Agroforestry systems as a profitable alternative to slashand burn practices in small-scale agricultureof the Brazilian Amazon

Stephane Tremblay • Marc Lucotte • Jean-Pierre Reveret •

Robert Davidson • Frederic Mertens • Carlos Jose Sousas Passos •

Christina A. Romana

Received: 11 April 2014 / Accepted: 9 October 2014

� Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Abstract Agroforestry systems are widely recog-

nized as an important way to address numerous

environmental challenges in tropical areas. They repre-

sent a sustainable alternative form of land-use for small-

scale agriculture, responding to the economic develop-

ment needs of communities and offering a number of

ecosystem services. This article presents an evaluation

of the short- and medium-term profitability of two

experimental agroforestry systems where fruit trees are

predominant, which were established in 2009 in the

Tapajos region of the Brazilian Amazon, state of Para.

An analysis of net present value (NPV) confirms that the

two experimental systems studied recover their total

implementation and operating costs within a 20 years

time horizon. These results underlie that prices of inputs

are stable and farmers have access to markets, credit,

and agricultural knowledge. The two experimental

systems are compared to plots under traditional slash-

and-burn cultivation, and Bragantino system. The

results support changes to public policies in order to

facilitate alternatives to slash-and-burn cultivation by

supporting access to credit, knowledge of alternative

agricultural practices, transportation systems, and

industries that transform agricultural products. The

consideration of ecosystem services should add a

supplementary argument in favour of policies that

promote agroforestry systems and thus limit the practice

of slash-and-burn subsistence agriculture.

S. Tremblay (&) � M. Lucotte

GEOTOP, Universite du Quebec A Montreal, Succ.

Centre-Ville, CP 8888, Montreal, QUEBEC H3C 3P8,

Canada

e-mail: tremblaystef83@gmail.com

M. Lucotte

e-mail: lucotte.marc_michel@uqam.ca

J.-P. Reveret

Department Strategie, Responsabilite Sociale Et

Environnementale, Universite Du Quebec A Montreal,

Succ. Centre-Ville, CP 8888, Montreal,

QUEBEC H3C 3P8, Canada

e-mail: reveret.jean-pierre@uqam.ca

R. Davidson

Biodome de Montreal, 4777 Pierre-de-Coubertin,

Montreal, QUEBEC H1V 1B3, Canada

e-mail: rdavidson@ville.montreal.qc.ca

F. Mertens

Centro de Desenvolvimento Sustentavel (CDS),

Universidade de Brasılia, Modulo C, Campus Darcy

Ribeiro, Gleba A, Asa Norte, Brasılia, DF, Brazil

e-mail: fmertens@unb.br

C. J. S. Passos

Faculty UnB at Planaltina, Universidade de Brasilia,

Brasilia, Brazil

e-mail: cjpassos@unb.br

C. A. Romana

IRD (CAR)/Laboratoire de Geographie Physique (CNRS),

92195 Meudon, France

e-mail: cromana.necker@invivo.edu

123

Agroforest Syst

DOI 10.1007/s10457-014-9753-y

Keywords Fruit-tree based agroforestry systems �Net present value � Amazon deforestation � Small-

scale farming

Introduction

Agroforestry systems are widely recognized as having

the potential to address a number of environmental

problems in the Brazilian Amazon, primarily because

they reduce soil erosion and do not require the

reoccurring use of fire over long time periods (Mercer,

2004). Traditional slash-and-burn family farming in the

Amazon region involves an estimated 600,000–

1,000,000 families (Droulers 2004; Fioravanti 2008).

This is the primary reason why family farming ranks

among the major causes of deforestation in Brazil

(Ramalho 2006). From 1996 to 2005, an average of

19,500 km2 per year of forest in the Brazilian Amazon

was cleared for crops and pasture (Nepstad et al. 2009).

It has been demonstrated that the clearing of lands

also contributes to health problems among communi-

ties in the Amazon basin. For example, the exposure to

mercury via fish consumption or the increased trans-

mission of Chagas disease by contact with infected

triatomine insects, which live in the palm trees that

thrive after burning (Roulet et al. 1998; Romana et al.

1999, 2003; Farella et al. 2006; PLUPH 2009).

Additionally, smoke from slash-and-burn techniques

can have significant negative effects on the health

of local populations (Ribeiro and Assuncao 2002;

Reinhardt et al. 2001).

Agroforestry systems have shown increasing suc-

cess in many tropical areas of the world and there have

been numerous studies of their social and economic

dimensions (ex: Current and Scherr 1995; Scherr 1995;

Franzel 1999; Grado et al. 2001; Dube et al. 2002;

McGinty et al. 2006). Many studies in the Brazilian

context and elsewhere have shown that these systems

can be economically viable (ex: Blinn et al. 2013;

Oliveira and Macedo 1996; De Sa et al. 2000; Puri and

Nair 2004; Ribeiro et al. 2004; Campello et al. 2007;

Bellow et al. 2008). Agroforestry systems have

numerous economic advantages for farmers in devel-

oping countries. Agroforestry can allow for increases

in total production, the reduction of risks associated

with changing market conditions, and the diversifica-

tion of crops, while using practices that are compatible

with local traditions (Nair 1993). These economic

gains are not only linked to the preservation of old-

growth forests; agroforestry systems also allow farm-

ers to preserve more secondary forests, which act as

social safety nets for families by providing resources

such as wood, coal and fruit (Hedden-Dunkhorst et al.

2003). Agroforestry can also help in increasing soil

quality and mitigate climate change (Rousseau et al.

2012; Nair, 2012).

Many models of agroforestry systems exist in the

Amazon. There are traditional knowledge and prac-

tices still in use today that were consolidated into the

science of agroforestry only a few decades ago

(McNeely and Schroth, 2006). In a literature review,

Miller and Nair (2006) describe indigenous agrofor-

estry systems in the Amazon. Some of them still exist

today. They are of various types, from homegardens to

orchards with mixed fruits. Some of those models

were adapted by European-descendant caboclos and

sustain families and communities.

