Journal of Arid Land

, Volume 8, Issue 4, pp 618–631 | Cite as

Charcoal production through selective logging leads to degradation of dry woodlands: a case study from Mutomo District, Kenya

  • Geoffrey M. NdegwaEmail author
  • Udo Nehren
  • Friederike Grüninger
  • Miyuki Iiyama
  • Dieter Anhuf


Provision of woodfuel is an important ecosystem service of dry forests and woodlands. However, charcoal production through selective logging of preferred hardwood species has the potential to alter the physiognomic composition of the residual or re-growth woodlands and may lead to their deterioration and degradation. This study, conducted through forest inventory in Mutomo District in Kenya, assessed the impact of charcoal production on unprotected dry woodlands in terms of tree density, targeted species basal area, species richness, evenness and Shannon diversity. The parameters of the disturbed woodlands were evaluated for significant differences with those of the neighbouring protected Tsavo East National Park, which served as a reference for an ecologically undisturbed ecosystem. By evaluating a consequence of tree harvesting for charcoal production, this study confirmed the overall significant differences between the protected and unprotected woodlands in all the tested parameters. To confirm if the differences in the land-covers of the woodlands had any influence on their degradation, all mentioned parameters were compared between the four differentiated classes and their respective control plots in the protected areas. At the “land-cover level”, the statistically significant difference in the basal area of tree species preferred for charcoal production between the protected and unprotected open trees confirms that the class with a high density of large mature trees is the prime target of charcoal producers. In addition, there seems to be a general trend of lower values of tree species richness, evenness and Shannon diversity for the unprotected woodlands subjected to charcoal production. On the other hand, the disturbed woodlands display the potential to recover through their comparably high saplings density. The findings make an important contribution to the discourse on the impact of charcoal production in dry woodlands, a topic that is highly controversial among researchers.


