Abstract:
SULEDO Village Land Forest Reserve is important in supporting livelihoods of the
adjacent local communities as well as for the economic development of the country at
large. However, there is inadequate information on power struggles underlying the
management and utilization of SULEDO VLFR. This study intended to assess power
struggles underlying resource use conflicts in SULEDO VLFR. The study was
conducted in three villages namely Sunya, Lengatei and Laiseri. Qualitative and
quantitative data were collected. Content analysis technique was used to analyze
qualitative data while descriptive and inferential statistical analyses were used to
analyze quantitative data. Moreover, SNA was used in the analysis of power
relations. A total of 25 stakeholders involved in the management and utilization of
SULEDO VLFR were identified along with their roles. Stakeholders identified were
categorized into three groups namely regulators, facilitators and users. Likewise three
categories of power were identified namely strategic, institutional and structural.
Strategic power was found to be dominant in the management and utilization of
SULEDO VLFR. The results showed different power struggles among stakeholders
whereby power struggle between ZEC and SULEDO villages was found to be
dominant which resulted into resource use conflicts in SULEDO VLFR. Socioeconomic
and institutional factors found to significantly (P<0.05) escalating
dominant power struggle between ZEC and SULEDO villages were wealth status,
immigration, distance from homesteads to resource base, membership in VEC and
political involvement while Education level, age, residence duration, farm size and
household size were significantly (P<0.05) reducing the power struggle. Main forest
resource- use conflict in SULEDO VLFR is with regards to disagreements which
ii
have resulted into unsustainable forest management. CBFM scheme in SULEDO
VLFR remains a complex and contested arena, comprising many stakeholders with
different powers and conflicting interests. It is recommended that communication
among stakeholders in the study area should be improved.
