Ecology and Development Series No. 10, 2003 - ZEF
Ecology and Development Series No. 10, 2003 - ZEF Ecology and Development Series No. 10, 2003 - ZEF
Conservation of the wild Coffea arabica populations in situneed to conserve the coffee genetic resources and the forest ecosystems by establishingcoffee gene reserves (Tadesse et al. 2002). A gene reserve is an in situ conservation areaestablished to protect the wild populations of the target species and its habitats.In the conventional conservation approach of protected areas, management usuallyexcludes human intervention or resource use within the boundaries of the protected areas(McNeely 1994). Today, there is a paradigm change toward collaborative management of theresources together with the local community in the proximity of the protected areas in orderto promote both conservation and sustainable use (McNeely 1994). Given the highdependency of the local people on the forests for different non-timber products includingcoffee (Tafesse 1996), and the importance of the forest for the conservation of coffee geneticresources and other biodiversity (Tewolde 1990), the new conservation approach is veryrelevant for the forests which are analyzed in this study. Hence, a management approach thatoptimizes both conservation and sustainable utilization of the forest coffee ecosystems isperceived as the most appropriate option to manage forest ecosystems important forconservation of coffee in Ethiopia (Tadesse et al. 2002).Conservationists advocate the concepts of the Man and Biosphere (MAB) programof UNESCO (UNESCO-UNEP 1984) as very stimulating ideas to conserve plant geneticresources in situ (Maxted et al. 1997). Based on this concept, biosphere reserves are areas ofecosystems promoting solutions to reconcile the conservation of biodiversity with itssustainable use (UNESCO-UNEP 1984). This approach incorporates ecosystem managementand human development into a regional context. It advocates the establishment of a multipleusenetwork of areas, including one or more strictly protected core areas, surrounded by lessstrictly protected buffer zones, both enveloped within a series of transitions zones(UNESCO-UNEP 1984; Batisse 1986; Wells and Brandon 1993; McNeely 1994; Maxted etal. 1997).Zoning allows the allocation of non-damaging uses by human beings in some partswhile protecting core parts of the reserve (IUCN 1994; Hepcan 2000). The core zones arestrictly protected areas for conserving biological diversity. Allowed activities in this zone arelow-impact uses such as education and ecotourism as well as non-destructive research. Thebuffer zones are clearly identified areas, and usually surround the core zones. Buffer zonescan be used for cooperative activities compatible with sound ecological practices, including99
Conservation of the wild Coffea arabica populations in situenvironmental education, recreation, ecotourism and research. The transition or cooperationzones may contain settlement areas, farms, and other human activities and are the areaswhere local communities, management agencies, scientists, non-governmental organizations,cultural groups, economic interests, and other stakeholders work together to manage andsustainably develop the area's resources.GIS-based multi-criteria evaluation methods have been successfully applied forsupporting management decisions that address different alternative solutions to spatialdecision making problems. The most common application of multi-criteria evaluationmethods is the identification of different land suitability classes for different uses (Eastman1999, Basnet et al. 2001). Recently, multi-criteria evaluation has also been used for mineralfavorability mapping (de Araujo and Macedo 2002), conservation of biodiversity and reservesite selection (Reyers et al. 2002), and protected areas zoning (Hepcan 2000).Zoning requires spatial decision-making by evaluating appropriate multiple criteriathat have spatial attributes. Spatial multi-criteria decision-making is an articulation of properobjectives and identification of attributes, which are useful indicators to achieve theseobjectives (Malczewski 1999). The biological evaluation criteria in forest reserve zoning fora coffee gene reserve can be layers of the extent of wild coffee populations and the diversityof plants species. Spatial representation of the evaluation criteria can be produced usingvegetation data from sample plots and respective data of environmental variables.Forest scientists and managers often use environmental conditions such as terrain,climate, and moisture to map the distribution of plant species and forest communities(Bolstad et al. 1998). The major environmental conditions that determine the distributionpatterns of plant species may change at macro- and meso-scales due to changes in latitudinaland continental/ oceanic influences on temperature and precipitation (Bailey 1996).However, the important environmental conditions at micro-level that determine plant speciesdistribution are mainly the soil moisture and temperature. These micro-level environmentalconditions are modified by variations in landform, elevation, slope and other terraincharacteristics (Bolstad et al. 1998). Hence, specific information about terrain may aid inpredicting the occurrence of species or plant communities at a given site, if there are strongrelationships between environmental conditions and species occurrences. Besides,environmental gradients identified by the ordination analysis such as the CCA and PCA axes100
- Page 56 and 57: Floristic analysis of the undisturb
- Page 58 and 59: Floristic analysis of the undisturb
- Page 60 and 61: Floristic analysis of the undisturb
