r&d status on agroforestry & multipurpose trees and shrubs

OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

Very truly yours,

PATRICIO S. FAYLONExecutive Director

Dear Reader:

This year, PCARRD is celebrating 30 years of service to the Philippine agriculture,forestry, and natural resources sectors. Through the years, the Council has steadfastlyprovided the directions in developing and modernizing these sectors to meet thecountry’s ever-challenging demands for food security, economic growth, and sustainabledevelopment.

In order to keep a top-caliber research system, PCARRD has streamlined itsR&D efforts by pursuing 20 important commodities on crops, livestock, agriculturalresource management, forestry and environment, and socioeconomics. To this end,PCARRD has come up with this special publication, R&D Status and Directions (2000and Beyond), composed of 20 volumes. Each volume provides essential information onthe R&D status and directions of a specific commodity prioritized by PCARRD and theNational Agriculture and Resources Research and Development Network (NARRDN).

This volume specifically discusses agroforestry and multipurpose trees and shrubs(MPTS). PCARRD hopes that the information contained in this book shall pave the way tomore focused R&D work on this commodity.

PHILIPPINE COUNCIL FOR AGRICULTURE, FORESTRY AND NATURAL

RESOURCES RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENTDepartment of Science and Technology

Los Baños, Laguna2003

R&D StatusR&D StatusR&D StatusR&D StatusR&D Statusand Directionsand Directionsand Directionsand Directionsand Directions(2000 and Beyond)(2000 and Beyond)(2000 and Beyond)(2000 and Beyond)(2000 and Beyond)

AgroforestryAgroforestryAgroforestryAgroforestryAgroforestryand Multiand Multiand Multiand Multiand Multi purposepurposepurposepurposepurposeTrees and ShrubsTrees and ShrubsTrees and ShrubsTrees and ShrubsTrees and Shrubs

ii ............................................................................................................. R&D Status and Directions

First Edition 2003

ISBN 971-20-0516-X

Bibliographic Citation:

Agroforestry and Multipurpose Trees and ShrubsR&D Team. R&D status and directions (2000and beyond): Agroforestry and multipurposetrees and shrubs. Los Baños, Laguna: PCARRD-DOST, 2003. 45p.

Volume Editors:

For. Vella A. AtienzaFor. Reynaldo S. DimlaForestry and Environment Research DivisionPCARRD

Mr. Karlo M. FelicianoApplied Communication DivisionPCARRD

Agroforestry and Multipurpose Trees and Shrubs ............................................................................................ iii

Foreword○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

PATRICIO S. FAYLONExecutive Director

PCARRD

For the past 30 years, PCARRD has been tasked to identify the research and development(R&D) gaps, establish a system of R&D priorities and provide directions for agriculture,

forestry and natural resources. In carrying out these tasks, the Council has to assess andreview the R&D performance of different commodities.

This volume, R&D Status and Directions (2000 and Beyond): Agroforestry andMultipurpose Trees and Shrubs (MPTS), presents an overall picture of the country’sR&D performance on these commodities from 1990 to 2000. The assessment includes thefollowing: commodity industry situation, technological milestones, completed and ongoingR&D projects, institutional capability, and challenges and issues confronting the commodity.It also presents the R&D gaps that need to be urgently addressed.

The R&D directions presented in this volume provide the R&D community and decision/policy makers with information on the challenges and issues on agroforestry and MPTSand the science and technology (S&T) interventions to address the R&D gaps.

We hope that this volume would greatly help in formulating the R&D programs and inprioritizing the R&D activities for agroforestry and MPTS from 2002 and beyond.

iv ............................................................................................................. R&D Status and Directions

Acknowledgment○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

PCARRD would like to thank and commend the efforts of the Agroforestry andMPTS R&D Team for preparing the manuscript: Dr. Alma Monica dela Paz, team

leader (2001); Dr. Virgilio Villancio, team leader (2002); the team members,For. Domingo Bacalla, Dr. Reynaldo Bayabos, Rev. Jose Cunanan, Mr. Ed Queblatin,For. Gregorio Reyes, and Prof. Roberto Visco.

PCARRD also recognizes the following for their invaluable help in putting togetherthis publication:

All the various government and nongovernment agencies, state colleges anduniversities, and other concerned individuals who have shared their data/information;Dr. Beatriz P. del Rosario, PCARRD deputy executive director for R&D forproviding the overall direction;Dr. Alma Monica dela Paz, executive director of the Kapwa UpliftmentFoundation, Inc. and former team leader of the agroforestry and MPTS commodityfor the technical input and support in preparing the manuscript;Mr. Jeffrey Palmer, director of the Mindanao Baptist Rural Life Center forproviding additional information;The FERD-based technical secretariat for their efforts in preparing the manuscriptand for providing substantial information; Dr. Rogelio C. Serrano, FERD directorand Dr. Romulo T. Aggangan, acting director for their technical support; and theFERD staff for assisting in the production process.

Appreciation is also extended to PCARRD’s Applied Communication Division (ACD)for the overall coordination in producing this publication––Dr. Norma V. Llemit, director,for reviewing the manuscript; Dr. Lorna C. Malicsi for supervising the production process;Ms. Marina T. de Ramos for preparing the layout and camera-ready proof; Mr. SimeonManahan Jr. for conceptualizing the cover design; and Ms. Carmelita B. Alamban forcoordinating the overall production flow.

Agroforestry and Multipurpose Trees and Shrubs ............................................................................................ v

Agroforestry and Multipurpose Treesand Shrubs R&D Team○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

Team Leader (2001): Dr. Alma Monica dela PazDirectorKapwa Upliftment Foundation, Inc.427 Durian Street, Juna SubdivisionMatina, Davao City

Team Leader (2002): Dr. Virgilio T. VillancioDirectorInstitute of AgroforestryCollege of Forestry and Natural Resources (CFNR)University of the Philippines Los Baños (UPLB), College, Laguna

Team Members: For. Domingo BacallaChiefCommunity-based Forest Management DivisionForest Management BureauVisayas Avenue, Diliman, Quezon City

Dr. Reynaldo C. BayabosSpecial Detail, Office of the DirectorEcosystems Research and Development Bureau (ERDB)College, Laguna

Rev. Jose P.M. CunananPresidentBasic Agricultural Land Aerial Growers Association, Inc.803 Cornus Street, St. Dominic VIProject 6, Quezon City

Mr. Ed QueblatinRegional Natural Resources Management SpecialistInternational Centre for Research in AgroforestryCFNR UPLB, College, Laguna

For. Gregorio D. ReyesChiefUpland Farms Ecosystems Research DivisionERDB, College, Laguna

vi ............................................................................................................. R&D Status and Directions

Prof. Roberto G. ViscoInstitute of Renewable Natural ResourcesCFNR UPLB, College, Laguna

Program Specialist: For. Reynaldo S. DimlaScience Research Specialist IIForestry and Environment Research DivisionPCARRD, Los Baños, Laguna

Agroforestry and Multipurpose Trees and Shrubs ............................................................................................ vii

Contents○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

Foreword ...................................................................................................................... iiiAcknowledgment ......................................................................................................... ivAgroforestry and Multipurpose Trees and Shrubs R&D Team .............................. vList of Acronyms and Abbreviations ......................................................................... ix

Introduction ................................................................................................................. 1

PART I. R&D STATUS

Commodity Industry Situation .................................................................................. 5Agroforestry in the Philippines ........................................................................... 5Features of Agroforestry Systems in the Philippines ....................................... 6Component Agroforestry Technologies ............................................................... 8

Technological Milestones ........................................................................................... 10Major Completed and Ongoing Projects ............................................................. 11

Principal Technological Milestones .......................................................................... 20Indigenous Agroforestry Systems ........................................................................ 20Developed Agroforestry Technologies/Systems ................................................. 21Biological and Physical Processes of Agroforestry Technologies

and Practices .................................................................................................... 21Sustainability of Indigenous Species for Hedgerows ........................................ 23Pest Management in Agroforestry Systems ....................................................... 24Economics of Agroforestry Systems .................................................................... 24Promotion of Agroforestry Systems..................................................................... 25Tools for Assessing Sustainability of Agroforestry Systems ............................ 27

Institutional Capability .............................................................................................. 29R&D Gaps ..................................................................................................................... 33

PART II. R&D DIRECTIONS

Challenges and Issues ................................................................................................. 37Reconciling Agriculture and Forestry ................................................................. 37Tenurial Security and Resource Management Advocacy .................................. 37Resource Governance ............................................................................................ 38Agroforestry Promotion and Resource Productivity Improvement ................. 38

viii ............................................................................................................. R&D Status and Directions

Increasing Farmer’s Income and Alleviating Poverty ....................................... 38Enhancing Environmental Services .................................................................... 38Monitoring, Evaluation, and Impact Assessment .............................................. 39Information, Education, and Communication (IEC) .......................................... 39

Major R&D Programs and Policies Addressing R&D Gaps .................................... 40R&D and Utilization .............................................................................................. 40Capability Building ............................................................................................... 41Policy Advocacy ..................................................................................................... 42Other Recommendations ...................................................................................... 42

References .................................................................................................................... 43

List of Figure

1 Institutionalizing the science and practice of agroforestry in thePhilippines: an operational framework .............................................................. 31

Agroforestry and Multipurpose Trees and Shrubs ............................................................................................ ix

List of Acronymsand Abbreviations○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

AAA - agroecosystem analysis approachADSDPP - Ancestral Domain Sustainable Development Protection PlanAIN - Agroforestry Information NetworkAFA - agroforestry farm assessmentAFMA - Agriculture and Fisheries Modernization ActALCAMS - Agroforestry Land Capability Mapping SchemeAPANews - Asia-Pacific Agroforestry NewsletterAPCS - accelerated pioneer-climax species seriesAPPM - agroforestry project planning managementAPPS - agroforestry production and postproduction systemsASER - agroforestry systems efficiency ratioATIK - Agroforestry Technology Information KitCARP - Comprehensive Agrarian Reform ProgramCBFM - community-based forest managementCDA - Cooperative Development AuthorityCDOs - community development officersCF - College of ForestryCFNR - College of Forestry and Natural ResourcesCHED - Commission on Higher EducationCP - contour plowingCPEU - Center for People Empowerment in the UplandsCRSP - Collaborative Research Support ProgramCS - certificate of stewardshipDA - Department of AgricultureDAR - Department of Agrarian ReformDENR - Department of Environment and Natural ResourcesDMMMSU - Don Mariano Marcos Memorial State UniversityDMMSU - Don Mariano Marcos State UniversityERDB - Ecosystems Research and Development BureauERDS - Ecosystems Research and Development ServicesEDO - Environment and Development OfficersFCO - forestry community organizersFLMA - forest land management agreementFPRDI - Forest Products Research and Development InstituteFRIEnD - farm resource integration, evaluation and designFSR/D - farming systems research and developmentIAF - Institute of AgroforestryICRAF - International Centre for Research in Agroforestry

x ............................................................................................................. R&D Status and Directions

IEC - information, education, and communicationIGP - income generating projectsIIRR - International Institute for Rural ReconstructionINM - integrated nutrient managementIPM - integrated pest managementIPRA - Indigenous Peoples Rights’ ActISCAF - Ifugao State College of Agriculture and ForestryISFP - Integrated Social Forestry ProgramKAPWA - Kapwa Upliftment Foundation, Inc.LAS - lowland agroforestry systemLER - land equivalent ratioLGUs - local government unitsLSU - Leyte State UniversityMBRLC - Mindanao Baptist Rural Life CenterMEAS - methodology for evaluating agroforestry systemsMES - monitoring and evaluation systemMMSU - Mariano Marcos State UniversityMOSCAT - Misamis Oriental State College of Agriculture and TechnologyMPTS - multipurpose trees and shrubsNAFDP - National Agroforestry Development ProgramNCIP - National Commission on Indigenous PeoplesNRP - National Reforestation ProgramNIPAA - National Integrated Protected Areas ActNGOs - nongovernment organizationsNVCS - natural vegetative contour stripsNVS - natural vegetative stripsPAFERN - Philippine Agroforestry Education and Research NetworkPCARRD - Philippine Council for Agriculture, Forestry and Natural Resources

Research and DevelopmentPOs - people’s organizationsRATIK - Regional Agroforestry Technology Information KitROI - return on investmentRT - ridge tillageRUDC - Regional Upland Development CommitteeRUPES - rewarding the upland poor fo the environmental servicesSAFODS - small holder agroforestry options for degraded soilsSAGIP-UPLAND- sustainable agriculture through agroforestry initiatives of people in

the uplandsSALT - Sloping Agricultural Land TechnologySALT 2 - Simple Agrolivestock TechnologySALT 3 - Sustainable Agroforest Land TechnologySALT 4 - Small Agrofruit Livelihood TechnologySANREM - Sustainable Agriculture and Natural Resources ManagementSEANAFE - Southeast Asian Network for Agroforestry EducationSFR - small farm reservoirSTNM - seed technology and nursery managementSWCM - soil and water conservation and management

Agroforestry and Multipurpose Trees and Shrubs ............................................................................................ xi

T - treatmentsTCA - Tarlac College of AgricultureTVOFT - technology verification through on-farm trialsUAP - Upland Agroforestry ProgramUDP - Upland Development ProgramUNAC - Upland NGO Assistance CommitteeUPLB - University of the Philippines Los BañosUPWG - Upland Development Working Group

IntroductionIntroductionIntroductionIntroductionIntroduction○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

In the past decades, the Philippines hasbeen deeply immersed into agroforestry

practices like the Banawe rice terraces inIfugao and the Naalad improved fallowsystems in Cebu. The potentials of thesepractices to address the closely linkedproblems of rural poverty and environ-mental degradation has been recognizedlocally and internationally.

“Agroforestry is a science, art, andpractice that deals with the production,management, and utilization of woodyperennials in combination with agri-cultural crops, animals, aquatic and/orother resources either zonally, mixedsimultaneously, or sequentially for the twinpurpose of conservation and socioeconomicproductivity” (UPLB-UAP 1992).

