Agroforestry option for improving livelihoods and the environment

S. Suyanto, Noviana Khususiyah, Rahayu Subekti and James M Roshetko

World Congress AgroforestryNew Delhi, 10-14 February 2014

Background

• Global climate change, expected to result in global warming, is the most serious environmental problem the world faces.

• Over the long term, climate change is likely to have a very serious impact on ecosystems and the world’s poorest are the most vulnerable as they depend heavily on natural resources for their food and livelihood.

• To anticipate those problems, it is important to promote land management that can improve livelihoods and the environment simultaneously.

Study Site

Methods

1. Socio-Economic:•Household Survey•Income Survey

Interviewed 90 Respondents (Households):

1. 30 respondents non-agroforestry farmers

2. 60 respondents agroforestry farmers

2. Carbon and tree diversity measurement

Maize field Cacao AgroForest

Coffee AgroForest Mix AgroForest

Type of Land Use

Average Land Holding by Land Use

Agroforestry Provides higher Income

Source of IncomeAverage Income Per Household in South Sulawesi

Non Agroforestry farmers Agroforestry farmers IDR % IDR %

1. Annual crops 3,688,182 28 1,289,467 6

2. Agroforestry systems 2,347,718 18 9,586,181 43

Cacao agroforest 284,208 2.2 274,025 1.2

Mix agroforest 334,467 2.6 7,054,781 31.3

Clove agroforest 0 0.0 1353150 6.0

Coffee agroforest 1,059,110 8.1 2,775 0.0

Firewood 669,933 5.1 901,450 4.0

3. Off-farm Incomes 6,975,850 54 11,672,442 52

Laborer (worker) 1,582,133 12.2 2,162,667 9.6 Remittances 2,680,000 20.6 483,333 2.1 3. Total income per year (IDR) 13,011,750 100 22,548,089 100 Total income per year (USD) 1,446 2,505

Income per capita per year 3,098,036 5,368,593

Income per capita per day (IDR) 8,488 14,708 Income per capita per day (USD) 0.94 1.63

Income (USD) per ha per year(Land productivity)

Non Agroforestry Agroforestry0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

477

1,005

Inco

me

(USD

/ha.

year

)

Types of trees

Income per ha (IDR/ha)

Mixed Agroforestry Cacao agroforestry Clove agroforestry

IDR/ha % IDR/ha % IDR/ha %

1. Cacao 2,581,190 27 3,998,203 75 1,942,326 18

2. Fruits 2,350,041 24 1,035,948 19 183,721 2

3. Clove 3,052,517 32 - - 6,930,930 64

4. Pepper 631,854 6 - - - -

5. Timber 348,947 4 - - - -

6. Banana 186,201 2 68,627 1 - -

7. Food crops 535,447 5 270,261 5 1,821,395 16

Total 9,686,198 100 5,373,039 100 10,878,372 100

Agroforestry as a livelihood option for adaptation strategy

Basal area of tree species in various land use Aboveground carbon stock in various land use

Agroforestry for improving environment

Clove Cacao Mixed garden

Undisturbed forest

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Land uses

Tota

l bas

al a

rea

tree

(m2

ha-1

)

Cacao Clove Mixed garden Undisturbed forest

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Land uses

Abo

vegr

ound

car

bon

stoc

k (M

g ha

-1)

Agroforestry for improving environment

Tree diversity index in various land use

Clove Cacao Mixed garden Undisturbed forest0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

Land uses

Shan

non-

Wie

ner I

ndex

Agroforestry system provide higher income for farmers, as a livelihood

option for adaptation strategy from shocks such as unstable

commodities price, pest and diseases and also from negative impact of

climate.

Based on environment assessment using three indicators: tree basal

area, carbon stock, and tree diversity index; we concludes that mixed

agroforestry systems has better environmental function than other

agriculture system.

This scientific evidences need to be translated into policy action such as

promoting agroforestry in the agricultural and rural development

programs, mitigation and adaptation strategy and biodiversity

conservation programs.

Conclusion

Thank You