Drivers of Agroforestry Tree Adaptation among Households Bordering Mukura Forest, Rutsiro District, Rwanda
Phenias Niyonzima *
Department of Environmental Studies, Faculty of Environmental Studies, University of Lay Adventists of Kigali (UNILAK), P.O. Box 6392, Kigali, Rwanda.
Janvier Niyomugabo
Department of Environmental Studies, Faculty of Environmental Studies, University of Lay Adventists of Kigali (UNILAK), P.O. Box 6392, Kigali, Rwanda.
Denys Uwimpuhwe
Department of Environmental Studies, Faculty of Environmental Studies, University of Lay Adventists of Kigali (UNILAK), P.O. Box 6392, Kigali, Rwanda.
*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Abstract
Aims: To examine how households living near Mukura Forest in Rutsiro District, Rwanda, have taken up agroforestry trees on their farms, and specifically to establish the prevailing level of uptake, the leading factors behind it, and the strength of association between those factors and uptake.
Study Design: A mixed-methods study combining descriptive and explanatory components, drawing on both quantitative and qualitative evidence.
Place and Duration of Study: Households situated within a 2.5 km radius of Mukura Forest, across Mukura, Rusebeya, and Mushubati sectors of Rutsiro District, Western Province, Rwanda; the agroforestry practices reviewed covered the period 2019–2024.
Methodology: A total of 372 household heads were sampled from a population of 5,185 households using Yamane's (1967) formula, combined with proportionate stratified sampling across sectors and cells and simple random selection of respondents within each cell. Structured questionnaires containing five-point Likert items, key informant interviews, on-farm observations, and secondary documentation provided the data. Quantitative data were analysed in SPSS version 28 using descriptive statistics, Pearson correlation, and multiple linear regression, while interview data were examined thematically.
Results: Households reported a relatively high overall level of agroforestry uptake (composite mean = 3.99, SD = 0.91). Among the factors examined, incentives carried the greatest weight (mean = 4.19), followed by community participation (mean = 4.05) and training (mean = 3.95), each showing a clear positive association with uptake. A Pearson correlation confirmed a strong, statistically significant relationship between these combined factors and the level of uptake (r = 0.876, P = .000), and regression analysis showed that they jointly accounted for 76.7% of the variance observed (R² = 0.767, F(1, 370) = 1217.121, P = .000). Households most often pointed to an insufficient supply of seedlings, small plot sizes, limited extension coverage, and concerns about competition between trees and crops as the chief obstacles to wider uptake.
Conclusion: Households around Mukura Forest are broadly aware of the benefits of agroforestry, yet incentives, training, and community involvement remain the strongest factors for translating that awareness into planting, while limited land and input supply continue to limit the extent of uptake. Reinforcing seedling delivery systems, farmer training, and community-anchored programmes would help translate existing awareness into fuller adaptation and stronger outcomes for both livelihoods and forest conservation.
Keywords: Agroforestry uptake, incentives, training, community participation, smallholder households, Rwanda