Since 1995, the Philippine governmenthas been using agroforestry as the maintechnology for the community-based forestmanagement (CBFM). As a nationalstrategy, agroforestry enhances thesustainable development of the country’sforest resources at the same time promotespeople empowerment and social justice.Thus, it has been marked as an integral partin the development of the uplands up to thepresent.

The benefits of adopting agroforestrypractices and technologies include securingfood supply, reducing poverty, protectingupland environment, and enhancingbiodiversity.

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

R&D Status

Agroforestry and Multipurpose Trees and Shrubs ............................................................................................ 5

Commodity Industry Situation○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

Agroforestry in the Philippines

The Philippines has about 17.6 million(M) ha as forest land or about 59% of

the country’s total land area of 30 M ha isforest. However, only 5.4 M of the 17 M hawere estimated to have forest cover(Dalmacio 1999). The rest are deforestedareas covered with grass and brushlands orare being cultivated by upland dwellers.

Upland population was estimated at18.6 M in 1999. At a growing rate of 2.6%annually, the upland population is expectedto double in the next 25 years (DENR 1996).

Since the late 1970s the Philippinegovernment has shifted its policy towardsupland dwellers from a punitive stance toone of engagement. Local communities weregranted tenurial stewardship rights toupland areas—peaceful occupation inexchange for responsible management thatincluded protection and restoration ofdegraded sites. This shift in dealing withupland development, favored the adoptionof agroforestry as a strategy and technologyto spearhead CBFM initiatives.

As a result, the Integrated SocialForestry Program (ISFP) was started in1992. It provided technologies on forestproduction and agroforestry and thetenurial instruments for the uplanddwellers. The importance of agroforestry isstill reflected in the implementation ofvarious programs that followed even withthe CBFM program of the Department ofEnvironment and Natural Resources

(DENR) which started in 1995. FormerPresident Fidel V. Ramos issued E.O 263declaring CBFM as the national strategy toensure the sustainable development of thecountry’s forest resources while promotingpeople empowerment and social justice.

The exact area of agroforestry farms inthe country is unknown. Based on DENRstatistics (1996), there are about 100,000 haunder agroforestry farm lease. This doesnot include agroforestry farms undervarious social forestry projects estimated tobe about 500,000 ha (Lasco 1998). However,the domain for agroforestry does not onlycover the upland areas considered asforestlands or those covered by variousDENR upland development programs, butalso the lowland areas with tree component.Moreover, there are about 4 M ha of coconutareas that are suitable for agroforestry(Magat 2001).

“Agroforestry is also defined as adynamic and ecologically based naturalresources management system that throughthe integration of trees on farms in theagricultural landscape, diversifies andsustains production for increased social,economic, and environmental benefitsfor land users at all levels” (ICRAF 1996).With this concept, R&D in agroforestry isgeared to develop appropriate andsustainable technologies to provide foodand alternative livelihood for uplandfarmers and address environmentalproblems related to soil erosion and forestdestruction.

6 ............................................................................................................. R&D Status and Directions

Features of Agroforestry Systemsin the Philippines

Agroforestry system in the Philippinescan be classified according to their dominantcomponent, that is, agricultural crops, foresttrees, and animals. These systems areclassified as agrisilvicultural, silvipastoral,agripastoral or agrisilvipastoral system(The Technical Committee on Agroforestry1995).

Agrisilvicultural System

Agrisilvicultural system is the combi-nation of agricultural crops with woodyperennials. This system includes: alleycropping , multistorey , boundary planting,windbreaks, improved fallow, and thetaungya.

Alley Cropping

Alley cropping is one of the simplest andmost widespread agroforestry practices insloping lands. It involves planting ofhedgerows along the contours and growingagricultural crops in the “alleys” formedbetween hedgerows. The hedgerows areplanted to one or more rows of woodyperennials and are regularly pruned toprevent shading. Prunings are used asgreen manure or mulch, which contributesto the soil nutrients when decomposed,thereby promoting efficient nutrient cycle.

Planting hedgerows is done to minimizesoil erosion by trapping sediments at thebase of the hedgerows and reducing surfacerunoff velocity. After a few years, terracesare formed. Alley cropping is applicable instabilizing and promoting the sustainabilityof upland (hilly land) farms devoted toannual crops such as corn, rice, andvegetables. Without hedgerows, these farmsare most ecologically vulnerable to erosionwith rates of up to 200 t/ha as against themaximum acceptable level of 12 t/ha.

Multistorey

This system is characterized byrandomly mixing various species thatcreate at least two layers of canopy. Itmimics the structure of a tropical rainforestwith its attendant advantages. The uppercanopy is composed of light-demandingspecies, while the understorey is made upof shade-tolerant species.

Multistorey system can be developedwhere there is existing monoculture (onlyone species) plantation, such as coconutand forest tree plantations. Plantingconfiguration of the main tree crop isplanted with wide spacing to allow enoughlight for layers of shade-tolerant crops.

Boundary Planting

Planting of multipurpose trees andshrubs (MPTS) around the farm is a verycommon practice. They provide protection,privacy, and valuable products to thefarmers. Trees are planted within propertyline as fence, or as demarcation of farm lots.

Windbreaks

Windbreaks are strips of vegetationcomposed of trees, shrubs, and vines toprotect croplands from strong winds. Theycan provide protection to crops over adistance equivalent to 15–20 times theheight of the trees in the windbreak. Theycan also help minimize wind erosion andreduce moisture loss.

Improved Fallow

The improved fallow system is anattempt to improve traditional shiftingcultivation. This is done by supplementingthe fallow vegetation to hasten therejuvenation of soil during fallow period.Instead of waiting for nature to revegetate,leguminous nitrogen-fixing MPTS areplanted on the field.


Taungya

The taungya involves the planting ofcash or food crops between newly plantedforest seedlings in a reforestation project.Farmers raise crops while the forest treesare still young. After 2–3 years, dependingon the tree spacing and tree species, thecanopy closes, and light-demanding annualcrops can no longer be planted. Theculminating vegetation is a pure treeplantation. Farmers then transfer to otheropen areas to repeat the process. This canbe applied by using different reforestationspecies.

Silvipastoral System

Silvipastoral system is the combinationof woody perennials with livestockproduction. This system includes : livestock-under-tree, protein bank (fodder bank), livefence, and hedgerow planting of improvedpasture grasses and/or other fodder treesor shrubs.

Livestock-Under-Tree

Animals (e.g., cattle, sheep, goats, etc.)are allowed to graze freely underneath therelatively mature tree plantations. Theseplantations are for wood or fruit production.

An example is the silvipasture schemeof Nasipit Lumber Company in Agusan. Thecattle are allowed to graze under the‘lumbang’ (Aleurites moluccanna) treeswhere improved forage grasses are grown.With this scheme nuts for linseed oil andmeat from grazing cattle are simultaneouslyproduced. The cattle keep the grassestrimmed down, saving labor costs incleaning the plantation, and making it easyto collect the fallen lumbang nuts. The cattledung scattered over the plantation areaserves as an excellent organic fertilizer.

Protein Bank (Fodder Bank)

Leguminous fodder trees or shrubs(e.g., ‘ipil-ipil’ [Leucaena leucocephala],‘kakawate’ [Gliricidia sepium], desmodium[Desmodium rensonii], etc.) are establishedas small stands on certain portions of thefarm or pasture area serving as asupplementary source of protein-richfodder for livestock. They also serve asfence. They are regularly pruned and thetop and branch prunings are then fed toanimals.

Live Fence

Trees or shrubs with foliage which arepalatable to livestock are grown around acertain grassland area to enclose thegrazing animals. Aside from the trees’ roleas live fence, they can be managed (e.g.,regular top pruning to encourage morelateral branching) such that the enclosedanimals can browse on the low-lyingbranches for fodder supplement.

Hedgerow Planting of Improved PastureGrasses and/or other Fodder Trees orShrubs

Hedgerows of fodder trees or shrubs(e.g., D. rensonii, L. leucocephala, G.sepium, Flemingia congesta, Sesbania sp.,etc.) are planted along contours at certainintervals. The strips between thehedgerows are grown with improvedpasture grasses and/or other fodder shrubs.Prunings from the hedgerows, grasses, andfodder trees/shrubs are fed to confinedanimals. An example is the SimpleAgrolivestock Technology (SALT 2)developed by the Mindanao Baptist RuralLife Center (MBRLC) at Bansalan, Davaodel Sur.


Agrisilvipastoral System

Agrisilvipastoral system is the combi-nation of agricultural crops, woodyperennials, and livestock. This systemincludes: silvipastoral, multistorey +animals, and alleycropping with pasturegrasses and agricultural crops.

Agrisilvicultural System Transformed toSilvipastoral

In this system, the initial croppingcombinations include tree seedlings andannual agricultural crops as in the taungyasystem. As the trees grow and close theircanopies, it will no longer be possible togrow annual agricultural crops. Instead,shade-tolerant grasses and vines will takeover the forest floor where animals areallowed to graze freely as in livestock-under-tree system.

Multistorey + Animals

This is similar to the multistorey underagrisilvicultural system, except that in thiscase, grazing animals are an addedcomponent. A good example is the coconut-lanzones mixture, with horses (or cattle)grazing under them as observed in Lagunaand Quezon provinces.

Alleycropping with Pasture Grassesand Agricultural Crops

This is similar to hedgerow croppingwith pasture grasses. However, instead ofall alleys planted to agricultural crops, somealleys in between the hedgerows are grownwith improved pasture grasses and/orfodder trees or shrubs which are regularlycut and fed to livestock.

Component AgroforestryTechnologies

Soil and Water Conservation Measures

Among the priority areas to considerin the practice of agroforestry is theharmonious balance between foodproduction and environmental protection.Soil and water conservation is an importantstrategy for sustainable crop productionand environmental conservation. Thefollowing technologies for soil and waterconservation are recommended for anyagroforestry system.

Vegetative Measures

Hedgerows. This is a collective name forstrips of vegetation planted along thecontours or across the hill- or mountain-side in order to slow down the flow ofsurface runoff and the movement ofdetached soil particles. Constructionand layout of the hedgerows arediscussed under the alley croppingsystem of previous sections.

Fascines. These are simply bundles oflong and dense brushwood. For soil/slope stabilization, the fascines can havea diameter of 25–30 cm and a length of1–1.5 m. They can weigh as much as 14kg which can be quite handy totransport.

Wattling. This consists of stems/rodsof sprouting species like sunflower,‘lantana’ (Lantana camara), and‘binatang hambog’ (Hibiscusschizopetalus) interwoven together.


Mechanical/Structural Measures

In cases where vegetation cannot beimmediately established, mechanical/structural measures are recommended tocontrol soil movement or erosion. There aredifferent types of such measures, but thefollowing are recommended in agroforestryfarms: bench terracing, contour levee,contour canals/trenches, and small farmreservoir. These are on-farm soil and waterconservation measures.

Bench terracing. This consists ofbuilding level or nearly level stripsalong contours at appropriate intervals.This terracing technology is suitable forsteep slopes up to 55% to reducesurface flow and soil erosion, as well asto increase the soil infiltration rate.Contour levee. This is an embankmentmade either of grasses, stones or hardsoil mass, or a combination of thesematerials.Contour canal/ditch. The canal/ditch isdug along the contour line and connectedto a natural waterway to carry awayexcess water.Small farm reservoir. This involves theconstruction of small dams to collectwater from rainfall and runoff from thewatershed. Small farm reservoir (SFR)can then be used as source of water forannual crops and animals. This smalldam can also be used for aquaculture.

Soil Fertility Maintenance/Improvement

The ultimate objective of soilconservation is to maintain the soil’s abilityto support plant growth for crop production

purposes and to enable it to sustain highyields. Thus, the effectivity of any soilconservation practice should be measuredin terms of its ability to maintain soilfertility and productivity.

Fertilizers can either be in organic orinorganic form. Both have been used quiteextensively and intensively in agricultureto the point that fertilizer in any form hasbecome almost a necessary production input.Chemical fertilizers are prohibitivelyexpensive and some negative effects on thechemical characteristics of the soil havebeen reported. Thus, use of organicmaterials and integrated nutrientmanagement (INM) strategies arerecommended.

Cultural Managementfor Perennials (Fruitsand Plantation Crops)

Plants can be propagated either by croprotation, relay cropping, mulching, andcover cropping by seeds (sexual), or bycuttings (asexual). Seed propagation isgenerally cheap and simple . One can haveseveral seeds as planting materialsespecially during harvesting season. Whenthe recommended variety of the crop is ahybrid, seeds are used as plantingmaterials. Examples are hybrids of coconutand cacao. In some crops, commercialpropagation can only be done by using seedsas in papaya. However, reproduction fromseeds results in plants that are not true-to-type, especially those coming from cross-pollinated crops like robusta coffee andcoconut, among other things.


Through the concerted effort of variousgovernment agencies and academic

institutions and nongovernment organi-zations, promising agroforestry systemsand technologies for the Philippine uplandswere developed. These include alleycropping or Sloping Agricultural LandTechnology (SALT), improved fallowsystems, multistory systems, tree farm/woodlots, and natural vegetative strips(NVS).

Moreover, several agroforestry toolswere developed by the multidisciplinaryteams, such as: agroforestry farmassessment (AFA); lowland agroforestrysystems (LAS); farming systems researchand development approach (FSR/D);Agroforestry Land Capability Assessmentand Mapping Scheme (ALCAMS);International Centre for Research inAgroforestry’s (ICRAF) diagnosis anddesign; methodology for evaluatingagroforestry systems (MEAS); and thecomputer based design procedure foragroforestry model. These tools weredeveloped to attain productivity andsustainability of the land, while improvingthe economic well being of the farmers andat the same time conserving the forestsresources.

The development of Landcare in 1996, afarmer-led organization among farmers inClaveria, Misamis Oriental, provided newbeginnings. Landcare, as defined by ICRAF,is a community-based and multisectoralapproach designed to facilitate the adoptionof conservation farming technologies andagroforestry practices among uplandfarmers. In 1999, it was replicated inLantapan, Bukidnon and other nearby

Technological Milestones○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

municipalities. It started with intensiveinformation dissemination program onsustainable development includingtechnological options and institutionalinnovations.

