AGROFORESTRY POLICIES CONTRIBUTE TO SUSTAINABLE LAND USE



By
K. N. Brooks
H. M. Gregersen
P. F. Ffolliott



Policy Brief No. 13, 6 pages, December 1995



For more information or copies of this paper, contact:

Kenneth N. Brooks
Department of Forest Resources
University of Minnesota
235 Natural Resources Administration
St. Paul, MN  55108

Tel: (612) 624-2774
Fax: (612) 624-8701
Email: kbrooks@mercury.forestry.umn.edu



Produced by: 

Ellen A. Maurer
Communications Director
EPAT/MUCIA Research and Training
University of Wisconsin-Madison
1003 WARF Office Building
610 Walnut Street
Madison, WI  53705-2993

Tel: (608) 263-4781
Fax: (608) 265-2993
Email: eamaurer@facstaff.wisc.edu



Edited by Sharon Graham and Ellen Maurer
Layout and Design by Lesa Langan



* Some figures and/or tables included in the printed version of
this publication could not be included in this electronic
version.  If you need copies of these figures or tables, please
contact the author.  



PROJECT INFORMATION



A USAID-funded global program, the Environmental and Natural
Resources Policy and Training Project (EPAT), is implemented, in
part, by 15 universities and development organizations through
the Midwest Universities Consortium for International Activities,
Inc. (MUCIA). 

EPAT/MUCIA has research, training, and communication components
that offer the latest information about:

  * Energy, Industry & the Urban Environment
  * Forestry & Watershed Management
  * Macroeconomic Policy
  * Population & the Environment
  * Institutions & Policy Implementation
  * Environmental Policy Training 
  * Environmental Policy Communications

EPAT/MUCIA publications include:

  * Policy Briefs - short overviews of environmental policy 
    concerns
  * Case Studies - outlining specific in-country policy 
    challenges
  * Manuals - how-to-do-it environmental policy handbooks for 
    easy reference
  * Working Papers - of environmental policy research in progress
  * Monographs - detailing the state of knowledge in particular
    subject matter areas.

EPAT/MUCIA environmental policy partners have applied their
research to real problems, and they collaborated with researchers
throughout the world.

For more information about EPAT/MUCIA contact: 
  Chief of Party
  1611 North Kent Street, Suite 807
  Arlington, VA  USA 2209-2134   
  Tel: (703) 841-0026
  Fax: (703) 841-0699

EPAT/MUCIA-Research and Training partners include University of
Arizona; Cornell University; University of Illinois; Indiana
University; University of Iowa; University of Michigan; Michigan
State University; University of Minnesota; The Ohio State
University; Purdue University; University of Wisconsin; Abt
Associates; Development Alternatives, Inc.; Development
Associates, Inc.; and World Resources Institute.

Policy Brief ISSN # 1072-9496



MESSAGE FROM USAID



This Policy Brief is a product of the Environmental and Natural
Resources Policy and Training (EPAT) Project funded by the United
States Agency for International Development (USAID).  It is part
of USAID's effort to provide environmental policy information to
decisionmakers and practitioners in developing countries.  The
objective is to encourage the adoption of economic policies to
promote sustainable use of natural resources and to enhance
environmental quality.

EPAT Policy Briefs are written for development professionals and
policymakers in developing countries who are responsible for
establishing and implementing policies on the sustainable use of
natural resources, and for civil servants, project officers, and
researchers who are directly involved in the implementation of
development activities.  This Policy Brief focuses on how
agroforestry contributes to sustainable use of many land areas,
particularly where monocropping is practiced on marginal soils
and hilly terrain.  A range of policies is discussed for
promoting the conversion from current unsustainable practices to
more appropriate land uses.

The contribution of USAID toward writing, printing, and
distributing this document is estimated to be $8,000.  Due to
financial limitations from USAID, this document is being
distributed on the Internet.  Copies are available from the
author.  The availability of this paper is being announced to
more that 2,000 policymakers and professionals in developing
countries.  







David Hales                       William Sugrue
Deputy Assistant Administrator    Acting Director
Center for the Environment        Office of Environment & 
USAID/G/ENV                       Natural Resources
Washington, D.C.  20523           USAID/G/ENV/ENR
                                  Washington, D.C.  20523




AGROFORESTRY POLICIES CONTRIBUTE TO SUSTAINABLE LAND USE



Agroforestry includes all practices that deliberately combine
trees and shrubs with agricultural crops and/or livestock over
time or space [note 1].  Most countries have practiced
agroforestry for centuries.  In many parts of the developing
world, it is an important form of land use and a major
contributor to land use sustainability.

Yet, because agroforestry is land use between forestry and
agriculture, policymakers do not give it the attention it
deserves.  Here we [note 2] focus on how agroforestry adds to the
sustainable use of many land areas, particularly monocropping of
marginal soils and hilly areas [note 3].  We suggest that policy
can encourage agroforestry to improve existing unsustainable land
use practices.  Readers interested in more information should
check other sources [note 4]. 

