Abstract:
Conversion of forest to agriculture has already been taking place in southwest Ethiopia.
Many of biodiversity are conserved in agricultural landscapes. In the long-term conservation
of native species, higly depends on agricultural landscapes. Coffee agroforestry has been
promoted as a means for preserving biodiversity in the tropics. The study was conducted to
investigate species composition, diversity, regeneration, and socioeconomic benefits of
natural forest and coffee agroforestry at Belete forest. Vegetation data were collected from
natural forest and coffee agroforestry study site. A total of 68 plots (34 plots in each sites),
having an area of 20 m x 20 m for trees, 10 m x 10 m for saplings and 5 m x 5m for seedlings
were laid along transect at a distance of 100m between each transects lines and plots.
Household survey was conducted to collect socioeconomic benefits of natural forest and
coffee agroforestry. A total of 136 households (68 households for each sites) were randomly
selected for the interview to collect socioeconomic benefits. The collected data from woody
species and household survey were analyzed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences
version 20 for different statistical purpose.The results showed that a total of 55 woody
species belonging to 35 families in natural forest and 33 woody species belong to 23 families
in coffee agroforestry were identified and recorded. Although more woody species were
recorded under the natural forest, the difference was not statistical significant (p>0.05). The
species richness and Shannon diversity index of woody species between natural forest and
coffee agroforestry were not statistically also significantly (p>0.05). Regeneration status of
seedling and sapling of woody species had showed significant (P<0.05) differences between
the natural forest and coffee agroforestry. However, there was no statistically different (p >
0.05) between the natural forest and coffee agroforestry interms of tree composition. The
socioeconomic benefit result shows that diversity of forest products that can be obtained
from the two were not statistically significant difference (p>0.05). However, the forest
income in a form NTFPs and Simpsons Diversification Index of household’s were significant
differnece (p < 0.05) between natural forest and coffee agroforestry. Coffee agroforestry
contributes to conservation of woody species through retention woody species and reducing
pressure on the natural forest, which may be a reflection of conservation of biodiversity and
economic values of the forest that promote sustainable uses of the forest and its products.
Therefore, conservation of woody species and socioeconomic benefits must be linked in the
arena of conservation approaches