This paper is based on an empirical study among

small-scale farmers in the region of Brazil’s Rio

Tapajos on the conditions of profitability of two

experimental agroforestry systems established within

the Poor Land Use, Poor Health project (PLUPH).

This study provides an analysis on a 20-years time

horizon, including implementation costs,, operating

costs, and revenues. These costs and revenues are

private, as each plantation is on the individual lot of a

particular household. This study analyses the eco-

nomic, political and social factors that influence the

profitability of such plantations, in the region studied.

A comparison is made with the traditional slash-and-

burn plots in the region (corn, beans, cassava and rice)

as well as a denser version developed by the Embrapa

called Bragantino system.

The main objective of this study’s economic

analysis is to determine whether small-scale agrofor-

estry systems can serve as a model for other farmers

and communities in the region. This same analysis

allows us to evaluate the inputs that are necessary for

the creation and maintenance of these plantations.

This study has an original element by virtue because it

is based on agricultural systems that were imple-

mented by households. The observation of market

conditions, working conditions, transportation limita-

tions, and the day-to-day life of farmers allows for an

analysis and resulting conclusions that are relevant to

Agroforest Syst

123

the local context and farmers’ current living

conditions.

Methodology

The location of the study sites

This study gathered data in the communities of

Agrovilla de Araipa and Sao Tome. Both communities

are located in the municipality of Aveiro, in the mid-

region of the Rio Tapajos in the state of Para, Brazil.

These communities are accessible by water to the main

urban centres of the region, Itaituba and Santarem

(approximately 50 and 260 km away, respectively).

The choice of the Rio Tapajos region as a study area

is relevant due to the environmental pressures appar-

ent throughout the region and the strong evidence of

public health problems linked to deforestation. The

Tapajos river basin has been an important develop-

mental frontier since the beginning of the construction

of the Trans-Amazonian highway in the 1970s

(Fearnside 2005). To date, Para is one of three

Amazon states accounting for 85 % of the total

deforestation of the Brazilian Amazon (Margulis

2004). Between 1980 and 2010 alone, the population

of the municipality of Aveiro, within which the study

sites are located, doubled from 7,700 to 15,800 (IBGE,

2010). The large majority of this population relies on

subsistence agriculture (Farella 2005).

For more than 15 years, the Tapajos region has

been the host of collaborative research-to-action

projects involving researchers and students from

Canadian and Brazilian universities. These projects

have allowed researchers to get well acquainted with

communities in the region. The participation of these

communities in various research projects allows for

this confidence to be maintained and has made a major

contribution to the validity of this and other projects.

Description of the agroforestry systems studied

In both of the agroforestry systems, fruit trees are

occupying a large portion of the physical space.

Table 1 shows the design of the MO and HO systems.

The medium-size orchard (MO) includes eight species

where the tallest trees grow to heights of four to five

meters. The high-size orchard (HO) includes nine

species where the tallest trees grow to heights of

10–15 m. One major benefit of systems based on fruit

trees is that they are easily adaptable to a range of

physical and social conditions around the world

(Scherr 1992; Withrow-Robinson et al. 1999). The

criteria for species selection were the following: (1) the

existence of a market for the product in the area; (2)

interest by the two communities; (3) good rates of

growth and low susceptibility to diseases; (4) good

availability of seeds or seedlings, and (5) short cycles

of production among varieties known to the commu-

nities. While the choice of systems and species was

market-oriented, there was also a place for species

destined for domestic consumption. These systems

were categorized as garden like orchards (GLOs) in the

definitions of Withrow-Robinson et al. (1999). How-

ever, unlike many GLOs, the species which produce on

short cycles are bromeliaceae (pineapple), and not

herbaceous.

Both agroforestry systems were compared to sub-

sistence crop cultivation: (1) the traditional slash-and-

burn technique (SB) established on a given lot for only

one year, (2) the alternative short-cycle crop system

called Bragantino system (BS), as in the eponym

region of the state of Para, Brazil. The slash-and-burn

is the most used technique by small-scale farmers in

the region. Farmers usually slash an area of one

hectare of primary or secondary forest, and then burn

the biomass in order to clean and to fertilize the area.

Afterwards, they plant whether corn, rice, cassava or

beans and harvest the same year.

The Bragantino system is an alternative system to

slash-and-burn traditional practices developed by

Carvo et al. (2005) from the Empresa Brasileira de

Pesquisa Agropecuaria (EMBRAPA). This system

was designed to facilitate soil recovery after degrada-

tion. It offers a continuous production by an associ-

ation of annual crops and the use of fertilizers. Those

crops are cassava, beans, rice and corn. The PLUPH

project used this design, but excluded the rice. The

spacing between plants is lower than the spacing

normally used by local farmers.

In each of the two communities studied, three

households were chosen to receive MO, HO or BS

systems. Households were selected according to

criteria related to their relative importance in social

and community networks. There were two criteria:

leadership recognized by the communities and will-

ingness to allow a part of their land to be used for the

project (Valadao 2009; Guentert 2010). The systems

Agroforest Syst

123

were set-up in 2009 on areas of one hectare each, using

lands that had been fallow for an average of four years.

Bush and other plants were cut, dried, and then burned

in piles on-site.

The six heads of household responsible for manag-

ing the experimental systems were interviewed con-

cerning their perspectives about sustainable forms of

agricultural production, local market conditions,

availability of labour, equipment needed for produc-

tion, and transport costs. Additional economic data not

known by farmers was sourced from the EMBRAPA

and from academic literature. These same six farmers

and eight other farmers from the same communities

were asked about factors that limit agricultural and

community development, through semi-structured

interviews.

