Journal of Global Resources
Volume 6 (02)
July 2020
Page 10-17
doi.org/10.46587/JGR.2020.v06i02.002
ISSN: 2395-3160 (Print), 2455-2445 (Online)

02
TRADITIONAL MITIGATION MEASURES AND PRACTICES TO CLIMATE CHANGE IN
ROMBO DISTRICT, TANZANIA
Evarist Fundisha
Department of Geography, Mkwawa University College of Education, Iringa, Tanzania
Email: evarist_fundisha@yahoo.com
Abstract: Mitigation to climate change has been treated as an issue in developed countries
whereas adaptation is seen as a priority for the developing countries. The study assessed theeffectiveness of traditional mitigation measures and practices to climate change in Rombo
District, Tanzania. Data were collected by questionnaire, interview and focus group discussion.
Results indicate that the majority of household heads had resorted to tree planting aimed at
mitigating climate change. The study found that education, land size and funds were among thestumbling blocks toward effective traditional mitigation measures and practices to climatechange. The study recommends involvement of local people in tree planting campaigns coupledwith awareness creation on the sustainable climate change mitigation at local levels.
Key words: Traditional Mitigation Measures and Practices, Climate Change
Introduction
Mitigation to climate change has been treated as an issue in developed countries, which
account for the greatest responsibility for inducing climate change, whereas adaptation is seen
as a priority for the South, where the capacity to mitigate is low with high vulnerability levels(Ayers and Huq, 2009). High vulnerability in the South is due to high proportion of aridity,
widespread poverty, difficult socio-economic conditions, and heavy reliance of populations on
natural resources. The South is also characterised by insufficient institutional and legal
frameworks, weak infrastructural base and insufficient scientific, technical and educational
capacity (UN, 1994). Mitigation refers to limiting global climate change through the reduction of
the emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs) and/or enhancing their sinks (Füssel and Klein,2006). Traditional measures and techniques which mitigate climate change include agroforestry,
mulching, fallowing, and cultural practices.
Agroforestry is defined as any land use system that involves the deliberate retention,
introduction or a mixture of trees or other woody perennials with agricultural crops, pastures
and/or livestock to exploit the ecological and economic interactions of the different components(Albrecht and Kandji, 2003). Agroforestry involves a tree-based system such as the jungle
rubber system of Sumatra, the mixed cocoa and fruit tree plantations of Cameroon, peach palm
systems of Peru or the pine-banana-coffee of eastern Java (Verchot et al., 2007). In the West
African Sahel, agroforestry consists mainly of intercropping agricultural crops under scatteredmature tree that are selectively retained by farmers because of the variety of non-timber uses
such as food and medicine (Takimoto et al., 2010). Apart from carbon sequestration potentials,
agroforestry also provides food, firewood, and shade to crops. Other benefits include plant
nutrients, biomass for mulch and protection from wind and water erosion and boundaries
demarcation (Albrecht and Kandji, 2003). This indicates that agroforestry facilitates mitigation
and adaptation to climate change. This argument is similar to Salazar et al.’s (2011) to the effectthat agroforestry system has been a solution to farming problems experienced on degradedsoils because of their secondary environmental benefits such as promoting ecological diversity
and improving the economy of the impoverished farmers who live in the inner rain-fed zone ofcentral Chile. Kiptot et al. (2007) also attest to the fact that the deliberate planting of fast10