In the area of instruction, the Instituteof Agroforestry (IAF) developed a set ofcourses to provide technical capability-building opportunities for variousdevelopment agents (IAF 2002). IAF alsoestablished learning laboratories foragroforestry. Its training courses includesagroforestry project planning management(APPM), agroforestry seed technology andnursery management (STNM), integratedpest management (IPM), and soil and waterconservation and management (SWCM) foragroforest farms, agroforestry technologyverification through on-farm trials (TVOFT),agroforestry production and postproductionsystems (APPS) and sustainable agriculturethrough agroforestry initiatives of people inthe uplands (SAGIP-UPLAND). To facilitatelearning and to meet the intendedparticipants’ needs, the said courses haveevolved in content, scope, and methods.

On the other hand, a module on farmplanning by distance approach wasdeveloped by the Agroforestry TechnicalAssistance of the University of thePhilippines Los Baños (UPLB) AgroforestryProgram and the Upland DevelopmentProgram (UDP) of the DENR (DENR-UDP1995). This training course is a series ofactivities undertaken by the peoplethemselves to understand better thephysical conditions of their respective farmsthrough the ALCAMS.

The DENR adopted agroforestry as themain production technology for CBFM to


enhance the sustainable development ofthe country’s forest resources and promotepeople empowerment and social justice.Thus, model agroforestry farms wereestablished in every region that served aslearning laboratories for the Center forPeoples Empowerment in the Uplands(CPEU). To facilitate and spread thesustainable forest management in theuplands, the DENR transformed regionaltraining centers into CBFM model sites.

In 1997, DENR published an informationkit. This information kit provides a list ofsustainable and environment-friendlylivelihood options for the upland, coastal,and urban-lowland ecosystems. Thematerials gathered were based from actualfield experiences of DENR personnel andother individuals or groups. It is intendedfor DENR field officers, farmers, fisherfolks,small-/large-scale miners, wildlifeenthusiasts, upland and urban/lowlanddwellers.

Major Completedand Ongoing Projects

The completed projects were responsiveto the attainment of the commodity’s goal.Sixty-four projects/studies dealt on theunderlying biological and physical processesof agroforestry technologies and practices,while 47 projects focused on promotion ofagroforestry systems and 21 projects oninformation on agroforestry systems andsociocultural interactions. The total numberof studies conducted on the documentationof indigenous agroforestry systems,economics of agroforestry systems, andsustainability of indigenous species forhedgerows were 14, 8, and 6 respectively.

However, few projects were conductedon the promotion of agroforestry systems,technology impact assessment, pestmanagement in agroforestry systems, theintegration of livestock and other

components in an agroforestry systems,and agroforestry in community-basedmanagement.

On the other hand, the ongoing studiesare geared to the needs of the uplandfarmers. The projects deal on the underlyingbiological and physical processes ofagroforestry technologies and practices (28),apiculture studies (11), and institutionalinnovations to evolve agroforestry systemsfor sustainable agriculture and management(9).

Completed and ongoing projectsmonitored by PCARRD under theAgroforestry and MPTS commodity includethe following:

Completed Projects

Project Title/Researcher/Duration/Implementing Agency

1. Development of computer-based designprocedure for agroforestry models/Agustin, E.O. et.al./1993–1996 /MMSU

2. Perceptions, attitudes and behavior ofCARP-ISF beneficiaries and theirinfluence on technology adoption/Dacayanan, J./1991–1994/DENR-RegionVIII

3. Methodology development for evalu-ating agroforestry systems / Lasco, R.D./1993–1996/UPLBCF

4. Tree species profiling/ Padilla, E./1996–2000/DMMSU, Bacnotan

5. Socio-economic survey of the farmer-cooperators of the CARP-ISFcommunity-based agroforestry R&Dlivelihood project in Region VIII/Bombio,R./1992–1996/DENR/Region VIII

6. Readership survey of technologytransfer materials distributed by ERDS-Region VIII/Cojin, B./1994–1995/DENR-Region VIII

7. Crop yield studies of gabi in agroforestrysystem/Mana-ol, E./1996–1998/ISCAF


8. Evaluation trials of sunflower, mulberryand ipil-ipil as hedgerows in a SALTfarm/Comaad, E./1996–1998/ISCAF

9. Evaluation of the impact of farmerstraining in the adaption of technologiesin Ifugao/Dincog, A./1996–1998/ISCAF

10. Factors associated with farmers’adoption of agroforestry technologiesunder the integrated social forestryprogram in Region I/ Almoite, O.T./1996–1998/ DMMMSU

11. Development of agroforestry modelfarms for Region I/ Sapitula, B.P./1996–1997/DMMSU, Bacnotan

12. Performance of some agriculturalcrops planted between calamansi andacacia trees/Sapitula, B.P./1996–1997/DMMMSU, Bacnotan

13. The effects of root pruning and fertilizerapplication on the growth and survivalof bareroot seedlings of multi-purposetree species/1996–1998/ DMMSU

14. Baseline benchmark survey inagroforestry systems./ Almoite, O.P./1996–1997/DMMMSU College ofAgriculture

15. Intercropping of blackpepper in MPTSplantation/Ufano, J./1996–1998/ DMMSU

16. Nitrogen mineralization and soil fertilityin Desmanthus virgatus+ rice alleycropping system./ Agustin, E.O./1994–1998/ MMSU

17. Site adaptability trials for nitrogenfixing trees/1994–1998/ MMSU

18. Development of postharvest equipmentand improved postharvest practices forcommercially viable agroforestryproducts/ Valdez, J.A./1997–2000/ TCA

19. Survey of agroforestry products forcommercial processing/Baquiran, J./1997–1998

20. Generation and improvement ofagroforestry production system in thedifferent provinces in Region VI/Brana,N./1994–1996/PSPC

21. Agroforestry schemes for hillside areasin Capiz/Abogadie, W./1994–1996/PSPC

22. Establishment of different schemeswith fertilizer application undercoconut/Gabino, G./1994–1996/PSPC

23. The effect of intercropping root crops onthe fast-growing fruit tree species/Brana, N./1994–1996/PSPC

24. Status of contour hedgerow technologyin Matalom, Leyte/Alcober, D./1997–1999/LSU

25. Utilization of Leucaena leucocephala andGmelina arborea as feed supplement tograzing goats in Matalom, Leyle/Gabunada, F./1998–1999/LSU

26. Agroforestry development and demons-tration farm establishment, in CARP-ISF project/Agpaoa, A.C./1996–1998/DENR-CAR

27. Integrated approaches to environmentalconservation and protection/Ronquillo,S. P./1996–1998 /DENR-CAR

28. Effectiveness of vetiver grass Vertiverazizanoides as hedges in selectedagroforestry schemes for siteproductivity enhancement/Ymana, S.P./1994–1997/DENR-CAR

29. Study on the passion fruit productionplanted under various tree/Baldino, T.Jr. S./ 1996–1998/ DENR-CAR

30. Impact assessment of the uplanddevelopment pilot CARP in Sablan/Estigoy, D.A./ 1996–1998/DENR-CAR

31. CARP-ISF Wildfood plant production,processing and marketing livelihoodCARP project/ Lopez, A.V./1996–1998/DENR-CAR

32. CARP-ISF agrilivestock project in CAR/Fadri,G./ 1996–1999/ DENR-CAR

33. CARP-ISF community-based agro-forestry livelihood in project in CAR/Martinez, E./1990–1994

34. Community-based wildfood CARPproject/1990–1994/DENR-CAR

35. Establishment of agroforestry demons-tration farm in Benguet/Agpaoa, A./1996–2000/DENR-CAR

36. Socio-economic impact assessment ofCARP-ISF beneficiaries five years after


project implementation/Amada, L.S./1996–1998/DENR

37. CARP-ISF fuelwood plantation project/Tomas, W.G./1996–1997/ DENR

38. Community-based agroforestry liveli-hood project in Region I/ Domingo, C.Jr./1990–1994/ DENR-Region I

39. CARP-ISF agrilivestock livelihoodproject in Region I/ Amanda, L. S./1996–1997/ DENR

40. Production costs-and-returns andmarket strategies of upland livestockenterprises/Buante, C.R./ 1996–1997/DENR-Region VIII

41. Community-based agroforestry develop-ment project in Region II/ Mercado, L.U./1996–1997/DENR-Region II

42. Development of plantation as showwindow for agroforestry, rattan,medicinal plantation, and other maturedtechnologies/Mercado, L./1990–1994/DENR-Region II

43. CARP-ISF agrilivestock livelihoodproject/Abel, L./1996–1998/DENR-Region II

44. CARP-ISF community-based agro-forestry livelihood project in Region III/Atabay, R.C./1996–1998/DENR-RegionIII

45. Performance of some crops intercroppedwith narra and mahogany in Mt. Duegresettlement area/Navarro, T.E./1996–1997/ TCA

46. Biomass production of adaptable foragespecies (grasess and legumes) underdifferent site conditions./ Buante, C.R./1996–1997/ DENR-Region VIII

47. Community-based agroforestry researchand development project in OrientalMindoro/Vendiola, E./1990–1994

48. Rehabilitation of open/grassland bydirect planting of kakawate (Glicidiasepium) at various densities/ Mendoza,M.P./1996–1998/ DENR-Region IV

49. CARP-ISF agrilivestock livelihoodproject/ Dela Cruz, V./1996–1998/ DENR-Region IV

50. CARP-ISF community-based agro-forestry livelihood project in Region IV/Nagpala, L.G./1996–1998/DENR-RegionIV-A

51. Fertilization of Leucaena and liming ofsite for adaption to low pH under twoclimatic conditions/Guimayen, G./1992–1996/DENR-Region IV

52. Pilot agroforestry for kaingin farmersin Liliw, Laguna/Calanog, L./1995–1997/ERDB

53. Selected agroforestry areas inthe Philippines: A comprehensivecommunity assessment/Calanog, L./1998–1999/ERDB

54. Extension strategies for the adoption ofagroforestry farming system in selectedareas in the Philippines/Calanog, L./1996–1998/ERDB

55. Effects of land titling on the adoption ofconservation-oriented farming techno-logies in the uplands/Calanog, L. et al./1990–1995/ERDB

56. Organizing agroforestry communities: Amarketing cooperative approach todevelopment/ Harder, R.T./1996–1997/ERDB

57. CARP-ISF agrilivestock livelihoodproject in Region V/ Palaypayon, W.R./1990–1994/ ERDB

58. The repelling effect of Benguet pine(Pinus insularis) as botanical control ofinsects pests in agroforestry system./Tiolo-Dawalis, A.J./1996–1998/RizalState College (RSC)

59. Economic and financial analysis ofincome-generating projects in CARP-ISFareas/Rivera, M./1993–1994/ERDB

60. Process documentation and contextualanalysis of income-generating projects inselected CARP-ISF areas/Villamor, C./1993–1994/ERDB

61. A socio-economic impact assessment ofthe CARP-ISF R&D programs onincome-generating projects on thefarmer-beneficiaries/Luna, A./1993–1994/ERDB


62. Impact of rural institutions on theimplementation of IGPs in selectedCARP-ISF areas in the Philippines/Calanog, L./1993–1994/ERDB

63. Direct seeding performance of selectedMPTS in Eastern Luzon/Principe, E./1991–1994/ERDB

64. Establishment and management ofCalliandra calothyrsus trials in thePhilippines/Duque, C., et al./1996–1999/ERDB

65. Reforestation of cogonal areas in PanayIsland with fuelwood species inter-planted with fruit trees/Arevalo, E./DENR-Region VI

66. Post-training evaluation of CARP-ISFagroforestry livelihood project/Talabero,V./1990–1994/DENR-Region VI

67. Site quality assessment of CARP-ISFagroforestry area in Mapili, SanEnrique, Iloilo/Talabero S.V./1990–1994/DENR-Region VI

68. Technical and financial feasibility ofestablishing agroforestry livelihoodproject in CARP-ISF area in Mapili, SanEnrique, Iloilo/Talabero, S./1990–1995/DENR- Region VI

69. CARP-ISF agroforestry livelihooddevelopment project in Region VI/Talabero, S.V./1990–1994/DENR-RegionVI

70. Post-training evaluation for agroforestryproject/Tolo, D./1992–1994/DENR-Region VI

71. Development of aqua-silviculturalproject in Region VI/Lustica, A./1996–1998/DENR-Region VI

72. Assessment of the marketing strategiesfor the aquasilviculture products/Tiolo-Dalawis, A./1996–1997/DENR-Region VI

73. Trial planting of Mamalis pitoporumpentandumin in Western Visayas/Lustica, A./1994–1999/DENR-Region VI

74. Agrilivestock livelihood project inRegion VI/Labos, J./1994–1996/DENR-Region VI

75. Effects of different feed combinations onthe growth performance of hybrid swine

in the uplands/Labos, J./DENR-RegionVI

76. Community-based fuelwood plantationand livelihood project/Burgos, G.

77. Utilization of madre de cacao and ipil-ipil leaves as organic fertilizers for fieldcorn production/Doloso, F./1993–1994

78. Documentation and assessment ofagroforestry practices in CentralVisayas/Lanuza, R./1990–1995/DENR-Region VII

79. Tiger grass R&D livelihood project inRegion VII/Tagra, M./1994–1996/DENR-Region VII

80. Community-based R&D agroforestrylivelihood project in Region VII/Tagra,M./1990–1994/DENR-Region VII

81. Establishment of pilot fuelwood plant-ation in Cebu and Bohol/Bonita, M./1996–1998/DENR-Region VII

82. Survival and growth performance ofselected fuelwood species as affected byweeding practices/Bagalihog, S./DENR-Region VII

83. Conversion of abandoned upland farmlots into Acacia ariculiformis and tigergrass intercrop/Tagra, M./1994–1996/DENR-Region VII

84. Biomass production and managementschemes for various agroforestry crops/Nasayao, E./1992–1995/DENR-RegionVIII

85. Acceptability of goat milking bycooperators of the CARP-ISF agri-livestock R&D livelihood project inRegion VIII/Gapuz, F./1992–1994/DENR-Region VIII