Farmers chosen for the study actively participated

to planting and maintenance of fruit trees on their own

land. Researchers were involved at each step in order

to ensure the design was respected, but also to provide

additional workforce if necessary. Only basic tools

were used to prepare the plot and plant (hatchet,

machete, chainsaw etc.…). All implementation costs

were covered by the PLUPH project.

Data collection and analysis

Data concerning tree growth and fruit production were

collected five times for this study: Jan–Feb 2009,

April–may 2009, Jan–Feb 2010, 2011 and 2012.

Interviews with farmers were conducted principally

in Jan-Feb 2009. Because some of the fruit trees were

still at an early stage in their growth at the time of

publication, estimations of future production for those

species were made on the basis of data from other

studies. Estimations of fruit production and operating

costs only begin at year 4, based on academic and

technical literature. Production and costs from years

zero to three were observed on field. Market prices for

agricultural products in the region were taken from

EMBRAPA or from the price monitoring of the

Centrais de Abastecimento do Estado do Para

Table 1 Experimental plantation design

Type Spacing Species # of seedling per hectare

Medium-size orchard

Long Cycle 10 m 9 10 m Pink mango (Mangifera indica) 55

Graviola (Annona muricata) 55

5 m 9 5 m Araca-boi (Eugenia stipitata) 100

Beira-rio orange (Citrus sp.) 100

Acerola (Malpighia glabra) 200

2.5 m 9 2.5 m Acai (Euterpe oleracea) 585

Plantain banana (Musa sp.) 586

Short cycle – Pineapple (Ananas comosus) 100

Organic fertilization – Inga-de-metro (Ingas edulis) 1,500

High-size orchard

Long cycle 10 m 9 10 m Brazil nut (Bertholettia excelsa) 50

Andiroba (Carapa guianensis) 30

Pink mango (Mangifera indica) 30

5 m 9 5 m Araca-boi (Eugenia stipitata) 100

Beira-rio orange (Citrus sp.) 100

Acerola (Malpighia glabra) 200

2.5 m 9 2.5 m Acai (Euterpe oleracea) 585

Plantain banana (Musa sp.) 586

Short cycle – Pineapple (Ananas comosus) 100

Organic fertilization – Inga-de-metro (Ingas edulis) 1,500

Agroforest Syst

123

(CEASA-PA 2009). Median market prices were used

in order to account for seasonal variations of species

that produce at more than one time of the year. The

data gathered serves to estimate the total monetary

costs and revenues of the two agroforestry systems and

for the Bragantino system, which can then be used to

calculate the opportunity costs of farming using either

of these.

Labour needed for implementation was observed

and labour needed for maintenance was estimated.

Working time was evaluated using the common wage

for agricultural workers at that time i.e. 20R$ (8.77

USD) per day. We consider no opportunity cost for

labour and land space is not a limiting factor. NPVs for

all types of agricultural practices were calculated on a

20 years basis.

This collaborative research was designed with the

participating communities and with the individuals

selected to receive plantations. This is a case study

where participants were consulted at all stages of the

planning and creation of the plantations. The eco-

nomic analysis presented in this article was done as an

on-site evaluation of two alternatives to slash-and-

burn practices.

Results

Total implementation costs of material and labour

made in year zero are presented in Table 2. Costs

totalled USD 4,625 for the HO, USD 4,571 for the

MO and USD 1,293 for the BS. For both agrofor-

estry systems (HO and MO), material costs represent

approximately 83 % of initial implementation costs

and seedlings alone represent 65 % of these total

initial costs. If we add the transport of these same

seedlings, along with fertilizers, this later percentage

rises to 75 %. Those seedlings came from a small

greenhouse business about 200 km away from the

study site. For the Bragantino system, material costs

were significantly lower, representing 60 % of the

total implementation costs. For HO and MO, costs of

labour (including family labour) make up only 17 %

of the total initial costs, and half of this labour is for

planting. This same proportion is of 40 % for the

BS.

The operating costs of the MO and HO systems,

estimated over a 20 years horizon, and operating costs

of the BS, estimated over a 5 years horizon, are

presented in Table 3. These costs are divided into two

broad categories: labour and transport. Transportation

costs make up the majority of operating costs, as of

year three and represent 70–80 % of operating costs

for years three to 20 (they represent 45 % of these

costs in year two and 26 % in year one). Transporta-

tion costs were estimated for households situated in

riverside communities that have year-round access to

water, including access to a commercial network for

the transportation by boat of materials from a local

market (the small commercial city of Itaituba is

located 50 km away). These costs can therefore be

considered as the minimum possible cost for this

region.

Transportation costs were calculated using the

production estimate for each fruits or crop and then

multiplied by the cost of transporting a unit (bag,

bushel or bunch).

The physical maintenance of HO and MO systems

represents the majority of labour costs for the first

three years. As of year four, labour is needed mostly

for the harvest and carriage of fruits destined to the

market. Indeed as the system matures, less labour is

needed for maintenance, but more labour is needed for

collection and carriage.

For the Bragantino system, labour and transporta-

tion costs are pretty stable over time. The annual crop

rotation process explains this. BS costs are generally

lower than for HO and MO systems. This is explained

by the fact that farmers are accustomed to maintain,

harvest and transport those crops, as they traditionally

plant them. They have developed techniques to harvest

and transport them rapidly.

Labour costs were calculated using an estimation of

the time (in days) needed for one person to realize each

activity. It was multiplied by the common daily wage

for agricultural workers in the area.

