Variables | Attitudes towards accepting the concept and practice of PFM | ||
---|---|---|---|
Ć | t | P value | |
Intercept | 1.64 | 1.14 | ā |
Sex (femaleā=ā1 and maleā=ā2) | 0.01 | 0.06 | 0.95 |
Age | ā0.53 | ā0.53 | 0.60 |
Levels of education | 0.003 | 0.02 | 1.0 |
Family size per household | ā0.16 | ā1.06 | 0.3 |
Occupation | ā0.05 | ā0.316 | 0.76 |
Annual income (ETB) | 0.09 | 0.55 | 0.59 |
Livestock ownership (Yesā=ā2) | ā0.05 | ā0.31 | 0.76 |
Had enough grazing land (Yesā=ā2) | ā0.24 | ā2.99a | 0.003 |
Wanted to keep more livestock in the future (Yesā=ā2) | 0.08 | 0.79 | 0.43 |
Had shortage of fodder for livestock (Yesā=ā2) | 0.04 | 0.29 | 0.78 |
Length of duration of residence in the area (years) | 0.68 | 0.60 | 0.55 |
History of settlement | 0.54 | 0.79 | 0.43 |
Had the plan to stay in the area in the future | 0.10 | 1.03 | 0.31 |
Private land ownership (Yesā=ā2) | 0.12 | 0.40 | 0.69 |
Allocated land for woodlot plantation (Yesā=ā2) | ā0.003 | ā0.03 | 0.98 |
Had shortage of fuelwood (Yesā=ā2) | 0.06 | 0.49 | 0.63 |
Benefited due to PFM (Yesā=ā2) | 0.80 | 7.63a | 0.0001 |
Knowledge of the respondents on WWF (Yesā=ā2) | 0.04 | 0.38 | 0.71 |
Distance between the edge of the WWF and the residential area of the respondents | ā0.13 | ā0.70 | 0.49 |
Had a tree planting and growing tradition (Yesā=ā2) | ā0.21 | ā1.15 | 0.26 |