrum
|
Black Pepper
|
miswak
|
Chewing stick
|
Gnetum africanum.
|
Eru
|
Cola nitida
|
Kola nuts
|
Cola lepidota
|
Monkey kola
|
Ricinodendron
|
Njansang
|
Prunus Africana
|
Pygeum
|
Calamus rotang
|
Rattan cane
|
Gastropoda
|
Snail
|
Acacia Seyal delile
|
Fuelwood
|
Aframomum melegueta
|
Alligator Pepper
|
Santalum lanceolatum
|
Bush Plum
|
Marantaceae
|
Ngongo
|
Cyperus bulbosus
|
Bush Onion
|
Anacardium occidentale
|
Cashew nuts
|
|
|
Source: Fieldwork, 2018
Forest resources in the form of NTFPs serve as safety nets, sustaining the livelihoods of some forest communities in BFR. They play a vital role in income generation and household food security (Nkem et al., 2010). The results of this study indicate that the collection and sale of NTFPs is a major livelihood activity and a source of income for households especially in Munyenge, Lilale, Lykoko, Bova, and Kotto and the access to NTFPs is open to the people in both forest reserve settings. They collect NTFPs known as shown in the table above. Local people extracted NTFPs primarily for meeting household needs, as well as for earning additional income to support or supplement their livelihoods. NTFPs harvested from the BFR have been classified according to the benefits identified by the respondents including direct and indirect benefits. Direct benefits included human food, animal feed, medicinal plants, and poles, and wood fuel. Indirect benefits include environmental conservation and watershed protection (ecosystem services).
3.1 Amount of NTFPs used and sold per household per year in the BFR
Table 3 shows the amount of NTFPs used and sold per household per year in the BFR. Bitter kola,eru, bush mango,njansang, kola nuts, snails were the most traded NTFPs in the area. It was learned that the demand for these resources was higher compared to the supply. It was estimated that a household can generate up to 1990000 FCFA per year from the selling of NTFPs. The amount of revenue was low because the forest is protected by the village, government, and the entry to the forest and the harvest of NTFPs was through the permit and they also have their limit were they can collect NTFPs. About 53%, 24%, and 23% of the respondents agreed that eru, bush mango njansang, bitter kola, and snails, respectively could be used to assist households to cope with climate change.
Products
|
Amount used per household per year
|
Average amount sold per year
|
The average amount earned per year (FCFA)
|
Bitter kola (buckets)
|
2
|
15
|
300000
|
Bush mango (buckets)
|
4
|
30
|
450000
|
Black pepper (buckets)
|
2
|
10
|
20000
|
Chewing stick (bundles)
|
1
|
20
|
10000
|
Eru (kg)
|
50
|
50
|
300000
|
Kola nuts (buckets)
|
5
|
22
|
250000
|
Monkey kola (buckets)
|
1
|
5
|
20000
|
Njansang (buckets)
|
7
|
16
|
400000
|
The rattan cane (Bundles)
|
5
|
15
|
90000
|
Snail (buckets)
|
10
|
30
|
150000
|
Fuelwood (bundles)
|
17
|
50
|
-
|
Bush Plum (buckets)
|
2
|
5
|
-
|
Total
|
|
|
1990000
|
Table 3: NTFPs used and sold per household per year
Source: fieldwork, 2018
3.2 Local perceptions of respondents on the impact of climate change on NTFPs and livelihoods
Forest resources in the form of NTFPs serve as safety nets, sustaining the livelihoods of some forest communities in BFR. They play a vital role in income generation and household food security Nkem et al., (2010). The results of this study indicate that the collection and sale of NTFPs is a major livelihood activity and a source of income for households especially in Munyenge and the access to NTFPs is open to the peoples in both forest reserve settings. They collect NTFPs known like eru (Gnetum africanum.), sails (Gastropoda), bush mango (Irvingia Gabonensis), bitter cola (Garcinia cola).In this study, 31% of the households agreed that heavy rainfall prevented the collections of NTFPs especially fuelwood which is used by the entire households in BFR. Most of the households eat unready prepare food because the fuelwood collected is wet and produces mostly smoke instead of flames when it is burnt. Households involve in the collection of NTFPs as the main livelihood activity