We calculated that acerola trees (Malpighia glabra),

acai palm trees (Euterpe oleracea) and Beira-rio orange

trees (Citrus sp.) are the species that generate the most

revenues, whether as part of the HO or the MO. This is

explained by their high productivity and by the price of

these fruits in regional markets. The main factor that

causes a difference in the revenues of the two systems is

the presence of andiroba trees (Carapa guianensis) and

Brazil nut trees (Bertholletia excelsa) in the HO, which

raises revenues. But these species are not sufficiently

matures, even after 20 years, to create a significant

Agroforest Syst

123

difference between these two systems. The presence of

banana trees allows for the production of revenues as of

year one, reaching a plateau rapidly. Pineapples

(Annanas comosus) produce only a negligible amount

of revenue and will likely not be sold at all.

The total costs and revenues of these systems

are aggregated in Fig. 1 with a 20 % real discount

rate. Table 4 shows NPV for all types of agricul-

tural systems, including the ones under slash-and-

burn practices. At every discount rate, the Bragan-

tino system is the most interesting for the farmer.

Income that comes from Cassava (transformed into

flour) plays a big role in the high NPV of the

Bragantino system, as it contains a high-density of

Cassava. Farmers know how to harvest it efficiently

and market is well developed for this product in

the region. Except for the corn, traditional plots are

interesting for the farmers as well, even if their

NPV are lower. Cassava is especially interesting.

HO and MO also show positive values for all

discount rates, but are slightly more interesting

with a lower discount rate, provided that imple-

mentation costs are high.

Discussion

This study shows that it is profitable for households

and communities in the region to adopt agroforestry

systems as well as the Bragantino system. While our

economic analysis shows a positive NPV for certain

crops that are grown using slash-and-burn techniques

(beans, cassava and rice), the NPVs calculated for the

two agroforestry systems suggest a higher added

value, this indistinctly for the HO or the MO. This

indicates that it would be in the interest of households

and communities in the region to convert a part of their

lands currently under traditional cultivation towards

agroforestry systems.

In tropical regions, intensive forms of agriculture

are generally much more economically advantageous

than less intensive forms, because of higher produc-

tivity and profitability. In addition, there tends to be a

positive relationship between the diversification of

crops and the profitability of agricultural systems

(Toniolo and Uhl 1995). Small-scale farmers are

particularly likely to adopt intensive models of

agriculture when these are profitable and protect the

Table 2 Implementation costs in year zero for one hectare of High-size orchard (HO), Medium-size orchard (MO) and Bragantino

system (BS) (USD)

HO MO BS

Amount % total Amount % total Amount % total

Material

Seedlings 3,012.15 65.1 2,958.52 64.7 406.7 31.5

Transportation of seedlings and fertilizers 437.78 9.5 437.78 9.6 87.56 6.8

Fertilizers

Poultry liter 115.57 2.5 115.57 2.5 62.11 4.8

Lime 83.18 1.8 83.18 1.8 22.7 1.8

Hardware

Chainsaw 175.11 3.8 175.11 3.8 175.11 13.5

Traditional tools 21.89 0.5 21.89 0.5 21.89 1.7

Total cost of materials 3,845.68 83.2 3,792.05 83 776.07 60

Labor

Plot preparation 131.33 2.8 131.33 2.9 131.33 10.2

Plot delimitation 35.02 0.8 35.02 0.8 35.02 2.7

Planting 394 8.5 394 8.6 218.89 16.9

Fertilizing 175.11 3.8 175.11 3.8 87.56 6.8

Plot cleaning 43.78 0.9 43.78 1 43.78 3.4

Total cost of labor 779.24 16.8 779.24 17 516.58 40

Total 4,624.92 100 4,571.29 100 1,292.65 100

Agroforest Syst

123

Table 3 Estimated

operating costs for one

hectare of HO, MO and BS

(USD)

Year 1 3 5 10 15 20

Labor (USD)

Maintenance

HO 315.21 367.75 315.21 315.21 315.21 315.21

MO 315.21 367.75 315.21 315.21 315.21 315.21

BS 280.18 262.66 218.89 – – –

Harvesting

HO 61.29 192.63 280.19 367.75 472.82 490.34

MO 61.29 192.63 288.95 332.73 367.75 367.75

BS 87.56 157.60 157.60 – – –

Handling

HO 26.27 96.32 140.10 183.88 236.41 240.79

MO 26.27 96.32 140.10 166.36 183.88 183.88

BS 26.27 26.27 26.27 – – –

Total for labor (USD)

HO 402.78 656.70 735.50 866.84 1,024.45 1,046.34

MO 402.78 656.70 744.26 814.31 866.84 866.84

BS 394.00 446.54 402.75 – – –

Transportation

HO 141.41 1,491.91 2,274.48 2,786.60 3,834.58 4,054.03

MO 141.41 1,491.91 2,340.15 2,838.59 3,913.93 4,106.02

BS 178.61 178.61 178.61 – – –

Grand Total

HO 544.19 2,148.61 3,009.98 3,653.44 4,859.03 5,100.37

MO 544.19 2,148.61 3,084.41 3,652.89 4,780.78 4,972.86

BS 572.62 625.15 581.37 – – –

-6000

-4000

-2000

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21NPV

(USD

)

Years

HO

MO

Fig. 1 Net Present Value with a 20 % real discount rate for one hectare of HO and MO (USD)

Agroforest Syst

123

household from risks and economic uncertainty

(Pimentel and Wightman 1999).

Our data on traditional agriculture aligns with the

production decisions of the farmers interviewed.

Indeed they allocate little or no space to the cultivation

of corn; the large majority of those who do grow this

crop do so for personal consumption. Conversely,

interviews revealed that almost all those interviewed

cultivate cassava on large proportions of their lands. It

is sold in the form of flour on local markets and makes

up most of the cash income of farmers in the region.

Implementation costs as a restrictive factor

Despite the advantages of agroforestry systems, the

costs of initial implementation are a major obstacle to

the development of agroforestry practices. This study

shows that initial costs are the main factor that prevents

households from adopting alternative perennial agri-

cultural practices. In general, local small-scale farmers

do not save enough money or assets in the short-or

medium-term to afford these initial costs of imple-

mentation representing a little more than 520 days of

work at the standard daily wages in the region for HO

and MO.

