THINKING beyond the canopyTHINKING beyond the canopy
The Fuelwood Market Chain of Kinshasa: Socio-economic and sustainability outcomes of the number one household energy in the Democratic Republic of
Congo
IUFRO August 2010-Urban Forestry Combating Poverty: Building a collaborative stakeholder dialogue– Jolien Schure, Verina Ingram
THINKING beyond the canopy
Outline presentation
• Why do we want to know more about fuelwood around
Kinshasa?
• Methods
• Who are the actors?
• Socio-economic and environmental implications
• Institutional framework and management
• Conclusion
THINKING beyond the canopy
Problem statement: fuelwood for the city of Kinshasa
• DRC covers 61% (98 million
hectares) of the Congo Basin forest
Kinshasa:
• 10 million people population,
urbanization
• Not sufficient access to alternative
energy (91.5% is fuelwood)
• - Deforestation forest-savana mosaic
(estimated 60,000 ha/year (Marien,
2009)), Increasing prices
• + Labor, (renewable) energy for
cooking
THINKING beyond the canopy
Conceptual framework and methods
• Focus on livelihood systems and entire chain in order to understand
individual and household choices and institutional arrangements.
• Mapping, interviews, surveys
THINKING beyond the canopy
The actors
Specialists:
Wood
cutting
Construction
of oven
‘Harvesting
of charcoal’
‘Put in bags’
‘Waving the
‘hat’.
Wholesaler
Retailer
Vendor
Porters
Packers
Collectors
Thieves
Truck
(98%)
Head (8%)
Barge
(4%)
Household
s
Small
industries:
bakeries,
restaurants
, grilled
meat
Private Sector NGOs, research
institutes
Government
THINKING beyond the canopy
What are social and economic outcomes? - Consumers
• Consumers in the city use mainly charcoal for cooking
(74%), some electricity and firewood.
• Reasons: clean, little smoke, taste of food, hygiene rules
of city.
• Almost no improved stoves used (3%).
• Prices have raised over past 5 years.
• Costs for household: 21US$/ month! (+-15.6).
THINKING beyond the canopy
Socio-economic outcomes- producers
• Producers: educated, all ethnicities, also women (4%).
• Permanent vs temporary producers (61% permanent in Kinshasa,
42% of producers Kin. depend on fuelwood revenues.
• Secondary activities: Agriculture (76% ), Fishing (15% ), Timber
exploitation (5% )
• Training pays off with production increases (21.4 percent received
training)
• Traditional charcoal oven
• Factors influencing production: (informal) taxes, distances and
transport costs, demand, caterpillar harvest season, events and
festivities (year’s end, return to school).
• Annual profit/producer= (Bags sold*price)-(Costs
transport+labour+materials+tax+access).
THINKING beyond the canopy
Average yearly volume and profit charcoal producers Kinshasa
0
50
100
150
200
Production charbon de bois (sacs)
167
Producteurs zones de Kinshasa
Income (US$)
Profit (US$)
$0.00 $100.00$200.00 $300.00 $400.00 $500.00 $600.00$700.00
$800.00$900.00
$863.49
$104.50
Producteurs zones de Kinshasa
THINKING beyond the canopy
And the natural resource base?
• 1 plantation acacia auriculiformis that provides fuelwood
(Mampu): estimated 0.85% of demand Kinshasa
(Ducenne, 2009)
• Perception: traders, producers, consumers see
diminishing source and increasing distances
• Volumes: 400,000 tonnes of charcoal/ year.
• Wood species: Kisangani : Limbalu, Gilbert, Botuna, Kélé, Alombi, Dabema,
Kele, Lipela, Agbama, Mbala; Kinshasa: Kiseka, Acacia, Bois noir, Makayabu, Kititi,
Muboti, Musangambala, Kiyeti, Mubamba, Mukwati
• Reforestation limited (only 4786.74 ha for 1986 – 2006,
despite plan of 500/1000 ha/ year).
• 80.5% producers never planted tree, 19.5% did.
• Location
THINKING beyond the canopy
THINKING beyond the canopy
Location of fuelwood harvesting for Kinshasa
Champs39%
Newly
cultivated forest
37%
Uncultiv
ated forest24%
Actual places of fuelwoodharvesting (producers region of Kinshasa)
Champs
55%
Uncultivated
forest45%
Preferred places for fuelwoodharvesting
(producers region of Kinshasa)
THINKING beyond the canopy
Intstitutional analyses
• Legal framework about land tenure and forest provides following legal options for
sustainable production of fuelwood:
1. Public plantations
2. Private plantations (Mampu, Ibi )
3. Reforestation at agricultural plots
4. Exploitation with fuelwood/ charcoal permit in surrounding forest
5. Community forestry (No regulation yet)
However in practice:
• Permit system hardly enforced and not guaranteeing sustainable outcome.
• Conflicting interests – e.g. Energy and Environment for the city of Kinshasa
• Land tenure ssue remains
THINKING beyond the canopy
Local rules of access
Type of access (%/city) Costs of access(US$/per parcel/ tree)
Kinshasa Kisangani Kinshasa Kisangani
Type of access
Customaryright
59.42% 24.33%$00.00 $00.00
Renting 33.89% 59.67% $40.91 $38.90
Concession 3.81% 2.67% $18.56 $26.19
Buying trees
2.86% 13.33%$17.12 $9.86
THINKING beyond the canopy
Preliminary conclusions1. Fuelwood provides essential access
to energy and is important for
livelihoods producers.
2. Sector is not sustainable at present
and not part of peri-urban planning.
3. No incentives to producers to
produce in more sustainable way.
Opportunities for stakeholder
dialogue:
Local level: involve local authorities,
producers and officials.
National level: overcome conflicting
interests/incoherence between ministries,
role of private sector.
International level: regional strategies
(COMIFAC), lessons learned from other
countries.