86. Effectiveness of various agroforestrypractices in controlling upland erosion/Dulay, P.A./1995–1997/DENR-RegionVIII

87. Production costs-and-returns andmarket strategies of upland livestoskenterprises/Angeles, H./1992–1995

88. Socio-economic and cultural develop-ment impacts of agrilivelihood projectsto CARP-ISF R&D area/Alvarez, F./1992–1994/DENR-Region VIII


89. A study of the Alayon systems withinthe context of the soil and waterconservation and agroforestry projectin Matalom, Leyte/Atega, T./1994–1996

90. Comparative analysis betweentraditional and introduced agro-forestry practices in CARP-ISF sites/Alba, M./1991–1994/DENR-Region VIII

91. Survey, collection, and identificationof insect pests and diseases associatedwith agroforest trees and crop species/Carandang,W./1994–1996/DENR-Region VIII

92. Socio-economic and environmentalimpact assessment of ISFP inIntegrated Social Forestry model sitesin Region VIII/Dionglay, M./1996–1999/DENR-Region VIII

93. CARP-ISF and agrilivestock R&Dlivelihood project in Region VII/Buante, C./1994–1996/DENR-RegionVIII

94. Community-based agroforestry R&Dlivelihood project in Region VIII/Nasayao, E./1990–1994/DENR-RegionVIII

95. Agroforestry schemes for uplandfarmers in Region IX/Barangan, F./1991–1992/DENR-Region IX

96. CARP-ISF R&D community-basedagroforestry livelihood project inRegion IX/Barangan, F./1990–1994/DENR-Region IX

97. Pre-sowing treatment of Calliandraseeds/Dichoso, M./1995–1996/DENR-Region IX

98. Effect of fertilization on the growthand fruit yield of guapple/Serna, C./1993–1995/DENR-Region X

99. CARP-ISF community-based agro-forestry livelihood project in Region X/Cacanindin, D./1990–1994/DENR-Region X

100. Socio-economic impact assessment ofCARP-ISF livelihood project to farmerbeneficiaries in Region X/Aceret, H./1990–1994/DENR-Region X

101. Survey of the prevalent diseasesoccurring in the selected CARP-ISFagrilivestock project site in Region X/Arida, A./1992–1993/DENR-Region X

102. Economics of production and marketanalysis for corn and agrilivestock inSan Jose, Malaybalay, Bukidnon/Mercado, B./1991–1993/DENR-Region X

103. Community-based agroforesrty liveli-hood project in Region X/Serna, C.

104. CARP-ISF R&D community agro-forestry livelihood project in RegionXI/Apura, B./1990–1994/DENR-RegionXI

105. An integrated sustainable develop-ment program for CARP-ISF areas inthe Philippines: An ecosystemapproach/Reyes, G./1990–1994/ERDB

106. Sustainable management of CARP-ISFlivelihood projects in Region XII/1994–1995/DENR-Region XII

107. Community-based agroforestry liveli-hood project in Region XII/Mercado,B./1994–1996/DENR-Region XII

108. CARP-ISF agrilivestock livelihoodproject in Region XII/Jaime, J./1990-1994/DENR-Region XII

109. Application of waste water treatmentmodel for small-scale handmade papermill/Mari, E./1999–2000/FPRDI

110. Determination of the acute lethaltoxicity of effluent from pulp and papermills/Austria, C./1999–2000/FPRDI

111. Commercial application of FPRDImechanized briquettor using coconutshells, husks and trunks/Pulmano, D./1995–1997/FPRDI

112. Optimization of dosage rates of wasteliquor as concrete additive/Moran, M.S./1995–1997/FPRDI

113. Utilization of CSNL-free shells for theproduction of charcoal briquette andactivated carbon/Bisana, B./FPRDI

114. Biological treatment of hazardouswaste from pulp and paper mill/Giron,M./1997–1999/FPRDI


115. Domestication of selected lesser-known Philippine indigenous foddertrees and shrubs (IFTS)/Calub, B./2000–2001/UPLB

116. Effects of Bt corn pollen on honey beespecies/2002

117. Pollination of Citrus spp./1999–2001/UPLB

118. Bee breeding research and develop-ment /Sito, A.a. Graft acceptance and queen

performance under queenless andqueenright cell builder conditions/Laquidan, R./2001–2002/DMMMSU

b. Performance of queen as affectedby supersedure and grafted cellmethod of queen production/Baldo, H./2001–2002/DMMMSU

c. Queen performance as affected bythe different sources of rawmaterials for pollen substitute/Laquidan, R./2001–2002/DMMMSU

d. Queen performance as affected byduration of queen banking andsystem of queen bank colonies/Baldo, H./2001–2002/DMMMSU

119. Pollination and hive managementR&D/Dangle, J.a. Yield response of carabao mango

to the pollination services ofhoney bee/Dangle, J./2001–2002/DMMMSU

b. Response of squash to pollinationservices of honey bee Apismellifera/Dangle, J./2001–2002/DMMMSU

120. Bee pests and diseases/Baldo, H.a. Integrated biological chemical

control measures for Varroa mitesVarroa destructor of honey bee Apismellifera/Dangle, J./2001–2001/DMMMSU

b. Wax moth control using formicacid and acetic acid under Region Icondition/Baldo, H./2001–2002/DMMMSU

121. Socio-economic R&D/ Dangle, J. andLopez, S.a. Assessment of migratory bee-

keeping in Region I./Dangle, J.et.al./2001–2002/DMMMSU

122. Supply-and- demand analysis ofhoneybee products and by-productsin Region I/Dandle, J./2001–2002/DMMMSU

123. Production and turnover of the fineroots of selected agroforestry species/Salamanca, E./2000–2002/DMMMSU

124. Soil nitrogen-mineralization, growthand yield of upland rice in alleycropping /2000-2001/DMMMSU

125. Influence of planting distance andcutting interval on the herbage yieldof ipil-ipil /Magtoto, R.L.and J.C.Briones/2001–2002/PAC

126. Application of various culturaltreatments on established clonal seedorchard in Bicol National Park/Balaguer, A.N./1998–2001/DENR-ERDS RegionV

127. Climatic classification informationassessment for optimizing agrofoestryproduction systems in the uplands ofCBFM sites/2001–2002/ERDB

128. Sustainability assessment of Philip-pine-German community project inQuirino/Calanog, L.A. and A.G.Calderon/2001–2002/ERDB

129. Development of panelized cons-truction system for modular shelters/Soriano, F.P./2000–2002/FPRDI

130. Non-conventional process: A cleanertechnology of producing tobacco pulpfor the handmade paper industry/2001–2002/MMSU

131. Southeast Asian Network forAgrofoestry Education (SENAFE)/1999–2002/IAF

132. Program to enhance NGO/POagroforestry capabilities for foodsecurity and the environment (PEACE


1 and PEACE 2) under the followingcomponents: /2000-2002/IAFa. Development and implementation

of agroforestry training coursesb. Development and production of

agroforestry information materialsc. Regional documentation of

successful agroforestry practicesin Luzon

d. Provision of technical assistance toFPE partners

e. Establishment and coordination ofagroforestry learning centers

133. Production of upland NGO assistancecommittee (UNAC) technology manualentitled, “Manual sa pagsasaka ngagroforestry”/2001–2002/UNAC, IAF

134. Production of Asia-Pacific AgroforestryNewsletter (APANews)/2001–2002/IAF

135. Evaluation of smallholder tree farmers’nurseries in Lantapan, Bukidnon,Claveria, Misamis Oriental and Cebu:“Quality stock production in supportof the tree domestication program forthe Philippines/2001–2002/IAF

136. Enhancing agroforestry education,research, and development for the nextdecade: A PAFERN national meetingworshop/2001–2002/IAF

137. Teaching materials development forBS Agroforestry/2001–2002/IAF

138. Carbon sink potential and soilamelioration capacity of the alleycropping systems/2001–2002/IAF

139. Improvement of agroforestry fieldlaboratory through participatorydevelopment/2001–2002/IAF

140. Inventory and analysis of teachingmaterials in agroforestry/2002/IAF

141. Agroforestry capability building forupland NGOs/2002/IAF

142. Institutional capability and needsassessment among PAFERN memberinstitution/2002/IAF

143. Agroforestry field practicumassistance for PAFERN memberinstitutions/2002/IAF

Ongoing Projects

1. Control of bees and bee mites inIndonesia and the Philippines/2001–2004/UPLBa. Effects of formic acid on Apis

melifera at varying concentrationsand ambient temperatures.

b. Population dynamics of bee mitesc. Toxicity of select acarides on adult

honey bees Apis cerna and A.mellifera

d. Survey of pathogens associated withA. cerana and A. mellifera

e. Genetic diversity of Philippine beemites

2. Genetic diversity of Philippine honeybee species/2001–2003

3. Altitudinal diversity of honey bees inMt. Makiling/2001–2003 /UPLB

4. Socioeconomics of Philippine bee-keeping industry/2001–2003/UPLB

5. Bee breeding R&D/Sito, A.a. Collection and maintenance of

different honey bee species in thePhilippines/Sito, A./2001–2005/DMMMSU

6. Sustainable Agriculture and NaturalResources Management CollaborativeResearch Support Program (SANREMCRSP/SEA)a. Technical and institutional

innovations to evolve agroforestrysystems for sustainable agricultureand the management of protectedecosystems in the framework of awatershed model/ 1998–2003/ICRAF

b. Adapting and transferring lessonslearned from Manupali to othercritical watersheds in SoutheastAsia/1998–2003/SEARCA/UPLB/UAF

c. Environmental management plan-ning and development policyanalysis using a watershedcommunity model in Lantapan,Bukidnon, Philippines/1998–2003/LGU- Lantapan/UPLB


d. Replicating models on institutionalinnovation for developed, parti-cipatory watershed management/1998–2003/ICRAF/USAID

e. Watershed resource managementand education/1998–2003/AuburnUniversity/USAID

f. Capability building for naturalresources management at the locallevel: Focus on 12 communities inValencia and Lantapan, Bukidnon/1998–2003/USAID

7. Hive product production, processingand utilization R&D (Royal jellyproduction for bee-keeping sustain-ability in La Union/2002–2003/DMMMSU

8. Phenological studies of potential api-silviculture species in La Union/2000–2003/DMMMSU

9. Intercropping of Passiflor flavicarpaunder growing Benguet pine trees/1998–2003/MPSPC

10. Establishment of seed productionareas for forage species/2000–2003/DENR-ERDS Region V

11. Establishment of the sericulture projectfor R&D/E and production/2002–2003/PAC

12. Evaluation of MPTS in hedgerow alleycropping scheme for sustainable uplandcrop production/1999–2003/UEP

13. Initial assessment of the productivity ofselected ISF-CARP community-basedagroforestry areas in Abra/2002–2003/DENR-ERDS-CAR

14. Pilot plantation for fuelwood production/2000–2003/DENR-ERDS Region X

15. Sustainability assessment of DENRcharcoal technology/2002–2003/ERDB

16. Silvical characterization of malapapaya(Polyscias nodosa) under a coconut-based agroforestry systems in Luisiana,Laguna/2002–2003/IAF

17. Rehabilitation of degraded landsthrough accelerated pioneer-climaxspecies series (APCS) strategy/2002–2003/IAF

18. Rehabilitation of degraded landsthrough rotation forestry species-basedagroforestry systems/2002–2003/IAF

19. Effect of thinning and coconut frondpruning treatments on the growth andyield of mahogany interplanted withcoconut/2002–2003/IAF

20. Effect of organic fertilizer and mulchingon growth of three-year old mahoganyplantation/2002–2003/IAF

21. Effect of thinning on growth and yieldof eight-year old mahogany plantationand on interplanted shade-tolerantcrops/2002–2003/IAF

22. Production and healing value analysisof DENR charcoal made from differentcombinations of municipal solid wastes/2001–2003/ERDB

23. Pilot plantation on the integration ofmedicinal plants as agroforestry cropsin selected upland projects in thePhilippines/2002–2004/ERDB

24. Piloting of the 1:4 Pooc agroforestrytechnology/2000–2006/ERDB

25. Gender roles in the ruminant productionin the municipality of Pila and Siniloan,Laguna/2002–2003/ERDB

26. Bioeconomic modeling of changes totraditional vegetable productionpractices in the Manupali- watershedand extensions to other Southeast Asianwatersheds/2001–2003/ERDB

27. Review and analysis of policies affectingthe source, harvesting, and transport offorest-based raw materials for thefurniture industries/2001–2004/ERDB

28. Pilot production and research of growingRoselle plant (Hibiscus sabdarffa) as anintercrop in agroforestry/2002–2004/ERDB

29. Community-based resource manage-ment sub-project environmental techno-logy transfer/1999–2003/ERDB

30. Growth response of two timber treespecies to various weeding treatmentsand planting densities in the ManupaliWatershed/2000–2003/ICRAF-Lantapan,Bukidnon


31. Enhancing productivity of timber andfruit tree-based contour hedgerow inupland soils: Quantification of tree-crop interactions/2000–2003/ICRAF-Lantapan, Bukidnon

32. Enhancing adoption of soil conservationpractices: Landcare Philippines/2002–2003/ICRAF-Lantapan, Bukidnon

33. Replicating models of institutionalinnovations for devolved participatorywatershed management/2001–3003/ICRAF-Lantapan, Bukidnon

34. Ancestral domain studies in Mt.Kitanglad/2003–2005/ICRAF-Lantapan,Bukidnon

35. Rewarding the upland poor for theenvironmental services (RUPES)/2003–2008/ICRAF-Lantapan

36. Enhancing adoption of conservationfarming and agroforestry practices

through Landcare/2000–2003/ICRAF-Claveria, Misamis Oriental

37. Smallholder timber production systems/2002–2003/ICRAF-Claveria, MisamisOriental

38. Smallholder agroforestry options fordegraded soils (SAFODS): tree establish-ment in cropped fields/2000–2003/ICRAF-Claveria, Misamis Oriental

39. Documenting existing local (indigenousand introduced) conservation farmingtechnologies/2000–2003/ICRAF-Visayas

40. Monitoring of farmers adoption andadaptation of technologies/2002–2003/ICRAF-Visayas

41. Linking technology generation anddissemination to Landcare/2002–2003/ICRAF-Visayas


The following are the technologiesdeveloped and information generated

from the commodity initiative andassessment efforts from 1990 to 2000.