This is why the Bragantino system could appear as a

more realistic possibility for farmers that don’t have

access to external help to cover the initial costs of

agroforestry. Seeds of corn, beans and rice and cassava

stakes, are easily available in the region, limiting the

initial costs for Bragantino systems.

While the social conditions of farmers are generally

fairly similar, there are nonetheless disparities

between the revenues and economic wellbeing of

households in this pioneer region. Many factors could

explain this situation: the area of lands cultivated by

each household; the proximity of markets; the length

of residence in the area; the quality of soils; the use of

technical aid; the practice of off-farm work, and; the

farmers’ initial capital (Marra et al. 2003; Murphy

et al. 1997). For Scatena et al. (1996), it is not possible

to distinguish which factors influence agricultural

production and the resulting revenues; however,

factors that can play important roles in final added

value include soil fertility, availability of lands,

availability of labour, family structure, and other local

economic conditions.

Looking more specifically at agroforestry systems

based on fruit trees, Bellow et al. (2008) argue that

factors which prevent the adoption of these systems

include the incapacity of households to produce

enough staple crops for annual needs, the poor quality

of fruits produced, and the lack of infrastructure

needed for marketing. Conversely, factors promoting

the use of this type of system include the complemen-

tary cycle of production of fruits and staple crops, the

domestic consumption of fruits, and the potential to

generate revenues on limited parcels of land. All these

factors could play important roles in the adoption of

agroforestry practices by households, particularly

because most of these factors directly influence the

possibility of accumulating capital.

Structural constraints

Aside monetary investment, there are other barriers to

the adoption of more intensive agricultural practices or

to the establishment of agroforestry systems in the

Brazilian Amazon. These constraints can appear at the

individual, household or structural levels.

The existence of these constraints was demon-

strated on the basis of interviews with the same

heads of households realized by Tremblay (2010).

Access to credit, markets, and knowledge are the

three main limiting factors. The absence of any of

these three elements can prevent the establishment

of agroforestry or other alternative systems of

cultivation among the region’s farmers (Bahamon-

des 2003). Among these problems, access to agri-

cultural knowledge seems to be a particularly

important factor. The accessibility of this knowledge

is linked to both individual and community capac-

ities, and has a definite impact on the region’s

potential for economic development.

Table 4 Net Present Values (NPV) for the HO, MO, BS and

SB in function of the discount rate (USD)

Discount Rates 20 % 15 % 10 % 5 %

High-size orchard 6,836 12,303 21,844 39,667

Medium-size orchard 5,577 10,084 17,800 31,970

Bragantino system 29,617 38,601 53,211 78,902

Traditional slash-and-

burn

Corn -853 -1,096 -1,491 -2,182

Beans 1,774 2,280 3,101 4,539

Cassava 3,240 4,165 5,665 8,293

Rice 1,279 1,644 2,236 3,273

Agroforest Syst

123

According to Pimentel and Wightman (1999), the

main obstacle facing farmers is not agricultural

techniques, but rather a lack of knowledge and

educational opportunities with regards to these tech-

niques. As argued by McGinty et al. (2006), a key

factor in the adoption of agroforestry practices is

farmers’ self-perception of having the capacities and

the knowledge needed to establish and maintain such

systems. Other authors put a similar emphasis on the

importance of the transfer of knowledge and tech-

niques in order to promote the replacement of slash-

and-burn cultivation with other methods (Bahamondes

2003; Toniolo and Uhl 1995). These same authors

affirm that access to credit is an important factor in

explaining the adoption of complex perennial agricul-

tural systems.

Another constraint on the development of agrofor-

estry systems is the lack of regional presence of an

industry for the transformation of agricultural pro-

ducts. This could significantly increase the financial

viability of plantations and reduce the time needed to

recover initial implementation costs. Smith et al.

(1998) argue that agro-industry should become more

present in the Brazilian Amazon, in both rural and

urban areas, because much potential productivity is

unrealized due to its absence. The communities of the

research are located in an isolated area where trans-

portation is essentially made by boat. Despite the fact

that the cost of transportation is cheap, it is difficult to

transport fresh fruits because of the length of trans-

portation. Indeed many crops analyzed in this study

have a much greater added value when they are

transformed. Fruit pulp can be extracted from acerola,

graviola and acai. Andiroba oil can be commercialized

on the regional market. However, these transforma-

tions require additional inputs of capital and labour, as

well as access to electricity.

Our financial analysis shows that the transportation

costs of inputs and of final products have a large

impact on the profitability of agroforestry systems and,

to a lesser extent, of the Bragantino system, as these

costs can vary by a large factor. Profitability is, among

other things, directly linked to market access. Defi-

ciencies in rural transport networks are often men-

tioned as a major obstacle to economic development in

the Brazilian Amazon (ex. Scott 1978; Guimaraes and

Uhl 1997). Many factors can influence the cost of

transport, which can make the NPV go from positive to

negative under certain conditions. These important

factors include the location of plantations, access to

transportation networks (waterways and roads), and

access to commercial transportation networks. Sea-

sonal variations are also an important factor, as the

rainy season can accelerate the degradation of agri-

cultural products and can make transportation by roads

very difficult.

Conditions of profitability in the systems we

studied imply a transition from an essentially subsis-

tence and barter economy to a monetized one.

Additional revenues could contribute to a significant

increase in standards of living and to the value of the

household’s assets, which thus implies an increased

security net for the family to rely on in hard times

(Hedden-Dunkhorst et al. 2003). Benefits to the

household economy could also spill-over into the

local community by providing a certain number of

days of paid work. These increases in communities’

monetary economies would also increase their contri-

butions to the local and regional economies and would

create a positive environment for the development of

individual and community assets. In turn, these assets

could stimulate the adoption of agricultural practices

that provide greater added value than slash-and-burn

cultivation.