We want to make three initial points concerning sustainability:

1. We define sustainable land use as that which produces goods
and services while continuing to protect the natural resource
base.

2. The goal is to maintain sustainable production of goods and
services, not to continue given land-use practices.

3. Since we cannot know whether a land use is sustainable far
into the future, the best method is to avoid uses that are
clearly unsustainable.  For example, land use that promotes
excessive soil erosion is obviously not sustainable.



Contributions of Agroforestry to Land Use Sustainability


Despite advanced technical knowledge, many land users today
continue to focus on current production and not on protecting the
natural resources base on which they and future generations will
depend.  Often this is because commonly-used technologies and
production systems focus on quick production responses rather
than long-term effects.

However, agroforestry largely evolved with sustainability
concerns -- resiliency, diversity, and avoiding negative side
effects -- in mind.  It blends production with protection, and
focuses on a holistic approach to land management.

Fuelwood, poles, lumber, and fodder are agroforestry tree
products often sorely needed by rural people.  Trees also
moderate the microclimate, protect the soil, provide shade to
livestock, and enhance crop production by reducing wind effects
on crops. 

At the same time, the role of trees in agricultural systems is
not always positive.  For example, trees can compete with crops
for space, light, nutrients, and water, reducing the overall
value of both trees and crops.

These problems require experience and careful study to find
combinations of trees, crops, and livestock that maximize overall
production.  In some cases, this can mean no trees; in other
cases, it can mean total forest cover.  Agroforestry is in
between.  Policies should encourage the most productive uses of
land and find positive ways to introduce trees.

In this context, agroforestry can contribute to sustainability in
three important ways:

1. It can increase diversity as a means to deal with economic and
environmental uncertainty and the dynamics of changing needs and
wants.

2. It can improve the land's resiliency. 

3. It can reduce adverse environmental impacts by creating
mutually beneficial land uses, both on-site and off-site. 

Let's discuss each of these potential contributions.


Increasing Diversity to Deal with Uncertainty

The future is not predictable.  We cannot say with certainty that
any particular land-use practice is sustainable.  However, by
increasing the variety of species and land-use practices, we can
better cope with uncertainty (and thus help avoid unsustainable
land use).

Agroforestry practices are more diverse than monocropping
systems, often resulting in more efficient use of moisture,
space, nutrients, and energy.  By producing multiple products
(such as clean water, aesthetics etc.) from agroforestry
practices, the land user gains flexibility to cope with an
unknown future.  Because trees are perennials, farmers have
flexibility in deciding when they harvest them.  Thus, trees can
generate current income or provide savings for later.


Improving Resiliency 

Usually, an area's average environmental conditions determine
land use practices.  However, drought, frost, or other extreme
events can partly or totally destroy crops.  The great drought of
mid-America in the 1930s is an extreme example.  Others occur
more frequently in the drylands of Africa and Asia.

Because agroforestry systems have more than one production
component and are structurally and functionally complex, they
tend to be more resilient than most monocropping systems.  


Examples include:

* Windbreaks help to sustain crops by conserving soil moisture
for them during windy, dry periods that otherwise would destroy
single crops.

* Tree fodder is available as a substitute for hay and native
forage during extended periods of drought.

* A diversity of species often reduces the susceptibility of any
one component to pests.

* Tree products provide income for farmers when drought or
hailstorms have destroyed annual crops.  This extends the
farmer's survival until better conditions return. 

* By combining woody perennials with forage and food crops,
marginal areas that are too fragile for sustainable, intensive,
monocropping systems (Some consider them wastelands.) can produce
food, forage, and wood crops.


Complementing Other Land Uses 

From a watershed management perspective, agroforestry can provide
both on-site and downstream benefits [note 5].


On-site Benefits 

These benefits include:

* Adding trees to cropping systems can increase soil
conservation.  

* Some tree species fix atmospheric nitrogen and add it to the
soil, improving crop production.

* Water benefits include increased infiltration, reduced surface
runoff, less soil erosion, and, sometimes, reduced
evapotranspiration of crops.


Off-site and Downstream Benefits

These benefits include:

* Reduced runoff from an area can have positive downstream
effects.

* Reduced surface runoff can help stabilize streamflow by
reducing peak flows from land areas.

* Stable upland soil can reduce levels of sediment delivered to
downstream channels, lakes, and reservoirs. 

* Trees absorb nutrients and pesticides that otherwise would
enter streams, lakes, or groundwater systems, adding
environmental and economic benefits.