growing leguminous trees or shrubs in rotation with crops have great potential in improving soil
fertility in areas where nitrogen deficiency is the main fertility constraint thereby improving
farmers’ income and hence food security.
In West African Sahel, there is live fence, which involves planting of fast-growing trees inhigh density around the field plots, and protecting the fields from roaming animal because
animal production is an integral part of agriculture and livelihood (Takimoto et al., 2008). The
same authors, however, found that farmers in the West African Sahel were unlikely to increase
the tree density to sequester more carbon because trees are raised through naturalregeneration and too many trees may negatively impact crop production from farmlands.
Similarly, farmers in Vihiga, Kenya, were unwilling to forego growing of seasonal crops to give
way to trees whose benefits are not immediate (Kiptot et al., 2007). It has been noted by
Verchot et al. (2007) that the prosperity of agroforestry is determined by the certainty of rainfall
in a particular area. Shemsanga et al. (2010) insist that rainfall is scarce and many trees growwith difficulty and take longer to grow. Agroforestry practices such as shifting cultivation andpasture maintenance by burning may favour the emission of GHGs (Albrecht and Kandji, 2003),
hence contributing even further to climate change.
Other traditional measures and practices which mitigate climate change are cultural
practices. A study conducted by Anthony (2006) in Mara Region, Tanzania, revealed that
cultural practices such as ritual activities mitigate climate change as only ethnic religious
leaders have access to and utilise forest and forest products where ritual activities are carriedout. These practices encourage conservation of forests, which promote carbon sequestration
and, hence, mitigating climate change. Speraza et al. (2010) found that sacred forests
established under traditional urge the modern state to support such tradition by declaring sacred
forests protected areas. A study conducted in India by Srinivasan (2004) established that
community regulations such as banning the cutting of certain types of trees or religious
decrees that declare certain trees to be sacred play a big role in maintaining ecosystem healthand facilitates mitigation to climate change.
Climate of Rombo District has been changing over time. Meena and O‘Keefe (2007) reportan average decrease of about 300mm of rainfall from 1974 to 2004. The same authors reported
a rise of one degree centigrade in the annual mean temperature over the same period. Suchchanges had resulted into recurrent droughts in the district leading into the differentiated foodinsecurity, water shortages and pasture deterioration (Fundisha, 2019, Fundisha, 2017 andMongula, 2000) Despite the impacts exerted by these changes to the ecosystem, studies on
how local people mitigate climate change in the study area are not readily available. The
present study, therefore, assessed the efficacy of traditional mitigation measures and practices
to climate change in Rombo District, Tanzania as a basis for achieving sustainable
development.
Research Methodology
This study was carried out in Rombo District, Tanzania. The district experiences variation in
rainfall and temperature, leading to two main agroecological zones (AEZs) with a transition zone
in between. The transition zone possesses characteristics of the main AEZs. The AEZs basedon the criteria aforementioned are the highland AEZ (1900 - 1500m), the intermediate AEZ(1500 - 1200m) and the lowland AEZ (1200 - 500m) (Figure 1). Primary data were collectedusing the questionnaire, interviews, observations and focus group discussions. The use ofdifferent tools to collect data is based on the assumption that the data to be collected are both
qualitative and quantitative in nature. On the other hand, secondary data and information11

relevant to the study topic were reviewed from the peer reviewed and accredited international
and local journals, technical reports and books.
Qualitative data from the questionnaire, interviews, observations and focus group
discussions were organised into themes and presented mainly in narrative form. Quantitative
data, on the other hand, were organised into independent and dependent variables andanalysed with the help of the Statistical Package for Social Sciences Version 16 to generatefrequencies and percentages. Frequencies and percentages were further cross-examined withthe selected characteristics of heads of household (i.e. to include agro ecological location, age,sex, level of education and marital status) to determine their relationship. These data were
presented in the frequency tables to simplify interpretations.
Figure 01: Study Areas

Results
As climate change is mainly induced by deforestation, their mitigation should concentrate onreforestation and afforestation programmes. The responses on traditional mitigation measures
to climate change provided during the heads of household interview are listed in Table 1. The
table shows that mitigation measures to climate change vary between AEZ and with socioeconomic characteristics of the heads of household. It was noted during the FGDs and directquestionnaire survey administration that planting indigenous trees is important in mitigatingclimate change than exotic ones. In-depth interview with the VEO at Msangai Village revealed
that individuals of the study area have a tradition of planting trees for different purposes. Trees
are planted for fodder, providing shade for coffee, fruits, timber, farm demarcation, and currently
for cash. The tradition of planting trees was confirmed during interviews with the heads ofhousehold that “I am now aware trees mitigate climate change. I acquired this knowledge fromour priest; also from village meetings and radios. Initially, I planted trees for fodder, building
materials, firewood and farm demarcation but now are for climate change mitigation”
12Characteristics
of Heads ofHousehold

Table 01: Mitigation Measures to Climate Change
Responses on Measures (%)
Planted trees
Avoid
Praying
No measuresindiscriminate
devisedtree felling

Location (AEZ)
HighlandIntermediate
Lowland
Education level
Primary
SecondaryPost-Secondary
No formal
Age Group
Youths (15-34)
Adults (35-64)
Elders (65+)
Sex
Male
FemaleMarital Status
MarriedSingles
Total (N=611)

