Role of Forest Resources to Local Livelihoods: The Case of East Mau Forest Ecosystem, Kenya

Table 5

Absolute forest income, relative forest income (%) by study location, wealth status, and ethnicity.

Variable	Absolute forest income (KES)	Relative forest income (%)
Location
Kapsimbeiywo	47,662.10 ± 6,236.81	28.85 ± 3.70
Silibwet	63,427.11 ± 6,470.64	30.71 ± 3.34
Kapkembu	65,217.56 ± 4,801.03	32.89 ± 2.18
Nessuit	66,579.73 ± 3,762.37	36.46 ± 1.84
Mariashoni	71,641.51 ± 4,711.57	33.42 ± 2.40
Overall mean	65,836.28 ± 2,232.06	33.73 ± 1.10
	( = 1.76, )	( = 1.18, )
Wealth status
Poor	46,275.90 ± 2,822.40	41.40 ± 2.13
Moderate	67,277.30 ± 3,932.40	35.60 ± 2.03
Rich	81,463.80 ± 3,797.70	26.30 ± 1.30
	( = 23.87, )	( = 18.35, )
Ethnicity
Indigenous	63,536.12 ± 3,961.22	31.93 ± 1.75
Nonindigenous	62,658.47 ± 2,196.54	33.15 ± 1.25
	( = 0.74, )	( = 0.307, )

Note. Means (column) with a common (letters) superscript imply the mean difference is not significant different at % level.