Policy Measures to Encourage Appropriate Agroforestry


Because agroforestry represents an array of possible land uses,
policies in many sectors can affect it.  For example, price
supports for agricultural crops, subsidies for fertilizer and
other agricultural inputs, low interest credit to farmers, and
investment in agricultural education and research can also affect
agroforestry.  Similarly, policies that favor certain types of
land use, can affect agroforestry.  The differences in these
types of policies are mainly a matter of degree.  However,
clearly, some policy measures particularly affect agroforestry
and the use of trees in land-use systems.  Below are examples of
such measures that policymakers need to review.


Regulatory and Legal Policies

There are a variety of these types of policies that
decisionmakers can use:

* Tenure laws sometimes make trees the property of the state.  In
such cases, farmers have "no" incentive to plant trees, no matter
how useful they would be.  Such laws are often a carry-over from
government ownership of forest lands and attempts to control
forest clearing.  Policymakers should review these laws carefully
and revise them where appropriate without jeopardizing remaining
forests.

* Laws and regulations that prevent farmers from harvesting farm
trees should be reviewed to increase incentives to plant and
manage trees as part of the total farm enterprise.

* Laws or regulations that control public forest management and
use can affect the incentive for farmers to grow trees on their
own land as these laws affect markets or the availability of free
or subsidized wood.  While policymakers have to consider such
laws and regulations in a much broader context than agroforestry,
they need to remember the impacts on farmer tree-growing
activities when planning public forest regulations.

* Some countries, such as Japan, for many years have had social
systems that regulate water use.  Downstream land and water users
pay upstream land users for soil and water conservation practices
that affect the downstream land uses.  Legal mechanisms can ease
these negotiations between upstream and downstream land users and
encourage agroforestry practices.  


Fiscal (Tax and Subsidy) Policy Measures

Policymakers can use several types of fiscal policies:

* Sometimes, governments apply (formally and informally) special
taxes to tree harvesting on private land.  This discourages tree
planting.  Policymakers must consider taxes in the context of
broader objectives of promoting sustainable land use.


* Governments often subsidize farmers who produce tree seedlings.

These subsidies can help get local communities into small-scale
nursery production and give farmers a readily accessible, cheap
source of planting stock.  

* Subsidies that affect the use of fuels, such as kerosene,
electricity, and fuelwood, can also encourage or discourage farm
planting and managing trees for fuelwood.

* Governments can levy taxes on downstream land and water users
to generate revenues for upstream soil and water conservation
projects. 


Public Investment Measures

Governments can also invest in their citizens:

* Public investment in training and education can encourage the
spread of productive agroforestry practices.  It is important
that trainers and educators have a solid knowledge of the
information they are extending.

* Governments can invest in agroforestry research that will also
benefit agriculture and forestry research. 



Conclusions


Agroforestry practices can help farmers cope with uncertainties
of drought, frost, pests, and other phenomena that can lead to
serious monocrop failure.

Agroforestry can enhance farmers' financial security while
providing environmental benefits to society.  Using agroforestry
practices to reduce nonpoint pollution from monocropping areas,
by using buffer strips of woody vegetation and otherwise
integrating trees into cropping systems, appears to have
excellent potential.

Agroforestry is not a cure-all for making land use more
productive and sustainable.  Introducing trees into land-use
systems can be harmful in some instances.  We need to monitor
existing agroforestry practices to avoid adverse practices and
promote beneficial practices.  We also need more research to
improve agroforestry technologies and systems.


By being aware of policies that promote or discourage
agroforestry, decisionmakers can develop more effective, positive
policies leading to more sustainable overall land use, including
agroforestry.




NOTES


1. Raintree, J. B.  1987.  "The State of the Art of Agroforestry
Diagnosis and Design."  Agroforestry Systems 5:219-50.

2. Kenneth N. Brooks and Hans M. Gregersen are Professors,
College of Natural Resources, University of Minnesota, St. Paul,
Minnesota, and Peter F. Ffolliott is Professor, School of 
Renewable Natural Resources, University of Arizona, Tucson,
Arizona.

3. Based on a paper presented at the symposium, "Agroforestry and
Sustainable Systems," Fort Collins, Colorado, August 7-10, 1994.

4. A good source of current information on agroforestry is the
International Centre for Research in Agroforestry (ICRAF) whose
address is ICRAF House, United Nations Avenue, Gigiri, P.O. Box
30677, Nairobi, Kenya.  

An additional source is Agroforestry Systems, a quarterly
journal.  

See Nair, P. K.  1993.  An Introduction to Agroforestry.  Boston,
Massachusetts: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Also McDicken, K. G., and N. T. Vergara, eds.  1990. 
Agroforestry: Classification and Management.  New York, New York:
John Wiley and Sons

5. Brooks, K. N., P. F. Ffolliott, H. M. Gregersen, and J. L.
Thames.  1991.  Hydrology and the Management of Watersheds. 
Ames, Iowa: Iowa State University Press.