66.7
58.7
53.4

18.3
32.3
27.6

5.6
6.0
3.4

9.5
3.0
15.5

61.4
68.8
86.7
39.6

27.0
22.9
13.3
24.5

4.7
8.3
0.0
11.3

6.9
0.0
0.0
24.5

81.9
62.7
48.3

10.3
25.5
27.0

2.6
5.6
7.9

5.0
6.2
16.9

63.0
48.5

26.5
24.8

4.4
10.9

6.2
15.8

61.3
65.9
63.58

26.9
21.4
21.9

5.1
5.4
5.9

6.6
7.1
8.7

Source: Field Data

The testimony above revealed that, tree planting in the study area owed its origin fromthe long standing tradition associated with the importance of trees in the community. The
tradition of planting trees was confirmed during field observation where almost every household
practised agroforestry. Common trees found in the study area were Gravellia robusta, Sedrela
odorata, Glirricidia sp. and Casuarina sp. (for timber); Milicia exselsa and Accacia sp. (for soil
fertility); Podocarpas sp. and Agrocarpas sp. (for medicine); Laucaena sp. (for fodder); andSenna siamea (for firewood). The efficacy of tree planting was mostly rated by the heads ofhousehold to be very effective compared to other measures to climate change (Table 2). The
FGDs conducted in the intermediate and lowland AEZs and in-depth interviews held with VEOs
at Kisale and Kiraeni villages, however, revealed that it was difficult to raise tree seedlings
without watering due to erratic rainfall. A similar case was reported during an in-depth interview
with the AEO in Kisale-Msaranga Ward. This was also affirmed during field observation where
dried trees were seen in the lowland AEZ. During an interview with a head of household at Holili
Vijijini, it emerged that some households hesitated to plant trees supplied to them because they
were neither preferred by livestock for fodder nor suitable for firewood. Also, the trees were notsuitable for agroforestry because they limit the growth of crops underneath. Furthermore, it wasnoted during an interview with a head of household at Msangai Village that tree planting was
also affected by theft and lack of money to buy suitable seedlings.
Furthermore, during interviews with government officials in the study area it wasestablished that in 2000, the district enacted a bylaw which prohibits the felling of indigenous
trees without securing permit. But following a meeting held in the Kilimanjaro Regional
Commissioners’ Office on 29th February, 2012 between researchers from the University of Dares Salaam and the leaders of the region, consensus was reached that all the trees must be
protected by the bylaw. The research team held that the wanton felling of trees in Kilimanjaro
Region contributed to increased temperature and the attendant consequences. The
13

consequences of increased temperature led to unprecedented melting of ice at the top of Mt.
Kilimanjaro, unpredictable rainfall regime and increased wind strength.
Table 2: Effectiveness of Mitigation Measures to Climate Change
Characteristics
Responses on Efficacy (%)
of Heads ofPlanted trees
Avoid indiscriminate
Praying
Householdtree felling
VE
E
NE
VE
E
NE
VE
E
NE
Location (AEZ)
Highland31.4 68.6 0.0
28.3
71.7
0.0
23.8 76.2
0.0Intermediate46.2 53.8 0.0
37.5
61.7
0.8
25
75
0.0
Lowland62.3 37.7 0.0
30.8
64.1
5.1
0.0
100
0.0
Age Group
Youths (15-34)
77.5 22.5 0.0
13.7
31.8
4.6
8.4
41.7
0.0
Adults (35-64)
38.1 61.7 0.0
0.0
33.0
65.2
1.8
23.3
0.0
Elders (65+)
53.2 46.8 0.0
37.9
62.1
0.0
25
75
0.0
Sex
Male
42.2 57.8 0.0
32.4
66.5
1.1
21.9 78.1
0.0
Female44.8 55.2 0.0
41.2
55.9
2.9
23.1 76.9
0.0
Education
Primary
40.5 59.5 0.0
32.8
65.6
1.6
11.8 88.2
0.0
Secondary
51.3 48.7 0.0
47.7
52.9
0.0
50
50
0.0
Post-Secondary
53.3 46.7 0.0
50
50
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
No Formal
54.5 45.5 0.0
26.7
73.3
0.0
57.1 42.9
0.0
Marital Status
Married41.6 58.4
00
33
65.5
1.5
16.2 83.8
0.0Singles
53.8 46.2 0.0
35.5
44.5
0.0
22.0 38.0
0.0
TOTAL (N=611)
49.3 50.7 0.0
32.0
57.0
5.9
20.4 60.7
0.0
Source: Field Data