- Page 62 and 63: Floristic analysis of the undisturb
- Page 64 and 65: Floristic analysis of the undisturb
- Page 66 and 67: Floristic analysis of the undisturb
- Page 68 and 69: Floristic analysis of the undisturb
- Page 70 and 71: Floristic analysis of the undisturb
- Page 72 and 73: Floristic analysis of the undisturb
- Page 74 and 75: Impacts of human use on the forest
- Page 76 and 77: Impacts of human use on the forest
- Page 78 and 79: Impacts of human use on the forest
- Page 80 and 81: Impacts of human use on the forest
- Page 82 and 83: Impacts of human use on the forest
- Page 84 and 85: Impacts of human use on the forest
- Page 86 and 87: Impacts of human use on the forest
- Page 88 and 89: Impacts of human use on the forest
- Page 90 and 91: Impacts of human use on the forest
- Page 92 and 93: Impacts of human use on the forest
- Page 94 and 95: Impacts of human use on the forest
- Page 96 and 97: Impacts of human use on the forest
- Page 98 and 99: Impacts of human use on the forest
- Page 100 and 101: Impacts of human use on the forest
- Page 102 and 103: Impacts of human use on the forest
- Page 104 and 105: Impacts of human use on the forest
- Page 108 and 109: Conservation of the wild Coffea ara
- Page 110 and 111: Conservation of the wild Coffea ara
- Page 112 and 113: Conservation of the wild Coffea ara
- Page 114 and 115: Conservation of the wild Coffea ara
- Page 116 and 117: Conservation of the wild Coffea ara
- Page 118 and 119: Conservation of the wild Coffea ara
- Page 120 and 121: Conservation of the wild Coffea ara
- Page 122 and 123: Conservation of the wild Coffea ara
- Page 124 and 125: Conservation of the wild Coffea ara
- Page 126 and 127: Conservation of the wild Coffea ara
- Page 128 and 129: Conservation of the wild Coffea ara
- Page 130 and 131: Conservation of the wild Coffea ara
- Page 132 and 133: Conclusions and recommendations7 CO
- Page 134 and 135: Conclusions and recommendations3. R
- Page 136 and 137: ReferencesBatisse M. 1986 Developin
- Page 138 and 139: ReferencesDavis A.P. and Rokotonaso
- Page 140 and 141: ReferencesESRI. 1996. ArcView GIS:
- Page 142 and 143: ReferencesIUCN 1992. Protected Area
- Page 144 and 145: ReferencesMesfin Ameha and Bayetta
- Page 146 and 147: ReferencesSmith R.F. 1985. A histor
- Page 148 and 149: ReferencesVan Jaarsveld A.S., Freit
- Page 150 and 151: Appendices9 APPENDICESAppendix 1 Li
- Page 152 and 153: AppendicesD. repandum (Vahl) DC, [H
- Page 154 and 155: AppendicesSapotaceaeAningeria altis
Conservation of the wild Coffea arabica populations in situenvironmental education, recreation, ecotourism <strong>and</strong> research. The transition or cooperationzones may contain settlement areas, farms, <strong>and</strong> other human activities <strong>and</strong> are the areaswhere local communities, management agencies, scientists, non-governmental organizations,cultural groups, economic interests, <strong>and</strong> other stakeholders work together to manage <strong>and</strong>sustainably develop the area's resources.GIS-based multi-criteria evaluation methods have been successfully applied forsupporting management decisions that address different alternative solutions to spatialdecision making problems. The most common application of multi-criteria evaluationmethods is the identification of different l<strong>and</strong> suitability classes for different uses (Eastman1999, Basnet et al. 2001). Recently, multi-criteria evaluation has also been used for mineralfavorability mapping (de Araujo <strong>and</strong> Macedo 2002), conservation of biodiversity <strong>and</strong> reservesite selection (Reyers et al. 2002), <strong>and</strong> protected areas zoning (Hepcan 2000).Zoning requires spatial decision-making by evaluating appropriate multiple criteriathat have spatial attributes. Spatial multi-criteria decision-making is an articulation of properobjectives <strong>and</strong> identification of attributes, which are useful indicators to achieve theseobjectives (Malczewski 1999). The biological evaluation criteria in forest reserve zoning fora coffee gene reserve can be layers of the extent of wild coffee populations <strong>and</strong> the diversityof plants species. Spatial representation of the evaluation criteria can be produced usingvegetation data from sample plots <strong>and</strong> respective data of environmental variables.Forest scientists <strong>and</strong> managers often use environmental conditions such as terrain,climate, <strong>and</strong> moisture to map the distribution of plant species <strong>and</strong> forest communities(Bolstad et al. 1998). The major environmental conditions that determine the distributionpatterns of plant species may change at macro- <strong>and</strong> meso-scales due to changes in latitudinal<strong>and</strong> continental/ oceanic influences on temperature <strong>and</strong> precipitation (Bailey 1996).However, the important environmental conditions at micro-level that determine plant speciesdistribution are mainly the soil moisture <strong>and</strong> temperature. These micro-level environmentalconditions are modified by variations in l<strong>and</strong>form, elevation, slope <strong>and</strong> other terraincharacteristics (Bolstad et al. 1998). Hence, specific information about terrain may aid inpredicting the occurrence of species or plant communities at a given site, if there are strongrelationships between environmental conditions <strong>and</strong> species occurrences. Besides,environmental gradients identified by the ordination analysis such as the CCA <strong>and</strong> PCA axes<strong>10</strong>0