Why no trees? Are they not useful and profitable?

Agroforestry as a land use based on planted trees, provides productive and protective (biological diversity, healthy ecosystems, protection of soil and water resources, terrestrial carbon storage) forest functions that societies care about in the debate on sustainable forest management. Yet, the trees planted in agroforestry systems are excluded in formal definitions and statistics of 'forests' and are often overlooked in the legal and institutional framework for sustainable forest management. A paradigm shift is needed in the forestry sector and public debate to redress this oversight.

Current relationships between agroforestry and plantation forestry are perceived to be complementary, neutral or competitive, depending on the ability of (inter)national policy frameworks to provide a level playing field for the provision to society at large of productive and protective forest functions. In conditions where large-scale plantations operate with substantial government subsidies (direct or indirect, partly justified by environmental service functions), in contrast to non-existent or minimal subsidies for agroforestry, the potential to produce wood and simultaneously provide for many forest benefits and ecological services with agroforestry is placed at a disadvantage, to the detriment of society at large.

Approach

WNoTree surveys will generally have three stages:

• Use checklist of potential issues in focus group discussions with farmers and local government agencies to identify the most significant constraints to tree management and domestication (incl. planting and harvesting) in the local context.
• Design follow-up surveys to test the hypotheses that emerge from these consultations, in combination with spatial analysis of actual tree presence in the landscape.
• Action research engagement with local communities and governments to address the primary constraints, and provide a direct test of the preceding analysis.

Phase I: Checklist of issues to pursue in focus group discussions

1. Issues of terminology for forests, plantations and reforestation are linked to land tenure and land use restrictions:
   1.   Lack of land and tree tenure: physical or economic access to land for tree planting is linked to use rights of tree
         products; lack of clarity on future use rights stops farmers from planting trees.
   2.   Fire: reasons for starting fire, lack of fire control: conflicts over land may enhance the use of fire in the landscape
         and/or reluctance to protect trees that are not bringing direct benefits.
2. Access to high quality planting material of proven suitability remains a challenge, especially at the start of a farmer tree-planting phase of a landscape:
   3.   Lack of suitable, high-quality planting stock adapted to soil, climate, pests and disease, intercropping systems,
         local preferences and markets.
   4.   Poor delivery mechanisms for high-quality planting material.
3. Management skill and information often constrain production for high market values:
   5.   Lack of physical performance of the tree due to drought, floods, grazing animals, pests, diseases, suboptimal
          thinning and pruning.
   6.   Lack of knowledge, labour or inputs for managing tree growth in intercropping or monoculture plantations.
4. Overregulation often restricts access to markets for farmer-grown timber and tree products, partly due to rules intended to curb illegal logging from natural forests or government plantations:
   7.   Lack of local demand and/ or physical and institutional access to markets for tree products.
   8.   High transaction costs (permits, formal and informal taxes) for harvesting trees and tree products.
5. Lack of reward mechanisms for environmental services provided by agroforestry: 
   9.   Lack of perception and appreciation of non-economic or cultural benefits.
   10. High opportunity costs: no-tree land use options are more profitable than tree-based ones; in fact this may be
          the only 'economically valid' reason for a lack of trees in the landscape unless high discount rates and lack of
          investment are the primary hurdle in otherwise profitable tree-based land use.

An example of such analysis for Indonesia and the Philippines is provided by Roshetko et al., 2008 and van Noordwijk et al., 2008.

Phase II: Detailed surveys to test hypotheses generated in Phase I

Phase III: Action research engagement in addressing constraints

Barrier analysis

In technical terms the WNoTree protocol clarifies the ‘barriers’ that an external support project can address in forms of the Clean Development Mechanism. Removing a barrier provides for ‘additionality’ of landscape C-stocks.

References

Step I
Roshetko JM, Snelder DJ, Lasco RD and van Noordwijk M. 2008. Future Challenge: A Paradigm Shift in the Forestry Sector. In: Snelder DJ and Lasco RD,eds. Smallholder Tree Growing for Rural Development and Environmental Services. New York, USA. Springer Science+Business Media B.V. P. 453-485.
http://www.worldagroforestry.org/sea/publication?do=view_pub_detail&pub_no=BC0281-08

Step II
Chokkalingam U, Suyanto S, Permana RP, Kurniawan I, Mannes J, Darmawan A, Khususiyah N and Susanto RH. 2006. Community fire use, resource change, and livelihood impacts: The downward spiral in the wetlands of southern Sumatra. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change. vol. 12 10.1007/s11027-006-9038-5: P. 75-100
http://www.worldagroforestry.org/sea/publication?do=view_pub_detail&pub_no=JA0242-06

Suyanto S. 2006. Underlying cause of fire: Different form of land tenure conflicts in Sumatra. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change. vol. 12:67-74 DOI 10.1007/s11027-006-9039-4: P. 67-74. http://www.worldagroforestry.org/sea/publication?do=view_pub_detail&pub_no=JA0241-06

Suyanto S, Permana RP, Khususiyah N and Joshi L. 2004. Land tenure agroforestry adoption and reduction of fire hazard in a forest: a case study from Lampung, Sumatra Indonesia. Agroforestry Systems. 65(1):P. 1-11.
http://www.worldagroforestry.org/sea/publication?do=view_pub_detail&pub_no=JA0013-04

Tomich TP, Fagi AM, Michon G, Murdiyarso D, Stolle F and van Noordwijk M. 1998. Indonesia's fires: smoke as a problem, smoke as a symptom. Agroforestry Today.
http://www.worldagroforestry.org/sea/publication?do=view_pub_detail&pub_no=MA0009-04

Step III
Martini E, Tarigan J, Roshetko JM, Gerhard Manurung G, Kurniawan I, Tukan J, Budidarsono S, Abdo M and van Noordwijk M. 2008. Capacity Building Activities to Strengthen Agroforestry as a Sustainable Economic Alternative in the Orangutan Habitat Conservation Program of Batang Toru, North Sumatra. Working Paper number 61:70 p.
http://www.worldagroforestry.org/sea/publication?do=view_pub_detail&pub_no=WP0099-08

Roshetko JM. 2007. Agroforestry on the Interface of Orangutan Conservation and Sustainable Livelihoods in Batang Toru (North Sumatra). Working Paper no. 56:26p.
http://www.worldagroforestry.org/sea/publication?do=view_pub_detail&pub_no=WP0091-08

Printed Flyer - English - Indonesian