VE = very effective; E = effective; NE = not effective

The findings from government officials in the study area further show that a permit to fella tree is applied to the District Executive Director (DED) through the VEO of the respective
village. The DED appoints a team to visit the area to determine whether the incumbent
application satisfies the stipulated rules. It includes concrete reasons for felling a tree such as
for building a house or avoiding danger associated with the tree. The danger could be to humanbeings and fixed assets such as houses due to the location and age of a tree. A permit to fell atree is granted once the DED is satisfied with the recommendations from the team. It was also
revealed during in-depth interview with the VEO from Kisale Village that the village has
established completion among the villagers on environmental conservation by focussing on
mainly tree planting. The prizes were at household level where those emerged outstanding on
the matter were given some farm implements.
Table 2 shows that mitigating climate change by avoiding indiscriminate tree felling was
the only aspect rated as ineffective. Interviews with heads of household at Keryo Village
indicate that tree felling is inevitable due to the growing market for timber and demand for
firewood. The ineffectiveness of this measure was also raised during interviews with heads ofhousehold at Mamsera Kati Village. In this regard, one head said: “Some government officials
are involved in lumbering and some own chain-saw machines....do you think these [government
officials] will stand firmly to make sure indiscriminate tree halt?” Also, the FGDs highlight thedifficulty of avoiding tree felling because the majority of households sell trees to raise money for
food, school fees and medical services. Furthermore, Table 1 shows that praying as a mitigation
measure to climate change was mostly mentioned by the heads of household without formal
education and females. Praying was mostly rated as an effective measure for mitigating climate
14

variability than other measures (Table 2). Nonetheless, Table 1 also shows that among theheads of household who mentioned having devised no measures to mitigate climate change.
The majority of these respondents were those without any formal education. There was no headof household with secondary and post-secondary education who had not devised measures tomitigate climate change. These results show that mitigating climate change is influenced bycharacteristics of heads of household.
Discussion
Studies by Mertz et al. (2009) and Kemausuor et al. (2011) reveal that community awareness ofthe causes of climate change constitutes a stepping stone in the formulation andimplementation of mitigation measures. Any mitigation of climate change including carbon
sequestration in developing countries should target the forests and land use sector because
they are major contributors to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (Shemsanga et al., 2010). The
tree planting mentioned in this study is consistent with the Tanzania government attempt toincrease GHGs sequestration (URT, 2007). It is important, however, to note that tree planting inthe study area owed its origin to tradition rather than to its current function of mitigating climatechange. Trees in the study area are planted to provide fodder for zero-grazing livestock, land
demarcation, coffee shading, and fruit production. Others are slope stabilisation, firewood,building materials, and cash value.
Zero-grazing livestock requires a constant supply of fodder whereby trees and grass areplanted to cater for these requirements. Because land in the study area is very expensive,households have decided to plant trees and herbs at boundaries to avoid encroachment by theirneighbours, which could lead into conflict. Also, some trees were planted to provide shade tocoffee plants and at the same time protect property from wind destruction. However, due to thedeclining coffee production caused by poor market and climate change (Meena and O’Keefe,2007), planting trees for shade might also experience a similar trend. The slopping land in the
study area may, as well, necessitate measures to control soil erosion, which include tree
planting. Households in the study area also plant trees, hoping to get fruits and timber forhousehold use or for cash. As it was pointed out during in-depth interview with the AEO in
Kisale-Msaranga ward, timber is an important source of income for the majority of the people inthe study area. Environmental and economic importance of agroforestry has also been
mentioned by Albrecht and Kandji (2003), Takimoto et al. (2010) and Salazar et al. (2011).
Kangalawe et al. (2011) also found that local people in the Great Ruaha Catchment area in
Tanzania planted trees to conserve water without knowing they were mitigating climate change.
Yanda and Mubaya (2013) underscore a difficulty inherent in assessing how much forest
degradation can be avoided because of the complexities and controversies related to the socioeconomic aspect of a particular region. As for this study, environmental conservation by
avoiding indiscriminate tree felling might prove difficult in maintaining because all the
respondents mentioned firewood as the main source of energy. Cooking by placing a cooking
pot on three stones and burning firewood underneath wastes much of the heat generated andproduces a lot of smoke that was unpalatable to good health. The large amount of heat lost in
cooking implies more cutting down of trees and, consequently, environmental degradation. This
may also lead to more time spent on collecting firewood or more money to buy the same.
Smoke produced during cooking contributes to increased GHGs emission thereby amplifying
climate and weather changes. Similar findings have been reported by Enete and Amusa (2010),
who show that the use of firewood increases the concentrations of greenhouse gases in theatmosphere trapping heat and, hence, inducing climate change.