Indigenous Agroforestry System

Naalad modified fallow aystem. Lasco(PCARRD Highlights 1992) conducted an on-farm evaluation of the Naalad modifiedfallow system in Naga, Cebu. It is one of themost unique indigenous improved fallowsystems found in Naalad, Naga, Cebu. TheNaalad system, developed 100 years ago, isbasically a fallow system. The fallow periodis hastened by the introduction of native‘ipil-ipil’ (L. leucocephala) in the area to befallowed. There are two improvements overthe traditional fallow system.

First, instead of waiting for naturalsuccession processes to revegetate thefallow, the farmers plant L. leucocephala toshorten the fallow period from ten or moreyears to only five to six years.

Second, at the end of the fallow period,farmers cut the L. leucocephala branchesand twigs but instead of burning the biomassas they do in shifting cultivation, they pilethem along the contours to form a fascine-like structure locally known as balabag orbabag, which help conserve the soil. Thebalabag are spaced from 1 m to 2 m and thealleys formed between are planted to cornand tobacco.

Hanunuo Mangyan indigenous agro-forestry systems. Gascon (PCARRD 1999)studied the Hanunuo Mangyans’ indigenous

Principal Technological Milestones○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

agroforestry systems in Sitio Dangkalan,Bulalacao, Oriental Mindoro. There arethree agroforestry production systemspracticed, namely: the swidden or kaingin,the multistorey, and the home garden.

In swidden farms, rice and corn were themajor crops planted. Other cropsinterplanted included banana, cassava,sugarcane, and root crops. Crops wereplanted simultaneously or sequentiallywithin the cultivated area. However, thecrops were randomly and/or inappropriatelyplanted, and thus competed with the riceand corn for soil nutrients, water, andsunlight resulting to low yields. It was themost practiced system but the leastecologically sound.

Fallowing was practiced whenever thefarmer noticed that the soil was no longerfertile. The land was rested for 1–3 yearswhich was not enough if compared to the 19years fallow period which their ancestorspracticed.

In multistorey farms, the upper canopyhad coconut while the middle canopy hadmango, banana, ‘anahaw’ (Livistonarotundifolia), and ‘anuling’ (Pisoniaumbellifera). The lower canopywas dominated by pineapple with someL. leucocephala at the edges. It was alsofound to be the most ecologically sound interms of soil fertility maintenance.

The home gardens were structurallysimple. The upper canopy was usuallyplanted to bananas, coconut, mango,jackfruit, and guava. Ube was plantedunder and twined on the fruit trees.L. leucocephala and ‘kakawate’ (Gliricidiasepium) served as live fences.


Agroforestry farms and farmpractices in Central Visayas. Based onthe study conducted by Baggayan Jr. andLanuza (PCARRD Highlights 1994), allfarmers in Central Visayas practicedcontour farming. They use hedgerow androckwall to conserve the soil. Some farmersin Cebu were also engaged in fishing andlivestock raising.

Developed AgroforestryTechnologies/Systems

Sloping Agricultural Land Tech-nology (SALT). MBRLC, an active partnerof the government in improving the livesof upland farmers and other tribalgroups in Mindanao, has developed theinternationally known SALT. SALT is adiversified farming system which can beconsidered under the agroforestry schemebecause permanent shrubs, such as coffee,cacao, citrus, fruit trees, etc., are dispersedthroughout the farm plot.

Basically SALT is a package technologyon soil conservation and food productionmeasures in just one setting. It is a guide onhow to farm hilly lands without losing thesoil. SALT is a method of growing field andpermanent crops in a 3–5-m wide bandsbetween contoured rows of nitrogen-fixingtrees. These trees are thickly planted indouble rows to make hedgerows. When ahedge is 1.5–2 m tall, it is cut down to about40 cm and the cut portions are placed in analley to serve as organic fertilizers (AsianRural Life Development Foundation[ARLDF] 1997).

Simple Agrolivestock Technology(SALT 2). SALT 2 is a goat-basedagroforestry with a land use of 40% foragriculture, 20% for forestry, and 40% forlivestock. Experiences by the MBRLC inBansalan, Davao Del Sur, indicate that thesaid technology minimizes erosion,

improves soil fertility, and providesadditional income to upland farmers. Thistechnology guides farmers on how to raisegoats under the SALT system (MBRLC1998).

Sustainable Agroforest Land Tech-nology (SALT 3). SALT 3 is a small-scalereforestation integrated with foodproduction. The farm is devoted to 40% and60% agriculture and forestry, respectively.Results indicate that application of thistechnology conserves the soil effectively,thereby providing food, wood, andadditional income for the uplanders. Thistechnology guides farmers on how to growcrops with trees in the SALT system(MBRLC 2000).

Small Agrofruit Livelihood Tech-nology (SALT 4). SALT system is furthermodified wherein fruit trees wereintegrated in the system known as SALT 4.In this particular technology, farmers canmodify the system to suit their needs. Ingeneral, SALT 4 guides farmers on how tointegrate fruit trees into the SALT system(MBRLC 2000).

Biological and Physical Processesof Agroforestry Technologies

and Practices

Agroforestry farming system for thehillyland. Malab (PCARRD Highlights1992) identified the tree-crop combinationas the most feasible and environmentallysound agroforestry scheme for marginalhillylands. The study found out thatcombination of Acacia auriculiformis +Mangifera indica and Gliricidia sepium +rice/mungbean are two models withsustainable and high potentials for hillylanddevelopment. These systems increase soilcarbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus.


Agri-nipa-aquaculture technology:A sustainable land use in the nipa-dominated wetlands of Puerto Galera.Agri-nipa-aquaculture is a technology whichcombines nipa and agricultural cropswith fish production, a variation ofaquasilviculture. The study was conductedin a 1-ha nipa dominated wetland in PuertoGalera, Oriental Mindoro. Results showedthat the area became productive through theuse of the said scheme. Baconguis (1994)reported that the farmer harvestedvegetables and other crops and fish from thepond for his food and augmented the familyincome, while he waited for the nipa to beharvested as materials for making thatch.The sap produced will be also collected.

Carbon sequestration. The potentialof agroforestry system to sequester carbonfrom the atmosphere and help mitigateclimate change was emphasized by Lascoand Pulhin (1997). They estimated that by2005, agroforestry farms in the Philippineswould cover about 5.9 M ha and would havea projected carbon sequestration of about14 t/ha.

Sales (1998) evaluated the carbonstorage capacity of yemane-cacao agro-forestry system and estimated 105 t/ha ofcarbon in a biomass of about 236 t/ha. Theannual litterfall of this stand was 5 t/hawhich has a capacity of storing 2.2 t of C/ha.

In another study, Estrella (1999) lookedat the carbon sequestration potential ofG. sepium-based alley cropping systemunder fallow. A total biomass of 33 t/haequivalent to 14.6 t of C/ha or a carbonsequestration rate of 0.91 t of C/ha per yearwas estimated. This rate of carbonsequestration was much lower than that ofa secondary forest in Makiling (7.81 t of C/ha per year) and tree plantation (4 t of C/haper year) in the Philippines. However, it washigher than that of the grassland ecosystemwhich has a zero sequestration ability (Lascoand Pulhin 1997).

Changes in soil properties invarious farmers’ agroforestry schemeswithin the watershed developmentarea of Matalom. Soil organic matter wasaffected more by the cropping system/pattern than by the length of cultivationbased on the study conducted by Quiroland Inderio (1999) in the WatershedDevelopment Project area in Matalom.Fallowing seems to increase/improve soilpH. The amount of soil loss due to erosionwas highly influenced by the croppingsystem/pattern and partially by the type andage of the hedgerows employed in the farm.Mura grass combined with leguminousshrubs/trees was effective in controlling soilerosion. There was a general reduction inthe total amount of soil loss from thewatershed area as depicted in thedecreasing sediment load in the existingriver system within the area. This waspartially attributed to the increasingnumber of trees planted in the watershedarea.

Ridge tillage system in corn-basedagroforestry system. Mercado et al. (1999)worked with Misamis Oriental State Collegeof Agriculture and Technology (MOSCAT)and North Carolina State University, inevaluating the use of ridge tillage (RT)system and natural vegetative contourstrips (NVCS) as alternative landmanagement systems for corn in corn-basedagroforestry system.

Based on the results, RT and NVCS werecapable of having three croppings per yeardue to reduced turn-around period. Bothscheme yielded an average of 13.26 t/ha peryear compared to non-RT system with only9.48 t/ha per year.

Combining NVCS and RT reduced soilloss by 95–98% while using RT and NVCSalone would reduce soil loss by 58% and73–91%, respectively. Ridge tillage hadhigher infiltration rate (40 cm/hr) comparedwith that of the other treatments. The


economic analysis done in the same yearshowed that RT system can yield an annualnet income of P39,446.75/ha per yearcompared with P24,982.50 by conventionalfarming.

Sustainability of IndigenousSpecies for Hedgerows

Performance of corn in alleycropusing different hedgerow species.G. sepium was found effective as hedgerow.Soriano, Jr. (1992) studied the performanceof corn in alleycrop by using differenthedgerows species: G. sepium, Leucaenadiversifolia, and Acacia villosa.

Findings showed that N and P contentsof herbages of three hedgerow species didnot differ significantly. Potassium content,however, was significantly higher in G.sepium herbage than that of the other twohedgerows. Grain yield of corn wasgenerally higher in plots with G. sepium andA. villosa hedgerows than that of cornmonoculture plot except during the firstyear where it outranked the treated plots.

According to Soriano, Jr. (1992),hedgerow intercropping treatment waseffective in reducing runoff and sedimentyield. Hedgerow plus a combination ofeither ground barrier or mulch providedsufficient protection against soil loss. Forrunoff control, hedgerow plus a combinationof both ground barrier and mulch wasneeded for maximum protection duringperiods of long duration and high intensitystorms. By controlling runoff and erosion,land degradation was minimized; hence, thereversion of productive agricultural landsto unproductive cogonal areas was likewiseprevented. The potential of hedgerowintercropping in combining erosion controland soil fertility enhancement can offerbetter opportunity for small farmers wherefinances are not readily available for thepurchase of fertilizers.

In the same year, he also investigatedthe potential of agroforestry practices in soiland water conservation in the upland farmsof Ilocos Norte. Results revealed that it wasmore effective if the loppings were usedeither as ground barrier, mulch, orcombination of both. Groundcover wasprovided by the loppings applied as surfacemulch that reduced soil water evaporation.Since upland farming is generally rainfedand crop is often exposed to intersperseddry spells, any reduction in soil waterevaporation is as beneficial as enhancedwater intake into the soil.

Desmanthus virgatus as hedgerowsin a hillyland agroforestry system.Agustin et al. (1995) conducted a study onD. virgatus as hedgerows in a hillylandagroforestry system from 1991 to 1995.Results showed that D. virgatus hedgerowscontributed to the increase of soil organicmatter from 1.96% to 2.64% after four yearsof continuous mulching. It could be plantedat any spacing between 20 cm and 30 cmbetween hills, in double rows and could becut from 50 cm to 100 cm above the groundwithout any remarkable difference in thegrain yield of the alley crop. Adaptability ofthe plant to very close spacing or densestocking suggested its high potential forerosion control.

Moreover, the species could also be usedas feeds for livestock and poultry and a goodsource of organic fertilizer.

Leguminous species as hedgerows inagroforestry systems. In 1995, Turaverified the use of selected leguminousspecies as hedgerows in agroforestrysystems in Overland, Buenavista, Bohol.The soil in the area was deficient inmacronutrients, moderately acidic withorganic matter concentrated on the topsoilequivalent to 1.5% decreasing downwards.The study established G. sepium hedgerowsin double or triple rows along the contour


following a distance of 25 cm between rowsand 30 cm between hills. The study foundout that herbage application for three yearsimproved the soil condition, increased thesoil pH, organic matter, total nitrogen,phosphorus, potassium, and othermacronutrients.

Gliricidia sepium as hedgerowspecies. The performance of G. sepium ashedgerow species was also done by Mercadoin 1997. The four-year hedgerow-cropinterference study compared three plantspecies: G. sepium, a nitrogen-fixing (N-fixing) tree legume; Cassia spectabilis, anon-N-fixing tree; and Pennisetumpurpureum, a forage grass. Factors such ashedgerow biomass, nutrient yields, and thespecies relative effects on rice and maizeproductivity were also investigated. Thestudy reported that non-N-fixing tree C.spectabilis produced 46% more pruningbiomass annually compared with N-fixing G.sepium. Nitrogen supplied by C. spectabilisto the alley crops was similar with that ofG. sepium on the first year of observation,but increased by 20–30% in the succeedingyears. The four-year comparativeexperiments showed that a hedgerowsystem with a N-fixing tree did not exertsignificant advantages compared with anon-N-fixing tree species.

Pest Management in AgroforestrySystems

Insect pests associated with cropsand agroforest tree species. Polo (1992)reported that insect pests associated withcrops and agroforest tree species in threeComprehensive Agrarian Reform Program-Integrated Social Forestry (CARP-ISF)agroforestry project sites includedchrysomelid beetle, sweet potato weevil,leaf hopper, corn borer, cotton stainer,negro bug, metallic wood boring beetle,

snout beetle, pedilid beetle, and scentlessplant bug. The natural enemies foundassociated with these insect pests were:ladybird beetle, Syrphid fly, spiders,longhorned grasshopper, ground beetle,field crickets, assassin bug, lacewing, andparasitic wasps.

Potential of G. sepium leaves in pestmanagement. Rabena (1996) reported thepotential of G. sepium leaves in pestmanagement. He isolated the activecomponents of G. sepium leaves that madeit a suitable botanical pesticide. Coumarinsisolated from G. sepium leaves withpetrolleum ether showed bioactivity.Coumarins inhibited the growth of fungusTricophyton mentagrophytes.