charcoal burning forest degradation selective harvesting Acacia-Commiphora bushland coppicing 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Ahrends A, Burgess N D, Milledge S A H, et al. 2010. Predictable waves of sequential forest degradation and biodiversity loss spreading from an African city. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 107(33): 14556–14561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Archibald S, Scholes R J. 2007. Leaf green-up in a semi-arid African savanna—separating tree and grass responses to environmental cues. Journal of Vegetation Science, 18(4): 583–594.Google Scholar
  3. Arnold J E M, Köhlin G, Persson R. 2006. Woodfuels, livelihoods, and policy interventions: changing perspectives. World Development, 34(3): 596–611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Banda T, Schwartz M W, Caro T. 2006. Woody vegetation structure and composition along a protection gradient in a Miombo ecosystem of western Tanzania. Forest Ecology and Management, 230(1–3): 179–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Becknell J M, Kucek L K, Powers J S. 2012. Aboveground biomass in mature and secondary seasonally dry tropical forests: a literature review and global synthesis. Forest Ecology and Management, 276: 88–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Butz R J. 2013. Changing land management: a case study of charcoal production among a group of pastoral women in northern Tanzania. Energy for Sustainable Development, 17(2): 138–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chidumayo E N, Gumbo D J. 2010. The Dry forests and woodlands of Africa: Managing for Products and Services. London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
  8. Chidumayo E N. 2013. Forest degradation and recovery in a miombo woodland landscape in Zambia: 22 years of observations on permanent sample plots. Forest Ecology and Management, 291: 154–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chidumayo E N, Gumbo D J. 2013. The environmental impacts of charcoal production in tropical ecosystems of the world: a synthesis. Energy for Sustainable Development, 17(2): 86–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. de Figueirôa J M, Pareyn F G C, de Lima Araújo E, et al. 2006. Effects of cutting regimes in the dry and wet season on survival and sprouting of woody species from the semi-arid caatinga of northeast Brazil. Forest Ecology and Management, 229(1–3): 294–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. De la Barreda-Bautista B, López-Caloca1 A A, Couturier S, et al. 2011. Tropical dry forests in the global picture: the challenge of remote sensing-based change detection in tropical dry environments. In: Carayannis E. Planet Earth 2011-Global Warming Challenges and Opportunities for Policy and Practice. [S.l.]: InTech, 231–257.Google Scholar
  12. Eriksen S, Gachathi F N, Muok B, et al. 2006. Synergies in biodiversity conservation and adaptation to climate change: the case of hilltop forests in Kitui, Kenya. In: Mistry J, Berardi A. Savannas and Dry Forests. London, UK: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  13. FAO. 2000. Management of Natural Forests of Dry Tropical Zones. Rome: The FAO.Google Scholar
  14. FAO. 2002. Multipurpose landcover database for Kenya-Africover. FAO. Scholar
  15. GOK. 2009. Kibwezi district development plan 2008–2012. Nairobi: The Government Printers.Google Scholar
  16. GOK. 2013. Analysis of the charcoal value chain in Kenya. Nairobi: Ministry of Environment, Water and Natural Resources.Google Scholar
  17. Grace J, San José J, Meir P, et al. 2006. Productivity and carbon fluxes of tropical savannas. Journal of Biogeography, 33(3): 387–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Grainger A. 1999. Constraints on modelling the deforestation and degradation of tropical open woodlands. Global Ecology and Biogeography, 8(3–4): 179–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Iiyama M, Neufeldt H, Dobie P, et al. 2014. The potential of agroforestry in the provision of sustainable woodfuel in sub-Saharan Africa. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 6: 138–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. le Polain de Waroux Y, Lambin E F. 2012. Monitoring degradation in arid and semi-arid forests and woodlands: the case of the argan woodlands (Morocco). Applied Geography, 32(2): 777–786.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Luoga E J, Witkowski E T F, Balkwill K. 2002. Harvested and standing wood stocks in protected and communal miombo woodlands of eastern Tanzania. Forest Ecology and Management, 164(1–3): 15–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Luoga E J, Witkowski E T F, Balkwill K. 2004. Regeneration by coppicing (resprouting) of miombo (African savanna) trees in relation to land use. Forest Ecology and Management, 189(1–3): 23–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Maass J M, Balvanera P, Castillo A, et al. 2005. Ecosystem services of tropical dry forests: insights from long-term ecological and social research on the Pacific Coast of Mexico. Ecology and Society, 10(1): 1–23.Google Scholar
  24. Millington A C, Critchley R W, Douglas T D, et al. 1994. Estimating Woody Biomass in Sub-Saharan Africa. Washington DC: The World Bank.Google Scholar
  25. Mutiti C M. 2010. Landscape structure of Acacia-commiphora bushland in Southeastern Kenya. PhD Dissertation. USA: Miami University.Google Scholar
  26. Ngene S, Njumbi S, Nzisa M, et al. 2013. Status and trends of the elephant population in the Tsavo–Mkomazi ecosystem. Pachyderm, (53): 38–50.Google Scholar
  27. Pielou E C. 1975. Ecological Diversity. New York: John Wiley & Sons Inc.Google Scholar
  28. Mugova A. 2009. Assessing livelihoods impact of charcoal production in Bondo and Kitui Districts of Kenya: a value chain analysis approach. Prepared by PAC for Pisces charcoal Kenya Nov 2009 Workshop; extracted from PAC report to UNDP Kenya on “sustainable charcoal Production in Four Districts in Kenya”. Nairobi: Practical Action.Google Scholar
  29. Shaw P J A. 2003. Multivariate Statistics for the Environmental Sciences. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Ter Braak C J F. 1987. The analysis of vegetation–environment relationships by canonical correspondence analysis. Vegetatio, 69(1–3): 69–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Ter Braak C J F, Šmilauer P. 2002. CANOCO Reference Manual and CanoDraw for Windows User’s Guide: Software for Canonical Community Ordination (version 4.5). Ithaca NY, USA: Microcomputer Power.Google Scholar
  32. The Angiosperm Phylogeny Group. 2009. An update of the angiosperm phylogeny group classification for the orders and families of flowering plants: APG III. Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society, 161(2): 105–121.Google Scholar
  33. Whittaker R H. 1972. Evolution and measurement of tree species diversity. Taxon, 21(2–3): 213–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Zida D, Sawadogo L, Tigabu M, et al. 2007. Dynamics of sapling population in savanna woodlands of Burkina Faso subjected to grazing, early fire and selective tree cutting for a decade. Forest Ecology and Management, 243(1): 102–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Xinjiang Institute of Ecology and Geography, the Chinese Academy of Sciences and Springer - Verlag GmbH 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Geoffrey M. Ndegwa
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    Email author
  • Udo Nehren
    • 2
  • Friederike Grüninger
    • 1
  • Miyuki Iiyama
    • 3
    • 4
  • Dieter Anhuf
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Physical GeographyUniversity of PassauBerlinGermany
  2. 2.Institute for Technology and Resources Management in the Tropics and SubtropicsTH Köln University of Applied SciencesBerlinGermany
  3. 3.The World Agroforestry CentreNairobiKenya
  4. 4.The Japan International Research Center for Agricultural Sciences (JIRCAS)Tsukuba, Ibaraki PrefectureJapan

Personalised recommendations