15

The prizes established at Kisale Village for individuals with outstanding effort inenvironmental conservation, particularly tree planting echoes the one under REDD plus
whereby individuals or groups who plant many trees get rewards (REDD net, 2009). Financing
environmental conservation is also stipulated in the Kyoto Protocol whereby forests establishedafter 1990 purposely for climate change mitigation are eligible for carbon offsets (Yanda andMubaya, 2013). This strategy should not be ignored although it is undermined by land
fragmentation whereby most people hesitated to plant more trees claiming to limit the smooth
growth of food crops. Similar findings have been reported by Kiptot et al. (2007) who found thattree planting in Siaya and Vihiga districts in Kenya was not successful due to small land sizes
and people who were not willing to plant trees at the expense of food crops. Takimoto et al.
(2008) also report that too many trees have a negative impact on crop production. The impactsof tree planting on crop production are more severe in dry environments because trees competewith crops for water (Albrecht and Kandji, 2003). Codjoe et al. (2012) in their studies carried out
in the Afram Plains of Ghana found that people were reluctant to plant trees because trees takea long time to grow, occupied space suitable for crop production and were not edible.
The findings from this study revealed that the future existence of trees particularly in thelowland AEZ faces a bleak future because it is impossible to raise trees without watering due torecurrent drought. The recently introduced environmental bye-law, which requires one to obtaina permit to fell a tree and the government order to plant trees, might facilitate theimplementation of the tree planting programme. However, full implementation of thesestrategies may intensify food insecurity because many trees limit the land available for crop
production.
Conclusion
The study community understand that trees are very important in mitigating climate change. It
was established that tree planting needs large tracts of land because trees compete with foodcrops thereby lowering crop yields. The future prospect of trees was found to be undetermined
due to small land sizes, unavailability of tree seedlings, the growing market for timber andincreased climate change. Afforestation and reforestation programmes should be emphasised
to facilitate sustainable mitigation to climate change. In this regard, suitable trees for planting
including those which increase soil fertility, edible and fast growing should be encouraged. Rural
electrification and capacity-building are important in enabling rural communities to use electricity
to curtail indiscriminate tree felling. Continuing education is also necessary for sustained
awareness of the consequences of human action in the course of interaction with theenvironment. Such awareness can lead to the change of attitude. Environmental bylaws shouldbe established by involving local people in inculcating a sense of participation for smooth
implementation. If possible, the traditional environmental bylaws should be revitalised. Prizes foroutstanding efforts on environmental conservation should be an integral part of motivation toincrease participation in environmental management initiatives.
References
1. Albrecht, A. and Kandji, S. T. (2003). Carbon Sequestration in Tropical Agroforestry Systems.
Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment Vol. 99 pp. 15-27.
2. Anthony, R. (2006). Traditional Environmental Knowledge Systems related to Changes andVariations of Water Resources Management in Semi-Arid, Tanzania. A Case of Mara River
Basin. A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophyof the University of Dar es Salaam.
3. Ayers, J. M. and Huq, S. (2009). The Value of Linking Mitigation and Adaptation: A Case Studyof Bangladesh. Environmental Management Vol. 43 pp. 753-764.
4. Codjoe, S. N. A., Atidoh, L. K. and Burkett, V. (2012). Gender and Occupational Perspectives on
Adaptation to Climate Extremes in the Afram Plains of Ghana. Climatic Change Vol. 110 pp.
431-454.
16

