Forests in Kenya are threatened by unsustainable uses and conversion to alternative land uses. In spite of the consequences of forest degradation and biodiversity loss and reliance of communities on forests livelihoods, there is little empirical data on the role of forest resources in livelihoods of the local communities. Socioeconomic, demographic, and forest use data were obtained by interviewing 367 households. Forest product market survey was undertaken to determine prices of various forest products for valuation of forest use. Forest income was significant to households contributing 33% of total household income. Fuel wood contributed 50%, food (27%), construction material (18%), and fodder, and thatching material 5% to household forest income. Absolute forest income and relative forest income (%) were not significantly different across study locations and between ethnic groups. However, absolute forest income and relative forest income (%) were significantly different among wealth classes. Poor households were more dependent on forests resources. However, in absolute terms, the rich households derived higher forest income. These results provide valuable information on the role of forest resources to livelihoods and could be applied in developing forest conservation policies for enhanced ecosystem services and livelihoods.

No abstract

No abstract

Forests play an important role in the livelihoods of local people in most developing countries. Local communities depend on forest resources for various products such as fuel wood, construction materials, medicine, and food. The Maasai Mau forest plays an important role in supporting the livelihood of people living around the forest. Exploitation of forest resources should only be limited to active members. To reduce dependency on the forest, alternative means of livelihood should be provided to reduce dependency on the forest.

The ecosystem services from Kenya's forest ecosystems have remained largely unmeasured and undervalued. Consequently, the benefits they provide are ignored in most forest management and conservation decisions. This has led to degradation and conversion to alternative uses. To provide a sound basis for decision making in forest management, it is important to estimate economic values provided by East Mau. This study relied on data collected from households using structured interviews and secondary data from published and unpublished sources. The total indirect use values (soil functions, hydrological functions, climate regulation values) from East Mau forest ecosystem was about US$219 million (KES 20billion). The economic values of nutrient cycling, erosion control, water flow and quality regulation were US$13.30, US$ 4.50 ha-1yr-1, US$ 1421.03 ha-1yr-1 and US $12.83 HH-1yr-1 respectively. The annual value for carbon sequestration and oxygen generation was US$3308.05 ha-1yr-1 and 1365.13 ha-1yr-1 respectively. These results provide valuable information on the magnitude of the selected ecosystem services that could be relevant in decision-making concerning conservation and management of East Mau forest ecosystem for enhanced ecosystem services and livelihoods. Contribution/Originality: This study is one of very few studies which have quantified indirect use values of forest ecosystem in Kenya. The study has provided valuable information on the magnitude of the selected ecosystem services relevant to sustainable conservation and management of forest ecosystems for enhanced ecosystem services and livelihoods 1. INTRODUCTION Forests are critical in provisioning of various commodities and services such as water, food, medicine, fuel wood, fodder and timber. Forests also provide a wide range of environmental services that support biodiversity conservation, watershed protection, protection of soil and mitigate global climate change [1, 2]. However, there is unprecedented increase in deforestation globally. It is estimated that 1 billion to over 6 billion ha of the global landscapes are degraded [3] resulting in diminished land productivity and impacting negatively on the flow of Ecosystem Services. For example, it is estimated that 60% of the ecosystems services are being degraded through unsustainable land use conversions leading to massive emission of Green House Gases [2]. It is estimated that one billion people live in degraded areas, which represent 15 percent of the Earth's population, and one third of the