Economics of Agroforestry Systems

Establishment of forage plantationsand agroforestry projects. Theestablishment of forage plantations andagroforestry projects ensured moreprotection and conservation to the denudedforest (Amada 1994). The project showed anincrease in income among farmerparticipants. Before the project, about 17%of the farmers earned below P5,000 and 39%earned P5,000–10,000. After the project,53% of the farmers earned P5,000–10,000 andno farmers were reported to be earning lessthan P5,000. Farmers also gained knowledgein livestock raising and managementthrough training, briefings, and actualapplication of different farming practices.

Impact of CARP-ISF Agrilivestocklivelihood project on the socioeconomicstatus of the farmers in Region X. In1994, Palma studied the impact of CARP-ISF Agrilivestock livelihood project on thesocioeconomic status of the farmers inRegion X. He reported that after the project,forest trees increased significantly, pasture

s


grasses improved, and the farmer-beneficiaries planted root crops as well.Proceeds from the sale of livestockdispersed to the farmer-beneficiaries haveaugmented their income by as much as 12%annually. This eased their financial burdens;enabled them to acquire their own livestock;improved their dwellings; and acquiredmaterial possessions such as land, shelter,draft animals, and personal belongings.

Economic performance of a SALT 2farm with goat farming. Also in 1994,Cumpio studied the economic performanceof a SALT 2 farm with goat farming. Thestudy showed that goat raised under thecut-and-carry system in SALT 2 farm hadgreater weight gains, higher production, andbetter quality of kids compared to goatsraised in native pasture. This could beattributed to the forage/legume fed to goatscontaining high crude protein and minerals.

Intercropping yemane (Gmelinaarborea) with cash crops. Mallorca andMamiscal conducted a study on inter-cropping G. arborea with cash crops in 1994.Economic analysis showed that yemaneexposed to field condition intercropped withbottle gourd, pechay, eggplant, squash, andtomato provided the highest net benefit ofP35,200. Partially shaded yemane plantedunder two-year old ‘lakatan’ bananaprovided a net benefit of P7,000. Fullyshaded yemane intercropped with five-yearold ‘cardava’ banana provided the lowestbenefit of P6,150. Return-on-investment(ROI) from pechay and tomato was 150%;eggplant, 125%; squash and lakatan, 118%;cardava, 112%; yemane, 113%; and bottlegourd, 0.8%. This system also enhanced therestoration of the area since soil erosion wasminimized.

Mushroom cultivation under closed-canopy high-diversity forest farmingsystem. In 1993, Mangaoan and Ranchesstudied mushroom cultivation under closed-

canopy high-diversity forest farming system.Findings showed local isolate of V. volvaceagave higher yield (2,263.65 g) comparedwith V. volvariella (1,574.80 g) from Biotech,College, Laguna. These fruited much betterin close-canopy area than when cultivatedin the open area. Pleurotus yield (209.60 g/bag) was higher when inside mushroomhouse under closed-canopy-area than wheninside the mushroom house in relativelyopen area (198.54 g/bag).

Cost-and-return analysis of V.volvariella and Pleurotus mushroomproduction was found to be economicallyfeasible.

Promotion of Agroforestry Systems

Promotion of agroforestry practicesand technologies. DENR, together withthe Ford Foundation and the InternationalInstitute for Rural Reconstruction (IIRR),published the Agroforestry Information Kit(ATIK). This is a documentation of variousagroforestry practices and technologies asreference guide for DENR field techniciansinvolved in social forestry and other uplanddevelopment programs and projects. It canalso be used as supplementary referencematerial for other forestry practitionersinvolved in upland development (PCARRD1997).

Furthermore, the Regional AgroforestryTechnology Information Kit (RATIK) wasproduced. Its main objective is to strengthenthe DENR capability in preparingagroforestry information, education, andcommunication (IEC) materials and todocument regionalized or more site-specificagroforestry practices and technologies.This was piloted in Regions II, VI, and XI(PCARRD 1997).

CARP-ISF R&D Program. In general,the DENR CARP-ISF R&D Program (1995)was implemented as an intervening systemto restore food and ecological security in the


uplands and coastal villages where most ofthe marginal sectors abound. Through thesociological and biotechnological inputs, theprogram also gained inroads in promotingfood and ecological security thus, attainingsustainable development. Sustained farmproductivity, improved socioeconomicstatus and delivery of social services, self-sufficiency in basic necessities, improvedenvironmental conservation and packagedtechnologies of upland farming systemswere the long-term benefits provided bythe program.

The program developed 3,103 ha of whichabout 50% or 1,588 ha was accounted forthe development of the production baseof agrilivestock. Smaller areas fordevelopment were devoted to nontradi-tional development activities such as thosefor wildfood, cutflower, ‘tikog’ (Frimbistylisglobulosa), and aquasilviculture (combi-nation of fish, trees, and agricultural crops).There were 4,076 cooperators in the saidprogram. About 124 associations wereestablished as well as 1,248 infrastuctureswere built. During the program imple-mentation, 521 training sessions wereconducted. The conduct of informaltrainings proved to be the best channel ofimparting technical information to thecooperators. Personal communication andcontact with them were found to be effectivetools for extension activities.

Results showed that the said programincreased the productivity of the uplandoccupants thereby, increasing their income.The livelihood opportunities generatedemployment for 2,755 families. The 1,968 haupland and mangrove resources weredeveloped into productive enterprises. Theoccupants acted as partners for thesustainable development of the environmentand natural resources. The established pilot/demonstration areas, served as models forpossible adoption by other upland farmers.

Agroforestry in CARP-ISF areas.The agroforestry practices/technologies

introduced in Region VIII were SALT,multistorey cropping, bio-intensivegardening, intercropping, introduction ofhigh-yielding cash crop varieties, improvedfallow, and soil-conserving bench terracing.Nasayao (1994) reported that after five yearsof project implementation, experiencessuggested that sustainable developmentwas possible only if the stages have beengradual and slow, although the prospect ofattaining it was high. The organizing andtraining activities significantly built up thefarmer’s capabilities to adopt introducedtechnologies. Regular farm visits andmeetings significantly contributed tobuilding the farmer’s confidence to expresstheir problems and concern and to come upwith appropriate solutions to theseproblems.

Upland Development Program(UDP). DENR, in partnership withacademic institutions, implemented theUDP. This program was intended to developeffective participatory approaches and toenhance the capabilities of DENR andthe upland communities for resourcemanagement. With the UDP, the parti-cipatory planning tools and methodologieswere developed and served as guide inimplementing social forestry, and latercommunity-based forest managementprograms. These included the communityprofiling; participatory planning,monitoring, and evaluation; communitytraining programs; and basic communityorganizing frameworks for community-based forest management programs. Theprogram provided women with equalopportunities for managing the forestresources by initiating a policy granting thecertificate of stewardship (CS) under thename of the husband and wife. Women werealso involved in trainings and projectactivities, and acted as presidents of theassociations, like in Regions IX and X. TheUDP had developed functional and viableorganizations. These organizations worked


hand-in-hand with the forestry communityorganizers (FCO) in implementing projectactivities and eventually took over theresponsibilities for project managementafter the turn over. Major portions of mostUDP sites had been developed into modelfarms. These areas served as learninglaboratories and training centers for otherupland farmers. The pool of farmer-trainersconducted training among farmers withinand outside the project areas.

Establishment of CBFM regionaltraining centers. The Center for PeopleEmpowerment in the Uplands (CPEU) isenvisioned to build an empowered and self-reliant communities in the uplands.Specifically, it is designed to promote theinvolvement of local communities and toencourage their active participation inupland development through people’sempowerment and capacity building.

To realize these objectives, DENRadopted selected model sites under the ISFPand other community projects andestablished one CPEU in each province. Asa center, it serves as training laboratory andshowcases the various upland technologiesand approaches. The activities to be carriedout focus more on training and communityorganizing, cooperative, and livelihooddevelopment in the upland. The activitiesof the center are supervised by DENR incollaboration with the local governmentunits (LGUs), nongovernment organizations(NGOs), and people’s organizations (POs).

However, based on the assessmentconducted in 1995, not all the CPEUs werefound to be functioning as originallyconceived due to lack of training facilitiesand funding support.

To operationalize the CPEU and to putin place the needed support to carry out thenecessary training programs, a regionaltraining center in every region was selectedand developed from among the existingCPEUs and other community-based projectsin 1996.

In the strategic action plan for CBFM,the DENR identified the development andthe use of networks of CBFM model sites asan important strategy. The objective is todevelop nerve centers and transformregional training centers into CBFM modelsites that will facilitate and spreadsustainable forest management practices inthe uplands.

Tools for Assessing Sustainabilityof Agroforestry Systems

In recent years, agroforestry has beenrecognized locally and internationally as themost effective means of addressing theproblems of rural poverty and rehabilitatingdegraded upland areas. With the vast arrayof agroforestry systems, a multidisciplinaryteam formulated the MEAS in the country(Lasco et. al 1997). This methodology can beused as an initial assessment tool toevaluate the “goodness” of an agroforestrysystem in question. It is applied in caseswhere development workers and farmersare considering whether to adopt or not anexisting agroforestry system.

The indicators used in the assessmentinclude soil erosion rate and soil fertilityfor soil conservation, land equivalent ratio(LER) for productivity, net income, surplus,agroforestry system efficiency ratio (ASER)for social acceptability. The agroforestrysystem satisfying all the indicators isconsidered “potentially sustainable.”Otherwise, improvements or modificationsof the agroforestry system should beimplemented to satisfy the indicator. If themodifications of the agroforestry system areno longer feasible, then the system isunsustainable.

In the formulation of MEAS, variousgovernment institutions developed otherevaluation tools such as the agroecosystemanalysis approach (AAA), AFA, FSR/D,monitoring and evaluation system (MES)and ICRAF’s diagnosis and design.


AFA, for instance, is a tool used inevaluating the effectiveness of agroforestryfarms (Lasco,1993). It determines how aparticular technology affects the farmer andhis environment. Likewise, it serves as afeedback mechanism for technology fine-tuning and provides opportunities formodifications at an early stage.

ALCAMS is a tool used to minimize trialand error; hence, plan the agroforestryfarms effectively (Lawas 1993). Landresource evaluation through the ALCAMSdetermines the capability and suitability ofthe area/site for agroforestry. Thetechnology answers the many questions infarm activity like adaptability foragroforestry site, appropriate systems,practices, and components for the area.

To maximize production per unit areaper time and added environmental benefits,the lowland agroforestry system (LAS) wasestablished by Saplaco and Dalmacio in1996. It utilizes the unproductive and/orwasted portion of rice-producing lowlandareas particularly the dikes, farmboundaries and landings, irrigation canalsas well as roadsides for vegetables, forest

and fruit trees, forage, and animalproduction. LAS can also be applied toflatlands or lowlands on mountain areaswith slope of not more than 5%.

A computer-based design procedure foragroforestry models was developed byForonda, et al. in 1996. This programotherwise known as the Farm ResourceIntegration, Evaluation, and Design(FRIEnD) was developed to assistagroforestry planners, extension workers,and researchers.

FRIEnD version 1.0 takes advantage ofpowerful and advanced portable computersystems and existing knowledge as well astechnologies by integrating them into acomprehensive planning and decision tool.This model is a powerful and dynamic toolthat hopes to assist social forestrytechnicians in the formulation ofappropriate agroforestry systems forindividual agroforestry farm.

This software is menu-driven and user-friendly, applicable not only to agroforestry,but also applicable for a computer-aideddesign procedure of any agroecosystemprovided the input model exists.


Through the years, agroforestry has beenrecognized as the sustainable manage-

ment systems capable of improvingproductivity in the upland, reducingpoverty, increasing farmer’s income, andenhancing environmental stability. Thus,various government agencies andnongovernment organizations are workingtogether in partnership with the local peoplefor a sustainable resource development andeffective management of natural resources.

PCARRD through the Agroforestry andMPTS Team sets the priorities anddirection of agroforestry research anddevelopment in the country. UPLB’sEcosystems Research and DevelopmentBureau (ERDB) and the Forest ProductsResearch and Development Institute(FPRDI) are the national R&D centers forAgroforestry and MPTS commodity. Inaddition, PCARRD listed 19 regional R&Dcenters, 22 cooperating stations and 1specialized agency. PCARRD coordinatesthe Sustainable Agriculture and NaturalResources Collaborative Research SupportProgram for Southeast Asia (SANREM-CRSP/Southeast Asia) and monitors theproject on Technical and InstitutionalInnovations to Evolve Agroforestry Systemsfor Sustainable Agriculture and theManagement of Protected Ecosystems. Theintroduction of alternative land manage-ment practices in Lantapan, Bukidnon hasresulted in agricultural diversification andthe conservation of soil resources. Thediversity of tree species across thelandscape provides opportunity for thefarmers to respond to market demands forspecific species. Now, there is a widespread

Institutional Capability○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

appreciation for tree farming as an income-generating activity.

IAF based at UPLB, coordinatesand facilitates the implementation ofagroforestry curricular programs. Itimplements education research to improvethe effectiveness of agroforestry educationin the country. Likewise, the Institutemaintains learning laboratory foragroforestry, evaluates, and documents bothindigenous and introduced agroforestrysystems.

IAF also develops information materials,promotes and field tests agroforestryresearch and technology for sustainabledevelopment (IAF 2002). IAF offers regularshort course in agroforestry attended byparticipants from various NGOs, POs, andgovernment agencies. The Foundation forPhilippine Environment (FPE) and theUpland NGO Assistance Committee(UNAC) provided scholarship support toNGOs and POs to participate in thosecourses.

From 1992 to 2002, IAF trained 1,137participants in agroforestry-relatedcourses. As of 2002, there were about 147organizations (i.e., GOs, NGOs, and POs)reported to be involved in agroforestryrelated projects. Opportunities for on-the-job training as well as technical assistanceare being provided. Moreover, FPEsupported the documentation of successfulagroforestry practitioners among selectedfarmers from Luzon and Visayas, whichbecame known as the Regional AgroforestryTechnology Information Kit (RATIK).