5. Enete, A. A. and Amusa, T. A. (2010). Challenges of Agricultural Adaptation to Climate Change
in Nigeria: A Synthesis from the Literature. Field Actions Science Reports Vol.
6. Fundisha, E. (2017). Livestock Management Strategies in a Changing climate in Rombo District,Tanzania. Journal of Global Resources Vol. 5 pp. 109-115
7. Fundisha, E. (2019). Assessment of Traditional Environmental Knowledge Systems Applied to
Climate Change and Variability Adaptation in Rombo District, Tanzania. Journal of Global
Resources Vol. 5(02) pp. 20-28
8. Füssel, M. H. and Klein, R. J. T. (2006). Assessing Vulnerability and Adaptation to Climate
Change: An Evolution of Conceptual Thinking. Climatic Change Vol. 75 pp. 301-329.
9. Kangalawe, R., Mwakalila, S. and Masolwa, P. (2011). Climate Change Impacts, Local
Knowledge and Coping Strategies in the Great Ruaha River Catchment Area, Tanzania. Natural
Resources Vol. 2 pp. 212-223
10. Kemausuor, F., Dwamena, E., Part-Plange, A. and Kyei-Baffour, N. (2011). Farmers’ Perceptionof Climate Change in the Ejura-Sekyedumase District of Ghana. Journal of Agricultural andBiological Science Vol. 6 (10)
11. Kiptot, E., Hebinck, P., Franzel, S. and Richards, P. (2007). Adopters, Testers or Pseudoadopters? Dynamics of the Use of Improved Tree Fallows by Farmers in Western Kenya.
Agricultural Systems Vol. 94 pp. 509-519.
12. Meena, H. E. and O‘Keefe, P. (2007). Sustainable Livelihoods in the Context of Vulnerability and
Adaptation to Climate Change Impacts in Tanzania: A Case Study of Kilimanjaro Region. The
Netherlands Climate Association Program, Netherlands.
13. Mertz, O., Mbow, C., Reenberg, A. and Diouf, A. (2009). Farmers’ Perceptions of Climate
Change and Agricultural Adaptation Strategies in Rural Sahel. Environmental Management Vol.
43 pp. 804-816.
14. Mongula, B. (2000). Food Security, Appropriate Technology and Micro-Industry: The Case ofDrought Areas of Rombo District in Tanzania. Institute of Development Studies, University of Dar
es Salaam.
15. REDD Net (2009). Visioning REDD+ in East Africa: A Focus on Benefit Sharing in Uganda andTanzania. REDD-Net East Africa Bulletin (01) 11p. December 2009.
16. Salazar, O., Casanova, M. and Kättere, T. (2011). The Impact of Agroforestry Combined With
Water Harvesting on Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Stocks in Central Chile Evaluated Using the
ICBM/N Model. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment Vol. 140 pp. 123-136.
17. Shemsanga, C., Omambia, A. N. and Gu, Y. (2010). The Cost of Climate Change in Tanzania:
Impacts and Adaptations. Journal of American Science Vol. 6 (3).
18. Speranza, C. I., Kiteme, B., Ambenje, P., Wiesmann, U. and Makali, S. (2010). Indigenous
Knowledge Related to Climate change: Insights from Droughts in Semi-arid Areas of former
Makueni District, Kenya. Climatic Change Vol. 100 pp. 295-315.
19. Srinivasan, A. (2004). Local Knowledge for Facilitating Adaptation to Climate Change in Asiaand the Pacific: Policy Implications. Working Paper Series No. 002. IGES Climate Policy Project.
20. Takimoto, A., Ramachandran, N. and Nair, V. D. (2008). Carbon Stock and Sequestration
Potential of Traditional and Improved Agroforestry Systems in the West African Sahel.
Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment Vol. 125 pp. 159-166.
21. United Nations (UN, 1994). Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee for the Elaboration of anInternational Convention to Combat Desertification in Countries Experiencing Serious Drought
and/or Desertification, Particularly in Africa. A/AC.241/27. http://www.unccd.int /Lists/Site
Document Library/ convention Text/conv-eng.pdf. Retrieved on 20th August 2014.
22. United Republic of Tanzania (URT, 2007). National Adaptation Programme of Action (NAPA) for
Tanzania. Division of Environment. http/:unfccc.int/ resource/doc/ napatza01.pdf. Retrieved on
28th May 2010.
23. Verchot, L. V., Noordwijk, M. V., Kandji, S., Tomich, T., Ong, C., Albrecht, A., Mackensen, J.,
Bantilan, C. Anupama, K. V. and Palm, C. (2007). Climate Change: Linking Adaptation and
Mitigation through Agroforestry. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies to Global Change Vol. 12
pp. 901-918.
24. Yanda, P. Z. and Mubaya, C. P. (2013). Managing a Changing Climate in Africa: Local Level
Vulnerabilities and Adaptation Experiences. Mkuki na Nyota, Dar es Salaam.

17