Risk and uncertainty

There are many risks and uncertainties that we should

take into account while studying the implementation

of agroforestry systems. Those risks can be linked to

natural conditions as well as market conditions. In

frontier area, fire is a risk on tree plantations. In the

Amazon, the natural water system is an important risk

factor as well as an advantage for farmers. Abundant

rainy season is an advantage that can rapidly turn out

as a disadvantage in case of inundation (Hoch et al.

2012).

Variations in prices between seasons and years can

also be an important risk factor. Indeed, fruit and crop

prices can change rapidly all over the state, not only

between seasons but also from year to year (SAGRI

2008). Agricultural markets in the region are fairly

small and relatively isolated from outside markets. A

widespread adoption of fruit-growing practices in the

region could cause disequilibrium between supply and

demand, which could lead to a considerable drop in

prices if there were not an opening towards outside

markets. Prices of seeds and seedlings can also show

Agroforest Syst

123

considerable variation, since there are only a handful

of suppliers. The production of seedlings in green-

houses is limited and therefore could not, in the short-

term, respond to a massive increase in demand. Crop

prices volatility and access to markets in general lead

to uncertainty among local farmers (Sunderlin et al.

2005).

Our study highlights the fact that, in our case, the

external help was essential to have a concrete adoption

of agroforestry practices. Adoption of agroforestry is

more complex than traditional agriculture because

they are typically more knowledge-intensive than

modern, industrial agriculture (Mercer 2004). Fur-

thermore, an agroforestry system is likely to take three

to six years before having full benefits (Franzel and

Scherr 2002). Nevertheless, costs of implementation

of agroforestry are lower than the extensive one.

Many studies suggest that there is a natural

diffusion process that occurs in the communities and

their vicinities where agroforestry systems are imple-

mented. In the same way, it appears that the adoption

of agroforestry practices does not necessarily need

external support. There are many small-scale entre-

preneurs that are experimenting on their own initiative

several types of perennial crops (Browder et al. 2005;

Smith et al. 1996). Pattanayak et al. (2003) point out

four types of variables linked to the adoption of

agroforestry: security of land tenure, experience in

agroforestry practices, training in agroforestry prac-

tices and membership in community organization or

cooperatives. In their interview, Tremblay (2010)

realized that the studied communities suffer from a

serious lack of officially recognized land tenure. For

most of the families, the National Institute of Colo-

nization and Agrarian Reform (INCRA) of Brazil

made no cadastre. So, families are not willing in

investing in perennial forms of agriculture.

Conclusion

This analysis has shown that the two types of agrofor-

estry systems studied are profitable from the farmer’s

perspective. In this regard, there is no significant

difference between MO and HO. Costs of seedlings

and their transport account for approximately 75 % of

implementation costs. As for operating costs, trans-

portation to markets represents 70–80 % of these costs

from year three onwards. The main species, which are

responsible for the profitability of these systems are

acerola, acai, and beira-rio orange, due to their high

productivity and good market prices.

Agroforestry systems will allow farmers to create a

surplus that will enable them to invest in assets and

develop an economic security net for themselves and

their families. The resulting monetary benefits and

sense of empowerment can lead to changes among

other individuals and communities in ways that favour

economic development. Farmers involved in agrofor-

estry can thus act as models and agents of change in

their areas.

Through a demonstration of the financial viability of

agroforestry systems in this region, this study has at the

same time deduced that implementation costs are the

most important factor preventing the widespread adop-

tion of these systems. Local and national public policies

should emphasize access to credit and markets, the latter

via improvements in transportation infrastructure and

the development of an industry for the transformation of

agricultural products. It is also important that such

public aid programs include measures to increase

understanding of alternative agricultural techniques

and related knowledge. It was noted during field

research and subsequent analysis that access to knowl-

edge is often a factor that limits households’ transitions

towards alternative forms of agriculture. Public policy

should focus on the capacity-building of family farmers,

while emphasizing the potential for endogenous devel-

opment in these regions. In addition to ensuring the

coordination of different projects to promote agrofor-

estry and other alternative agriculture, policy-makers

should ensure that there is financing and low risks for

individual or community efforts to cultivate using more

environmentally respectful systems. This could take the

form of publicly or privately provided micro-credit, the

coverage of risks in the loans of financial institutions, or

direct subsidies for project start-up.

The numerous positive externalities that agrofor-

estry systems bring to households and communities

seem to justify public financing for these initiatives. In

addition to the fact that these systems produce profits

after seven years, they can also be seen as a ways of

increasing the financial wellbeing of underprivileged

households and communities, and as investments that

yield important social and environmental benefits. The

social return on investment is much higher than any

calculation of exclusively financial benefits, therefore

more than covering costs.

Agroforest Syst

123

Agricultural alternatives to slash-and-burn cultiva-

tion must be analyzed in relation to the ecosystem

services that they bring, especially their effects on

population health. The appropriateness of any possible

alternate system must also be evaluated by its

adaptation to the region, to the financial conditions

of farmers, and to socio-cultural specificities. Agro-

forestry systems have the potential to meet all of these

conditions, and may therefore be the key to saving

Amazon ecosystems and to promoting the wellbeing

of local populations.