The Philippine Agroforestry Educationand Research Network (PAFERN) was


created with 31 member-institutionsactively involved in promoting agroforestrycurricula, training, and research. Accordingto Villancio (2002), PAFERN helpsstrengthen the institutional capabilitiesof member-institutions in agroforestryeducation and research. It also servesas mechanism to promote sustaineddevelopment of agroforestry as a distinctdiscipline, and facilitate exchange ofrelevant agroforestry information and othermaterials. The development of a NationalAgroforestry Development Program(NAFDP) was recognized as an appropriatemechanism for the institutionalization ofagroforestry in the country (Villancio 2002).Figure 1 shows the operational frameworkof institutionalizing the science and practiceof agrofestry in the Philippines.

ERDB and the Environment Researchand Development Services (ERDS) of theDENR have been actively implementingvarious environmental, social and livelihoodprograms such as the ISFP, NationalReforestation Program (NFP), Forest LandManagement Agreement (FLMA) andCBFMP in residual forest lands occupied bythe upland farmers. They also establishedmodel agroforestry farms in every regionand learning laboratories in major islandsin the country. The 1:4 agroforestry systemin Pooc II, Silang, Cavite was documentedby ERDB.

DENR, through UDP in coordinationwith different agencies and researchinstitutions, has been promoting agro-forestry in the upland communities torestore the natural resources, specificallysoil and water and the ecosystem as a whole.Several studies and projects have beenconducted/implemented in these commu-nities for agroforestry development.

FPRDI works on the processing andutilization of harvested forest productsincluding timber.

MBRLC, a nonprofit foundation basedin Kinuskusan, Bansalan, Davao delSur, undertakes research and develops

appropriate farming technology systemsintegrating crops and livestock that willhelp farmers increase income and sustaintheir productivity. To date, MBRLC hasestablished a 19-hectare-agroforestrydemonstration center hosting about 20,000visitors annually (Tacio 2001).

Another private organization committedto work with the farmers and communitiesat the grassroots level is the KapwaUpliftment Foundation, Inc. (KAPWA) inMatina, Davao City. KAPWA pioneers itswork in community organizing, providestechnical assistance to farmers and tribalcommunities in attaining food security in theupland. It also undertakes organizing andcapacity building to ensure that uplandfarming technologies and the introducedinnovations are sustained (Lawas et al.1997).

ICRAF and the Southeast Asian Networkfor Agroforestry Education (SEANAFE)both based at CFNR administration buildingare the two international institutionscontinuously promoting the exchange ofinformation on agroforestry research anddevelopment.

ICRAF addresses poverty and environ-mental needs through collaborativeprograms and partnerships with thegovernment, nongovernment organization(NGO) and farmer-organizations’ locallyand globally. Likewise, it conductsinnovative research and development inagroforestry and provides leadership innatural resources management (ICRAF1991) .

Currently, the Landcare approachdeveloped by ICRAF in 1996, is being usedas a mechanism to insure that appropriatetechnologies such as natural vegetativestrips (NVS), agroforestry systems, tree-crop management options, among otherthings, will reach the end-user. Theapproach is a process led by farmers andcommunity groups, with the support of thelocal government units backed up byICRAF, DENR, Department of Agrarian


Fig

. 1.

Inst

itu

tion

aliz

ing

the

scie

nce

an

d p

ract

ice

of a

grof

ores

try

in t

he

Ph

ilip

pin

es:

an o

per

atio

nal

fra

mew

ork

(V

illa

nci

o20

02).

Inst

itutio

naliz

atio

nof

Agr

ofor

estr

y

Pro

fess

iona

lizat

ion

ofag

rofo

rest

ryC

reat

ion

of c

lass

ifie

dpl

anti

lla i

tem

s fo

rag

rofo

rest

ers

Lic

ensu

re e

xam

inat

ion

for

agro

fore

stry

gra

duat

esC

reat

ion

of C

omm

itte

e on

Agr

ofor

estr

y as

ape

rman

ent

body

of t

heC

HE

D/T

PA

EE

stab

lish

men

t of

mun

icip

al, p

rovi

ncia

l,re

gion

al, a

nd n

atio

nal

agro

fore

stry

cen

ters

and

netw

orks

For

mu

lati

on o

f N

atio

nal

AF

Age

nda

Leg

isla

tion

Est

abli

shm

ent

of

AF

cent

ers

Har

mon

izin

g ac

tivi

ties

wit

h ex

isti

ng n

etw

orks

Nat

iona

lA

grof

ores

try

Dev

elop

men

tP

rogr

am

PA

FE

RN

PO

s

TA

FE

LG

Us

Leg

isla

tive

Bod

ies

NG

As

NG

Os


Reform (DAR), Municipal Agriculture Office(MAO), and NGOs (Mercado et al. 2001).

The Landcare approach initiates andimplements plans and programs leading tothe adoption of resource conservationtechnologies. To date, about 350 Landcaregroups in Claveria, Misamis Orientalhave disseminated farming technologiessuccessfully to more than 5,000 farmers.It also established communal nurseries forfruit and timber trees. In Lantapan, it grewto about 60 farmer groups and has spreadto other areas in Visayas particularly Bohol,Leyte and in Central and SouthernMindanao (ICRAF no date).

ICRAF (1991) used three modalities incapacity building. First, selected researchpartners for institutional innovations,particularly LGUs and communities, gainknowledge and skills through their directparticipation in action research. Second, thedevelopment institutions learn throughvisits to ICRAF action research sites andfollow-up training activities. In the thirdmodality, research scientists andeducational institutions are provided with

opportunities to participate in regional,national and international conferences,specialized training, on-site dialogue withpractitioners in other countries, and accessto recent publications.

On the other hand, SEANAFE iscomposed of member-institutions fromIndonesia, Lao PDR, Thailand, Vietnam, andPhilippines. SEANAFE aims to intensify thepromotion and development of agroforestryas a land-use management systems both inthe uplands and lowlands. Common needsand gaps among educational institutions inSoutheast Asia are being addressedregionally and nationally. Their goal is topromote sustainable development throughagroforestry education and training. Eachlink represents the agriculture andforestry institutions involved in developingand/or implementing formal and nonformalagroforestry curricula (Arboleda 1999).Recently in 2002, the SEANAFE decent-ralized activities into the national network,wherein the Philippines is represented byPAFERN. Similar national networks wereorganized in other member-countries.


The goals of agroforestry and MPTS R&Dare sustainable upland production and

rural development. However, based on theassessments done by the Agroforestry andMPTS R&D Team, few studies have beendone to document, evaluate, and assess theapplicability, sustainability, and impact ofagroforestry system in the upland. Thus,the team identified the following areaswhich need to be further addressed(PCARRD 1994):

Indigenous agroforestry systemBiological and physical processesof agroforestry technologies andpractices

R&D Gaps○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

Sustainability of indigenous speciesfor hedgerowsPest management in agroforestrysystemsIntegration of livestock and othercomponents in agroforestryInformation on agroforestry systemsand socio-cultural interactionsEconomics of agroforestry systemsPromotion of agroforestry systemsTechnology impact assessment

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

R&D Directions


Challenges and Issues○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

The challenges for agroforestry andMPTS are still enormous but these can

be streamlined into manageable proportionsto be addressed properly. These include thechallenges of resource degradation (i.e.,land, soil, water, and biodiversity) and itsrelation to environment and people.Agroforestry should be able to assert itssignificant role in alleviating pressure onthose resources through proper manage-ment and governance. Agroforestry has torespond by providing sustainablemanagement systems capable of improvingresource productivity in the upland,reducing poverty, increasing farmer’sincome, and enhancing environmentalstability.

Reconciling Agricultureand Forestry

The Agriculture and Fisheries Modern-ization Act (AFMA) includes upland areasin agricultural planning, recognizing thatfood production is moving into the uplandsas agricultural lands are being convertedinto industry and urban settlements. TheAFMA policies articulate the concern of theupland poor and the need to engage themin protection, while assisting them withtheir production concerns. The DENR andDA are expected to work with variousstakeholders in the upland to reconciledevelopment initiatives to restore,rehabilitate, and conserve resources in theuplands for the sustainability not only ofagriculture, but also of the forest.Agroforestry is recognized to be the

convergence of these efforts. While theAFMA provides support for theseundertakings, these have not beenaccompanied with fiscal and humanresources to support implemention.Conscious effort between the agricultureand forestry sectors to support agroforestryinitiatives should be put in place. Thisshould redound to rational land-use policyconsidering the forestry, agriculture,settlement, and industry needs that haveto be addressed simultaneously.

Tenurial Security and ResourceManagement Advocacy

Logged-over areas are being convertedinto other land uses. Food production isexpanding into areas that were once forests.The open-access situation in the uplandscontinues unabated and subsistenceagriculture which used to dominate theupland areas are being converted tocommercial agriculture. CBFM recognizesthe importance of working withcommunities by engaging them to beresponsible resource managers in exchangefor securing use rights. Even the NationalIntegrated Protected Areas Act (NIPAA)recognizes the presence of “tenuredmigrants” in protected areas who deserveto be assisted to transform destructivefarming practices into biodiversity-enhancing livelihood activities. TheIndigenous Peoples Rights’ Act (IPRA) pavesthe way for indigenous peoples to regainthe control and management of manyforestlands. CARP also includes security of


tenure of farmers in the forestlands astheir concern in cooperation with DENR.Security of tenure has been viewed as arequisite to enhance adoption of agro-forestry technologies necessary for therestoration of the uplands.

Resource Governance

Beyond the piece of paper that gives theright to farmers to occupy and benefit fromtheir produce, the support to fulfill theirresponsibilities under the program has notalways been provided. When ISF sites weredevolved in 1992, CPEUs or model ISF siteswere retained by DENR. The sites becametheir research and training laboratory todevelop the capability of LGUs to supportagroforestry technologies and uplanddevelopment.

In 1996, DENR formulated a plan for theagency-wide participatory implementationof the CBFM program. The plan proposedclose collaboration with local governmentsto manage forests and people living inforestlands. The targeted period was from1998 to 1999 for program consolidation andreorganization of DENR for it to be able tomeet the CBFM challenge (DENR 1996).Collaboration and partnership amonggovernment, nongovernment organizationsand the LGUs to support CBFM need to beenhanced to promote effective and efficientgovernance of natural resources.

Agroforestry Promotionand Resource Productivity

Improvement

Natural resources in the settled uplandshave been degraded and have resulted tolow productivity. To date, there are alreadyavailable technologies for soil and waterresources rehabilitation and conservationwhich can be used. The challenge lies on

how these technologies can be extended tofarmers in the uplands considering thetenurial constraints and overlapping or“passing the buck” of mandates ofgovernment agencies (i.e., DA, DENR,and LGUs). Part of the challenge is theprovision of basic support servicesfor the upland farmers to use thetechnologies to enhance their resourceproductivity, at the same time effectivelymanage the uplands.

Increasing Farmer’s Incomeand Alleviating Poverty

Productivity will increase as a result ofthe adoption of agroforestry technologies,but this has to be translated into increasedincomes to alleviate poverty amonghouseholds in the uplands. The challenge ishow to make the input and output marketsbe made available to help the upland poor.There are some efforts among the NGOs toorganize the Upland Marketing Foundation,Inc. through UNAC to assist upland NGOsin their marketing concern.

However, this is only limited to uplandNGOs who are able to avail of the services.The upland farmers need to be linked to themainstream markets. Foremost to this is theneed to make the uplands accessiblethrough roads and adequate transportationfacilities. Postharvest technologies andvalue-adding enterprises in the whole valuechain (production-processing-marketing-consumption) need to be considered as wellfor agroforestry to contribute in increasingfarmers’ income and alleviating poverty.

Enhancing Environmental Services

The contributions of agroforestry inproviding environmental services need tobe emphasized. Since most of the uplandsin the country had been settled and


occupied, agroforestry can be developed toprovide cover for the watershed, reduce soilerosion, sequester carbon and enhanceagrobiodiversity. Although there areavailable technologies, there is a need toevaluate the capability of the agroforestrysystem to provide these environmentalservices. Thus, ecological and economicvaluation of agroforestry in naturalresources enhance-ment may need to beinitiated.

Monitoring, Evaluation,and Impact Assessment

The current performance accom-plishment reports should be improved toreflect the degree to which issues on soilerosion, resource degradation, and povertyreduction are systematically addressed. Soil,water, and biodiversity remain to be thecritical concerns. Models and approachesshould be developed to monitor, evaluate,and assess agroforestry interventions bothat the plot level and at the landscape level.

The results of the CARP-ISF projectsustainability indicators have beenprepared into very user-friendly formatsthat can readily measure gains as well asestablish key areas that need to beaddressed. With the overall goal of globalcompetitiveness, there is a tendency to puta premium on economic goals at the expenseof important environmental and socio-cultural considerations. This is a challengethat agroforestry advocates have to contendwith, seeing to it that the agroforestrysystem addresses both these concerns toensure its sustainability.

Information, Education,and Communication (IEC)

In 2002 , PCARRD created computer-based data banks for agroforestry. Thesedata banks will integrate R&D andindustry information and technologies onagroforestry into a comprehensive andoperational information systems that canreadily be accessible to end-users. Thisinformation system will serve as repositoryof R&D information on agroforestry fordissemination to all potential users.However, there will be a need for continuousgathering, review, and evaluation ofresearch results lessons, and experiencesto update the content.

The implementation of CBFM wasreported to have improved the well beingof forest-dependent communities—theindigenous peoples as well as the migrantgroups. At the same time it ensured thesustainable management, rehabilitation, andprotection of the country’s forest lands andresources (DENR 2000).

However, upland farmers continue topractice shifting cultivation. Watershedsand protected areas are still under extremethreats. Open access, poor coordination, andlack of comprehensive developmentplanning continue in many areas across thecountry. Therefore, IEC initiatives shouldbe able to capture CBFM-related successesand lessons learned for the next program toemulate and utilize.