especially the Kotto households communicated that the harvesting of fruits from the different tree species is at times poor as a result of poor flowering and fruiting of the tree species, Also heavy rainfall is affecting the collection of NTFPs especially the harvesting of certain fruits in some trees species according to some households in Bova is very poor due pests and diseases that affect the flowering of this fruits based on their local knowledge While some households (55%) communicated that there has been the decrease in eru which they attributed it to climate change and variability. Besides,(22%) of the households agreed that drought as one of the climate impacts on climate-sensitive resources in these communities. Drought has caused a serious problem in collections of some NTFPs species especially Njansang which have become very difficult for back to decompose and cracking to remove the nuts and decrease in the number of snails (40%) of households pointed out that it was due climate change and variability
Responses on climate change and variability impact impacts on NTFPs
|
Responses
|
% Responses
|
Drying of water sources
|
35
|
Drought
|
20
|
Heavy Rainfall
|
31
|
Decrease in Eru
|
55
|
Decrease in Snails
|
40
|
181
|
Total
|
Table 4: The figure represents th parentages of respondents
Figure 3 : Frequencies of responses on climate change impacts on NTFPs
3.3 Changes in temperature around the BFR
The majority of the respondents agreed that there have been changes in the temperature in the area. About 71% of them reported that there has been an increase in temperature for more than 20 years ago around the BFR (Figure 2). However, about 12% of the respondents noticed the contrary, a decrease in temperature. While only 5% believed that there has been no change in the temperature for the last 20 years. Trend analysis of the annual temperature around BFR shows an increase in the temperature for the past 30 years (Figure 2). The climatic data records were in line with the people’s perceptions
Figure 4: local perceptions on changes in temperature around the BFR
Figure 4: Average annual temperature around BFR from 1971 to 2015
Source: Manfe Weather Station, 2018
3.4 Rainfall changes around BFR
The majority of the respondents (88%) agreed that there have been changes in the rainfall patterns over 20 years. They noticed a change not only in the total amount of rainfall but also in the timing of the rains; with rains coming either earlier or later than expected. But only 10% of the respondents believed that there were no changes in rainfall patterns from the last 30 years. Figure 3 indicates that 54% of respondents noticed an increase in the amount of rainfall or a shorter heavy rainy season (unpredicted rainfall). It was further revealed that 21% of the respondents felt that there has been a decrease in the amount of rainfall including dry season starting early and was also longer than usual in the area. However, only 9% believed that there has been no change in annual rainfall for the last 20 years. The trend analysis of the annual rainfall from 1960 to 2015 shows fluctuations with increased annual rainfall (Figure 3). The people’s perceptions were in line with the climatic data records
Figure 5: local perceptions on changes in rainfall patterns around the BFR
Figure 6: Average annual rainfall around BFR from 1960 to 2015
Source: Manfe Weather Station, 2017
- The Availability of NTFPs
Eru was identified as key and rare NTFPs in the study area. The majority of the respondents (55%) admitted to harvest and consume eru during the wet season. A total of 25 bags harvested from the forest were listed during PRA (Table 4). This implies the BFR is rich in wild eru and people were knowledgeable on edible eru found in the forest. It was reported by respondents that fuelwood is available during the dry season as the rainy season has been too rainier in the past years while the collection of snails is during the rainy season especially during August to September which is considered as the peak season for snails collection as identified by respondents.