References

Bahamondes M (2003) Poverty-environment patterns in a

growing economy : farming communities in arid central

Chile. World Dev 31(11):1947–1957

Bellow JG, Hudson RF, Nair PKR (2008) Adoption potential of

fruit-tree-based agroforestry on small farms in the sub-

tropical highlands. Agrofor Syst 73(1):23–36

Blinn CE, Browder JO, Pedlowski MA, Wynne RH (2013)

Rebuilding the Brazilian rainforest: agroforestry strate-

gies for secondary forest succession. Appl Geogr 43:

171–181

Browder JO, Wynne RH, Pedlowski MA (2005) Agroforestry

diffusion and secondary forest regeneration in the Brazilian

Amazon: further findings from the Rondonia Agroforestry

Pilot Project (1992–2002). Agrofor Syst 65(2):99–111

Campello EFC, Silva GTA, Nobrega PO, Vieira ALM, Franco

AA, Resende AS (2007) Sistemas agroflorestais na Mata

Atlantica: a experiencia da Embrapa Agrobiologia. Cir-

cular Tecnica, Embrapa

CEASA-PA (2009) Cotacao de precos––Centrais de Abasteci-

mento do Estado do Para. http://www.ceasa.pa.gov.br/.

Accessed 21 Septembre 2009 2009

Cravo MS, Corteletti J, Nogueira OL, Smyth TJ, De Souza BDL

(2005) Sistema Bragantino: Agricultura Sustentavel para a

Amazonia. Documentos, Embrapa

Current D, Scherr SJ (1995) Farmer costs and benefits from

agroforestry and farm forestry projects in Central America

and the Caribbean : implication for policy. Agrofor Syst

30:87–103

de Sa CP, dos Santos JC, Lunz AMP, Franke IL (2000) Analise

financeira e institutionsl dos tres principais sistemas agro-

florestais adotados pelos produtores do reca. Circular

Tecnica, vol 33. Embrapa, Porto Velho

Droulers M (2004) L’Amazonie : vers une developpement

durable. Armand Colin, Paris

Dube F, Couto L, Silva ML, Leite HG, Garcia R, Araujo GAA

(2002) A simulation model for evaluating technical and

economic aspects of an industrial eucalyptus-based agro-

forestry system in Minas Gerais, Brazil. Agrofor Syst

55:73–80

Farella N (2005) Les fermes de la region frontiere du Tapajos en

Amazonie bresilienne : relations entre les origines

familiales, les pratiques agricoles, les impacts sur les sols et

le deboisement. Universite du Quebec a Montreal,

Montreal

Farella N, Lucotte M, Davidson R, Daigle S (2006) Mercury

release from deforested soils triggered by base cation

enrichment. Sci Total Environ 368:19–29

Fearnside PM (2005) Deforestation in Brazilian Amazonia :

history, rates ans Consequences. Conserv Biol 19:680–688

Fioravanti C (2008) Terra protegida. na Amazonia, tecnica de

cultivo reaproveita a capoeira em vez de quima-la. Pers-

quisa FAPESP 150:87–89

Franzel S (1999) Socioeconomic factors affecting the adoptionpotential of improved tree fallows in Africa. Agrofor Syst

47:305–321

Franzel S, Scherr SJ (2002) Introduction. p. 1–11. In: Franzel S,

Scherr SJ (eds) Trees on the farm: assessing the adoption

potential of agroforestry practices in Africa. CABI, Wal-

lingford, pp 1–11

Grado SC, Hovermale CH, St-Louis DG (2001) A financial

analysis of a silvopasture system in southern Mississippi.

Agrofor Syst 53:313–322

Guentert A (2010) Analyse des representations sociales des

agriculteurs et des agriculteurs-pecheurs familiaux, hom-

mes et femmes, de la region de la riviere Tapajos (Para,

Bresil) concernant la technique de la coupe et du brulis et

les pratiques agricoles alternatives. M.Sc. Thesis presented

at Universite du Quebec a Montreal, Montreal, Qc, Canada

Guimaraes AL, Uhl C (1997) Rural transport in Eastern

Amazonia : limitations, options, and opportunities. J Rural

Stud 13(4):429–440

Hedden-Dunkhorst B, Denich M, Vielhauer K, Mendoza-Es-

calante A, Borner J, Hurtienne T, De Sousa Filho FR, De

Abreu Sa TD, Costa FA (2003) Forest-based fallow sys-

tems : a safety net for smallholders in the Eastern Amazon ?

Paper presented at the international conference on rural

livelihoods, Forests and Biodiversity, Bonn, Germany,

19-23 Mai 2003

Hoch L, Pokorny B, Jong W (2012) Financial attractiveness of

smallholder tree plantations in the Amazon: bridging

external expectations and local realities. Agrofor Syst

84(3):361–375

IBGE (2010) Dados distritais. Censo demografico, Brasilia

Margulis S (2004) Causes of deforstation of the Brazilian

Amazon. World Bank Working Paper no.22. World Bank,

Washington, DC

Marra M, Pannell DJ, Abadi Ghadim A (2003) The economics

of risk, uncertainty and learning in the adoption of new

agricultural technologies: where are we on the learning

curve? Agric Syst 75(2–3):215–234

McGinty MM, Swisher ME, Alavalapati J (2006) Agroforestry

adoption and maintenance: self-efficacy, attitudes and

socio-economic factors. Agrofor Syst 73(2):99–108

McNeely J, Schroth G (2006) Agroforestry and Biodiversity

Conservation––traditional practices, present dynamics,

and lessons for the future. Biodivers Conserv 15(2):

549–554

Mercer DE (2004) Adoption of agroforestry innovations in the

tropics: a review. Agrofor Syst 61–62(1–3):311–328

Miller RP, Nair PKR (2006) Indigenous agroforestry systems in

Amazonia: from prehistory to today. Agrofor Syst

66:151–164

Agroforest Syst

123

Murphy L, Bilsborrow R, Pichon F (1997) Poverty and pros-

perity among migrant settlers in the Amazon rainforest

frontier of Ecuador. J Dev Stud 34(2):35–65

Nair PKR (1993) An introduction to agroforestry. Kluwer

Academic, Dordrecht

Nair PKR (2012) Climate Change Mitigation: a low-hanging

fruit of Agroforestry. In: Nair PKR, Garrity D (eds)

Agroforestry––The future of global land use, vol 9.,

Advances in AgroforestrySpringer, Netherlands, pp 31–67

Nepstad DC, Soares-Filho BS, Merry FD, Lima A, Moutinho P,

Carter J, Bowman MS, Cattaneo A, Rodrigues H, Sch-

wartzman S, McGrath DG, Stickler CM, Lubowski R,

Piris-Cabezas P, Rivero S, Alencar A, Almeida O, Stella O

(2009) The end of deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon.