The Agroforestry and MPTS R&DTeam recommended strategic R&D

activities for 2001–2005 to address the gapsidentified from 1990 to 2000. The agendaidentified are along the following areas:

R&D and Utilization

Indigenous Agroforestry System

Several studies highlighted thecontribution of indigenous people in thepractice of agroforestry in the Philippines.More studies need to be undertaken todocument and evaluate them and have itmade available for use. The followingspecific projects need to be undertaken:

Documentation and evaluation of theindigenous agroforestry systems;Documention and evaluation of theexisting agroforestry systems;Determination of the sustainabilityof indigenous species for hedgerows;andEvaluation of the indigenous timberand nontimber species fordomestication in agroforestrysystem.

Biological and Physical Processesof Agroforestry Technologiesand Practices

The challenge of reconciling agriculture,forestry and other land uses needs to be

Major Programs and Policies Addressing R&D Gaps○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

addressed. However, this concern needsto consider other areas that have favorableimpact on agroforestry. In this case,agroforestry will focus on the following:

Review and evaluation on thesuitability of agriculture commodityrecommendations for agroforestrysystems in multiple-use and bufferzones of watersheds and protectedareas;Development and adaption of thecomponent technologies for coconut-based agroforestry systems and agro-forestry gardens;Development and adaption of thepest management system inagroforestry;Development and adaption of thecomponent technologies for treedomestication in agroforestrysystems; andAdaption of the technologies forintegration of animals inagroforestry.

Economics of Agroforestry Systems

There are current efforts to develop asystem to reward upland dwellers providingenvironmental services. With this, there isa need to focus on the social, environmental,and economic valuation of agroforestrysystems. These studies should beundertaken at various levels, that is, plot,farm, and landscape/watershed level.


Technology Evaluationand Impact Assessment

Agroforestry practices and systemshave evolved and the technologies havebeen developed by different institutionsworking on agroforestry. Thus, the focuswill be given on the assessment of theperformance of agroforestry systems andtechnologies; effectiveness of technologypromotion, dissemination, and utilization;and institutional capabilities. Specificallythese would include, among other things,the following:

Performance evaluation ofagroforestry systems as to itsproductivity; profitability; promotionof household food security and foodsafety; biodiversity, carbonsequestration; and povertyalleviation. This involves establish-ment of a benchmark and basis formeasuring performance of agro-forestry systems and technologies;Establishment of mechanisms todetermine areas under risk of soilerosion in each region and toestablish a plan addressing andmonitoring changes over time;Effectiveness and efficiency assess-ment of agroforestry promotion,dissemination, and utilizationprocess;Impact evaluation of devolution ofagroforestry projects under ISF toLGUs; andImpact assessment of policies,programs and capabilities ofgovernment and nongovernmentorganizations (DA, DAR, DENR,LGUs, NGOs, POs) to address openaccess and inappropriate develop-ment in the uplands.

Capability Building

Information on AgroforestrySystems and Networking

The IEC strategy in agroforestry willfocus on the following:

Development and update of theintegrated database managementsystem for agroforestry systems andtechnologies; andRationalization of existing agro-forestry networks in the countryand identification of lead institutionsas agroforestry disseminationcenters at the local, regional, andnational levels.

Promotion of Agroforestry Systems

The promotion of agroforestry systemwill be focused on the capacity building ofinstitutions involved; thus, the thrusts areas follows:

Capability assessment of existingorganizations to promote agro-forestry;Agroforestry learning sites andresource centers establishmentthrough joint efforts of LGUs,SCUs, local offices of nationalgovernment agencies, NGOs, andother organizations in theirrespective areas;Training of extension and develop-ment workers of LGUs, SCUs, NGOs,POs, DA, DAR, and DENR onagroforestry systems and techno-logies, technology development,promotion and utilization, andrelated policies and programs; and


Information and educationalmaterials development andutilization for the promotion ofagroforestry.

Policy Advocacy

The R&D agenda mentioned abovewill generate information that will supportthe policy advocacy and promote agro-forestry as an art, a science, and a practice.The following policy directions arebeing espoused by PAFERN and otherorganizations:

Rationalization of land use;Professionalization of agroforestry;andIncreasing the role of LGUs bymandating them to designateagroforestry technicians (municipallevel) and specialists (provinciallevel) to manage vast upland areas.

Other Recommendations

Based on the assessment of anddiscussion on the situation of agroforestryin the Philippines, the Agroforestry andMPTS R&D Team recommends themobilization of the different GOs, NGOs,POs, and other agencies involved inagroforestry to work together in thepromotion of agroforestry. Since theseagencies are strategically locatedacross the country, their expertisewill greatly contribute in the agroforestryresearch, extension, and advocacy.

The harmonization of networks andeffort into organization of the NationalAgroforestry Development Program(NAFDP) will also put in place a systematicmechanism to ensure that the results ofR&D programs and policies address theproblems of resource degradation (land,soil, water and biodiversity) and poverty inthe uplands.

Agustin, E.O.; Malab, S.; Rosario, J.I. Desmanthus as hedgerows in agroforestry croppingsystems. Batac, Ilocos Norte: MMSU, 1995. – (MMSU-funded project, completed).

Amada, L.S. Agrilivestock livelihood for upland farmers. San Fernando, La Union. 1994.– (DENR-ERDS Region I-funded, completed).

Arboleda, L.P. PAFERN now accepting interested members. In: The PhilippineAgroforestry Development News, 1999. pp.37–38.

Asian Rural Life Development Foundation Editorial Staff. How to farm your hilly landwithout losing your soil. Kinuskusan, Bansalan, Davao del Sur. How to Series No.1,1997. 20p.

Baconguis, S.R. Agri-nipa-aquaculture technology: a sustainable land use in the nipa-dominated wetlands of Puerto Galera. Puerto Galera, Oriental Mindoro. 1994. – (ERDB-DENR-funded, completed).

Cumpio, J. Economics of goat production in SALT 2. Agao, Pangasinan: DENR-ERDS RegionI, 1994. – (DENR-ERDS Region I-funded, completed).

Dalmacio, R. Agroforestry: concepts, principles and examples. Paper presented duringthe training course on Technology Verification through On-farm Trials. IAF-CFNR,UPLB, Laguna; August 1–7, 1999.

DENR CARP-ISF R&D program: An integrated sustainable development program forCARP-ISF areas in the Philippines: An ecosystem approach, 1995. 57p. – (Unpublishedterminal report).

DENR. Community-based forest management action plan, 1996.DENR-UDP. Farm planning by distance approach. UPLB-UAP/DENR-UDP, 1995. 96p.Estrella, R.H. Carbon dioxide sequestration potential of kakawate (Gliricidia sepium [Jacq.]

Walp.) based alley cropping system under fallow. Los Baños, Laguna: UPLB, 1999. –(Unpublished undergraduate thesis).

Foronda, S.U.; Malab, S.C.; Agustin, E. O.; Cadapan, E.V.; Lansigan, F.P.; Lasco, R.D.; Padilla,E.F.; Racelis, D.A.; Vergara D.K. Computer-based design procedure for agroforestrymodels. 1996. – (Terminal Report).

Gascon, C. Sustainability indicators of the Hanunuo Mangyan indigenous agroforestrysystems. Lucban, Quezon: SLPC, 1999. – (SLPC-funded, completed).

IAF. Joining the world wide crusade for sustainable resource development and conservationthrough agroforestry. 2002. – (IAF-UPLB-CFNR leaflet).

IAF. Training opportunities in agroforestry, 2002. – (IAF-UPLB-CFNR leaflet).ICRAF. In the Philippines and CGIAR: partnership in action, 1991. pp. 33–40.________. ICRAF annual report 1996. Los Baños, Laguna: ICRAF, 1997.________. Visayas research site, 2002. – (Leaflet).

References○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○


________. Lantapan research site, 2003. – (Leaflet).________. Claveria research site, 2003. – (Leaflet).________. Landcare (n.d.). – (Leaflet).Lasco, R.D. Agroforestry farm assessment (AFA). Los Baños, Laguna: UPLB CFNR, 1993.

– (Terminal Report).Lasco, R. Management of Philippine tropical forests: implications to global warning. World

Resources Review 10(3), 1998. pp. 410–418.Lasco, R. Naalad modified fallow system, 1992. – (UPLB CF-funded, completed).Lasco R.D.; Agustin, E.O.; Calderon, M.M.; Lawas, N.R.; Racelis, D.A.; Santos, E.P.

Methodology for evaluating agroforestry systems (MEAS), 1997. – (Terminal Report).Lasco, R.D.; Pulhin, F.B. The mountain ecosystem of the Philippines: opportunities for

mitigating climate change. Paper presented during the European conference onEnvironmental and Societal Change in Mountain Regions. UK: University of Oxford,December 1997.

Lawas, N. Agroforestry land capability mapping scheme (ALCAMS), 1993. – (UPLB-funded,completed).

Lawas N.R.; Cabahug, R.D.; de Luna, C.C. Three ears of corn: The case of KAPWA’sframework for the rehabilitation of the uplands of Malalag project, 1997. 61p.

Magat, S. Opportunities for promoting agroforestry in coconut-based farming system. Paperpresented during the 2001 annual conference and symposium of the ConservationFarming Movement. Los Baños, Laguna: SEARCA, November 14–15, 2001.

Malab, S. Agroforestry farming system for the hillyland. Batac, Ilocos Norte: MMSU, 1992.– (MMSU-funded, completed).

Mallorca, R.C.; Mamiscal, M.I. Technology adaptation for higher family income on yemane(G. arborea) intercropped with cash crops. Cagayan de Oro: DA-Region X, 1994. – (DA-Region X-funded, completed).

Mangaoan, E.; Ranches, R. Mushroom cultivation under closed-canopy high-diversity forestfarming system. Baybay, Leyte: VISCA, 1993. – (VISCA-funded, completed).

Mercado, A. Nitrogen fixation capacity in contour hedgerow system. In: Developments inAgroforestry Research. Los Baños, Laguna: PCARRD, 1997. pp. 16–179. – (Book SereisNo. 160).

Mercado, A; Garrity, D.; Pailagao, C.; Thapa, B.; Badino, D. Ridge tillage system enhancescorn productivity, profitability, and sustainability. Claveria, Misamis Oriental: ICRAF,1999. – (ICRAF-funded, completed).

Mercado, A.R. Jr.; Patindol, M.; Garity, D.P. The Landcare experience in the Philippines:Technical and institutional innovations for conservation farming. In: August 2001Development in Practice, ICRAF, 2(4), 2001. pp. 495–508.

MBLRC Editorial Staff. Simple agro-livestock technology (SALT 2): A guide how to raisegoats under the SALT system. Kinuskusan, Bansalan, Davao del Sur: MBRLC, 1998.16p. – (How to Series No. 6).

________. Sustainable agroforest land technology (SALT 3): A guide on how to grow cropswith trees in the SALT system. Kinuskusan, Bansalan, Davao del Sur: MBRLC. 2000.15p. – (How to Series No. 7).

________. Small agrofruit livelihood technology (SALT 4.): A guide on how to integratefruit trees into the SALT system. Kinuskusan, Bansalan, Davao del Sur: MBRLC, 2000.24p. – (How to Series No. 8).


Nasayao, E. Community-based agroforestry livelihood R&D project in Region VIII:An extension approach. Tacloban City: DENR-ERDS Region VIII, 1994. – (DAR-PARCfunded, completed).

Palma, N. Socioeconomic impact of CARP-ISF agrilivestock project to the farmer-beneficiaries, Bukinon. Los Baños, Laguna: ERDB, 1994. – (DENR-ERDS Region X-funded, completed).

PCARRD. Developments in agroforestry research. Los Baños, Laguna: PCARRD, 1997.486p. – (Book SeriesNo. 160/1997).

________. PCARRD medium term research and development plan for Philippineagriculture and natural resources 1995–2000. Los Baños, Laguna: PCARRD, 1994. 78p.

_________. PCARRD highlights. Los Baños, Laguna: PCARRD. – (1992, 1994, 1996, 1997,1999, 2000, 2001).

Polo, M. Identification of insect pests and diseases associated with agroforestry tress andcrops. Los Baños, Laguna: ERDB, 1992. – (DENR-ERDS Region VIII-funded, completed).

Quirol, B.; Inderio, O. Changes in soil properties in various farmers agroforestry schemeswithin the watershed development area of Matalom. Baybay, Leyte: FARMI-VISCA,1999. – (VISCA-funded, ongoing).

Rabena, A. The isolation, characterization, identification, and antimicrobial assay of theactive components of kakawate (Gliricidia sepium) leaves. Vigan, Ilocos Norte: UNDP.1996. – (UNESCO, SEARCA and NRCP-funded, completed).

Sales, R.F. “Carbon dioxide sequestration potential of a multi-storey agroforestry systemin Mt. Makiling forest reserve.” B.S. Thesis. Los Baños, Laguna: UPLB, 1998.

Saplaco, S.R. Lowland agroforestry system (LAS): Some policy and management issuesand recommendation in renewable natural resources conservation. Paper presented atthe Second San Miguel Corporation Professorial Chair Lecture. CFNR UPLB, Laguna;June 25, 2001.

Saplaco, S.; Dalmacio, R. Lowland agroforestry system (LAS). Los Baños, Laguna: UPLB,1996. – (Terminal Report).

Soriano, J. Jr. Soil fertility and corn yield under alley cropping scheme involving selectedlegumes as hedgerows. Tarlac: TCA, 1992. – (TCA-funded, completed).

Tacio, H.D. MBRLC annual report 2001: Thirty years of sustainable development, 2001.13p.

The Technical Committee on Agroforestry. The Philippine recommends for agroforestry.Los Baños, Laguna: PCARRD, 1995. – (Unpublished).

Tura, C. Kakawate hedgerows for improved soil fertility and crop yield. Cebu City: DENR-ERDS Region VII, 1995. – (CARP-ISF-funded, completed).

UPLB-Upland Agroforestry Program. Developing an agroforestry curriculum using theDACUM process: workshop proceeding. Los Baños, Laguna: UPLB; November 23–26,1992.

Villancio, V.T. Agroforestry education in the Philippines: Trends, issues, opportunitiesand agenda for action. Paper presented in institutionalizing the science and practice ofagroforestry: A round table discussion. TREES-CFNR UPLB, Laguna; November 8, 2002.

ISBN 971-20-0516-X

r&d status on agroforestry & multipurpose trees and shrubs

Documents