NTFPs Scientific Name
|
Local Name
|
Availability
|
Garcinia cola
|
Bitter kola
|
Rainy season
|
Irvingiagabonensis
|
Bush mango
|
Rainy season
|
Piper quinensis
|
Bush pepper
|
Dry season
|
Acacia Seyal delile
|
Fuelwood
|
Dry season
|
Gnetum Africana
|
Eru
|
Rainy season
|
Cola nitidia
|
Kola nuts
|
Dry season
|
Cola lepidota
|
Monkey kola
|
Rainy season
|
Helix aspersa
|
Snail
|
Rainy season
|
Gnetum Africana
|
Eru
|
Rainy season
|
Table 4: NTFPs and their availability
3.6 Adaptation strategies to cope with climate change and variability
The need for a multi-disciplinary approach in climate change mitigation and adaptation research is dictated by the multi-disciplinary nature of problems related to climate change. At the center of this communication and collaboration, Vignola et al., (2009) advocate an ecosystem-based framework in which addressing the problems of ecosystem degradation and the conservation of natural capital are the main focus. In this study, 4.2% of the households used fertilizers in their farms to increase yields. The local agriculture system depends on natural temperature, sunshine, and rainfall. This implies adjusting and improving (technically, financially, and materially) agriculture activities which will reduce the vulnerability and increase the adaptive capacity of households. The planting of trees to protect winds 5.9% of the household have planted trees especially around their houses to protect strong winds during torrential rainfall which is accompanied by strong winds in the study site which use to up roof their houses and most households used their traditional methods to protect winds by tying red pieces of cloth around their farms land. An additional 7.6% of the household have adopted an irrigation system of farming during the prolonged dry seasons and drought, they moved to swamps areas and opened new farms where water is available throughout the year the local farmers used watering cane to send water into their farms. Furthermore, 32.8% of household have diversified their crops, sustaining the diversity of crops it is an appropriate adaptation option for food security and livelihood in these communities. Household in the study area has expressed their willingness to integrate other livelihood activities like food crops and livestock rearing (sheep) have increased their source of income especially small farmers in the study area. This is similar to the findings of Yengoh et al. (2010). This study also shows that diversification as an adaptation option at the local levels, cuts across different sectors (environment, forest and wildlife, livestock and fisheries, agriculture and rural development, scientific research, finance, and commerce), thus it requires the development of inter-sectoral coordination. This finding is supported by that of Yengoh et al., (2010), which draws attention to the fact that coordination and collaboration are required between sectors that build the capacity of rural livelihoods.
In this result, 69.7% of households have diversified their occupation to reduce their vulnerability to local climate and uncertainty. Engaging in non-climate dependent alternative jobs such as driving, masonry works, sale of assorted goods "provision store", shoe repairing, painting, sewing, or dressmaking was ranked the second-highest among the coping measures described by respondents. Although the dominant occupation is farming and therefore it is expected that most people will give priority to any coping measures that will help sustain their dominant livelihood activity, household members especially the young migrating to urban centers in search of jobs resulting in rural exodus in the study site.
Also, 78.2% of respondents have increased their farm sizes. According to the household, they increase their farm sizes every beginning of farming seasons as an adaptation option to local climate variability and uncertainty. The expansion of agricultural land is a coping and adaptation strategy for these forest-dependent communities. This supported finding carried around the same area Bele et al.,(2013a,2013b) and Chia et al.,(2013). Increasing the agriculture land to compensate for losses has put more pressure on other natural resources on which the communities depend, resulting in a perverse cycle that could increase their vulnerability even more. Increase climate variability and uncertainty seems to be one of the main disturbances shaping current vulnerability in these communities. It was revealed that 85.2% of respondents consume and sell NTFPs from the forest as a climate change variability coping strategy. They use NTFPs like bush mango, fuelwood; bush Blum, snails, bitter kola, kola nut to be sold in Mbonge, and Munyuka markets. Finally, 52.3% of respondents sell timber trees from their farm as coping strategies to climate change and variability.
Adaptation strategies
|
% Response
|
Used of fertilizers
|
4.2
|
Planting of trees
|
5.9
|
Irrigation
|
7.6
|
Diversification of crops
|
32.8
|
Diversification of occupation
|
69.7
|
Increase in farm sizes
|
78.2
|
Used of NTFPs
|
85.2
|
Timber selling from own farm
|
34.3
|
|
|
Table 5: Responses on various adaptations as coping strategies to climate change
Figure 7: Frequencies of respondents on coping and adaptation strategies