Science 326:1350–1351

Oliveira AD, Macedo RLG (1996) Sistemas agroflorestais:

consideracoes tecnicas e economicas. Lavras, Brazil

Pimentel D, Wightman A (1999) Economic and environmental

benefits of agroforestry in food and fuelwood production.

In: Publishers FL (ed) Agroforestry in sustainable agri-

cultural systems. Boca Raton, pp 295–317

Puri S, Nair PKR (2004) Agroforestry research for development

in India; 25 years of experiences of a national program.

Agrofor Syst 61–62(1–3):437–452

Puttanayak S, Mercer DE, Sills E, Yang J (2003) Taking stock of

agroforestry adoption studies. Agrofor Syst 57:173–186

Ramalho M (2006) Science and development network. http://

www.scidev.netiNewslindex.cfm?fuseaction=read-

News&itemid=3081&Janguage. Accessed 21 september

2009 2009

Reinhardt TE, Ottmar RD, Castilla C (2001) Smoke impacts

from agricultural burning in a rural Brazilian town. J Air

Waste Manag Assoc 51:443–450

Ribeiro H, Assuncao JV (2002) Efeitos das queimadas na saude

humana. Estudos avancados 16. http://www.scielo.br/

scielo.php?pid=S0103-40142002000100008&script=sci_

arttext. Accessed 21 September 2009

Ribeiro RNS, de Santana AC, Tourinho MM (2004) Analise

Exploratoria da Socioeconomia de Sistemas Agroflorestais

em Varzea Fluvio-Marinha, Cameta-Para, Brasil. Rev

Econ Sociol Rural 42(1):133–152

Romana CA, Pizarro JC, Rodas E, Guilbert E (1999) Palm trees

as ecological indicators of risk areas for Chagas disease.

Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg 93:594–595

Romana CA, Brunstein D, Collin-Delavaud A, Sousa O, Ortega-

Barria E (2003) Public policies of development in Latin

America and Chagas’ disease. Lancet 362:579

Roulet M, Lucotte M, Saint-Aubin A, Tran S, Rheault I, Farella

N, E De Jesus Da Silva, Dezencourt J, Sousa Passos CJ,

Santos Soares G, Guimaraes JRD, Mergler D, Amorim M

(1998) The geochemistry of mercury in central Amazonian

soils developed on the Alter-do-Chao formation of the

lower Tapajos River Valley, Para state. Brazil. Sci Total

Environ 223(1):1–24

Rousseau GX, Deheuvels O, Rodriguez Arias I, Somarriba E

(2012) Indicating soil quality in cacao-based agroforestry

systems and old-growth forests: the potential of soil mac-

rofauna assemblage. Ecol Indicat 23:535–543

SAGRI—Secretaria de estado de agricultura—Para (2008)

Boletins anuais dos precos 2000–2007

Scatena FN, Walker RT, Homma AKO, de Conto AJ, Ferreira

CAP, Carvalho RA, da Rocha ACPN, dos Santos AIM, de

Oliveira PM (1996) Cropping and fallowing sequences of

small farms in the ‘’terra firme’’ landscape of the Brazilian

Amazon : a case study from Santarem, Para. Ecol Econ

18:29–40

Scherr SJ (1992) Not out of the woods yer: challenges for

economics research on agroforestry. Am J Agric Econ

74:802–808

Scherr SJ (1995) Economic factors in farmer adoption of

agroforestry : patterns observed in Western Kenya. World

Dev 23(5):787–804

Scott EP (1978) Subsistence, markets, and rural development in

Hausland. J Dev Areas 12:449–469

Smith NJH, Falesi IC, Alvim PDT, Serrao EAS (1996) Agro-

forestry trajectories among smallholders in the Brazilian

Amazon: innovation and resiliency in pioneer and older

settled areas. Ecol Econ 18(1):15–27

Smith J, Winograd M, Gallopin G, Pachico D (1998) Dynamics

of the agricultural frontier in the Amazon and savannas of

Brazil: analyzing the impact of policy and technology.

Environ Model Assess 3:31–46

Sunderlin WD, Angelsen A, Belcher B, Burgers P, Nasi R,

Santoso L, Wunder S (2005) Livelihoods, forests, and

conservation in developing countries: an Overview. World

Dev 33(9):1383–1402

Toniolo A, Uhl C (1995) Economic and ecological perspectives on

agriculture in the eastern Amazon. World Dev 23(6):959–973

Tremblay S (2010) Caractere durable de pratiques agricoles

alternatives a la culture sur coupe et brulis dans la region du

Rio Tapajos, en Amazonie bresilienne : une analyse so-

cioeconomique. M.Sc. Thesis presented at Universite du

Quebec a Montreal, Montreal, Qc, Canada

Valadao LM (2009) O papel das liderancas comunitarias em

projetos de saude e ambiente : uma analise das redes sociais

em comunidades do Rio Tapajos. Universidade de Brasılia,

Brasılia, DF, Para. Mestrado de Desenvolvimento

Sustentavel

Withrow-Robinson B, Hibbs DE, Gypmantasiri P, Thomas D

(1999) A preliminary classification of fruit-based agro-

forestry in a highland area of northern Thailand. Agrofor

Syst 42:195–205

Agroforest Syst

123