Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Agroforestry preferences in refugee hosting communities in Cameroon

  • Published:
Agroforestry Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

An Erratum to this article was published on 08 June 2014

Abstract

Pressure on natural resources and local infrastructure often increase in areas of refugee settlement, and food and health security can decline as a result. Agroforestry is the use of trees and crops and/or livestock in the same farming system to achieve production and conservation objectives. These polycultures can help improve food security in refugee settlement areas by rendering diverse products while increasing conservation in the face of augmented population pressure. In the past 10 years, 90,000 Central African Republic refugees have crossed into Cameroon and settled in hundreds of villages. This study focused on agroforestry preferences among refugees and host-nationals in six villages in the Adamaoua Region of Cameroon. One-hundred and twenty-two community members participated in the study. Visual methods were used to quantify preferences for eight agroforestry practices and tested for statistically significant differences across gender, ethnicity, and status as refugee or Cameroonian. There were differences in practice preferences as well as preferences for implementation in a group or as a family. Most differences were between refugees and Cameroonians. Refugees were more likely to prefer practices that help meet basic needs and also more likely to prefer group implementation. Open-ended comments also were analyzed to contextualize quantitative results. Overall, results suggest that agroforestry preferences in refugee settings may relate to a greater degree on social class and experience rather than gender or ethnicity. Results also indicate common ground in that refugees and host nationals are likely to share many preferences.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. There are two main ethnic groups in the region, Foulbé and Gbaya. Two other ethnic groups existed in smaller numbers which are linguistically and culturally related to Gbaya. These were grouped with Gbaya for analysis purposes, creating two groups: Foulbé and non-Foulbé.

  2. Sauce leaf trees are those which provide leaves which are prepared as a vegetable in a sauce for meals.

References

  • Agea JG, Obua J, Kaboggoza JRS, Waiswa D (2007) Diversity of indigenous fruit trees in the traditional cotton-millet farming system: the case of Adwari subcounty, Lira district, Uganda. Afr J Ecol 45:39–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ahmed M. R. (1999). Gender analysis in participation, productivity and equity in social forestry programs in Bangladesh. PhD, North Carolina State University, Raleigh

  • Alam M, Furukawa Y, Mika M (2010) Perceptions, preferences and attitudes of Bangladesh farmers towards homegarden farming systems. Small-Scale For 9(2):213–226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arnold JEM (1983) Economic considerations in agroforestry projects. Agrofor Syst 1(4):299–311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Black R (1998) Refugees, environment and development. Longman, Harlow

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonnard P, Scherr S (1994) Within gender differences in tree management: is gender distinction a reliable concept? Agrofor Syst 25(2):71–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collier J Jr (1957) Photography in anthropology: a report on two experiments. Am Anthropol 59(5):843–859

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis K, Franzel S, Hildebrand P, Irani T, Place N (2004) Extending technologies among small-scale farmers in Meru, Kenya: Ingredients for success in farmer groups. J Agric Educ Ext 10(2):53–62

    Google Scholar 

  • DE Rocheleau, Weber FR, Field-Juma A (1988) Agroforestry in dryland Africa. International Council for Research in Agroforestry, Nairobi

    Google Scholar 

  • Dutta P (2011) Migration as source of risk-aversion among the environmental refugees: the case of women displaced by erosion of the river ganga in the Malda district of West Bengal, India. COMCAD Working Papers, 98, COMCAD - Center on Mogration, Citizenship and Development, Bielefeld

  • Ebling MR, John BE (2000) On the contributions of different empirical data in usability testing. In: Proceedings of the 3rd conference on designing interactive systems: processes, practices, methods, and techniques. New York, NY, USA, ACM, pp 289–296

  • Ferguson H, Kepe T (2011) Agricultural cooperatives and social empowerment of women: a Ugandan case study. Dev Pract 21(3):421–429

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer A, Vasseur L (2002) Smallholder perceptions of agroforestry projects in Panama. Agrofor Syst 54(2):103–113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franzel S (1999) Socioeconomic factors affecting the adoption potential of improved tree fallows in Africa. Agrofor Syst 47(1–3):305–321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garrity DP (2004) Agroforestry and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals. Agrofor Syst 61–62(1–3):5–17

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghimire K (1994) Refugees and deforestation. Int Migr 32(4):561–570

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gordon AM, Jose S (2008) Applying ecological knowledge to agroforestry design: a synthesis. In: Jose S, Gordon A (eds) Toward agroforestry design, vol 4. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 301–306

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Horst C (2006) Introduction: refugee livelihoods: continuity and transformations. Refug Surv Quart 25(2):6–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobsen K (1997) Refugees’ environmental impact: the effect of patterns of settlement. J Refug Stud 10(1):19–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobsen K, Landau LB (2003) The dual imperative in refugee research: some methodological and ethical considerations in social science research on forced migration. Disasters 27(3):185–206

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson J, Delgado O (2003) Farmer perspectives on agroforestry opportunities and constraints in Cape Verde. Small-Scale For Econ Manag Policy 2(3):343–355

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelso A, Jacobson M (2011) Community assessment of agroforestry opportunities in GaMothiba, South Africa. Agrofor Syst 83(3):267–278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kibreab G (1997) Environmental causes and impact of refugee movements: a critique of the current debate. Disasters 21(1):20–38

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kiptot E, Franzel S, Hebinck P, Richards P (2006) Sharing seed and knowledge: farmer to farmer dissemination of agroforestry technologies in western Kenya. Agrofor Syst 68(3):167–179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krings T (1995) Marginalisation and revolt among the Tuareg in Mali and Niger. GeoJournal 36(1):57–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuntashula E, Mafongoya PL (2005) Farmer participatory evaluation of agroforestry trees in eastern Zambia. Agric Syst 84(1):39–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lassailley-Jacob V (1993) Refugee-host interactions: a field report from the Ukwimi Mozambican refugee settlement, Zambia. Refuge 13(6):24–26

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawrie N, Van Damme W (2003) The importance of refugee-host relations: guinea 1990–2003. Lancet 362(9383):575

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Markemann A, Stemmer A, Siegmund-Schultze M, Piepho HP, Valle Zárate A (2009) Stated preferences of llama keeping functions in Bolivia. Livest Sci 124(1–3):119–125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mekoya A, Oosting SJ, Fernandez-Rivera S, Van der Zijpp AJ (2008) Multipurpose fodder trees in the Ethiopian highlands: farmers’ preference and relationship of indigenous knowledge of feed value with laboratory indicators. Agric Syst 96(1–3):184–194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mouiche I (2011) Democratisation and political participation of Mbororo in western Cameroon. Afrikaspectrum 46(2):71

    Google Scholar 

  • Nair PKR (1989) Agroforestry systems in the tropics. Kluwer Academic Publishers, in co-operation with ICRAF, Dordrecht/Boston

  • Nair PKR (1993) An introduction to agroforestry. Kluwer Academic Publishers in cooperation with International Centre for Research in Agroforestry, Dordrecht

  • Namaalwa J, Buyinza M, Kirabo A, Byakagaba P (2011) Agroforestry as a land conflict management strategy in western Uganda. Environ Res J 5(2):42–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council Advisory Committee on the Sahel (1983) Agroforestry in the West African Sahel. National Academy Press, Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Oberhauser A, Pratt A (2004) Women’s collective economic strategies and political transformation in rural South Africa. Gender Place Cult 11(2):209–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ogunlana EA (2004) The technology adoption behavior of women farmers: the case of alley farming in Nigeria. Renew Agric Food Syst 19(01):57–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pieterse S, Ismail S (2003) Nutritional risk factors for older refugees. Disasters 27(1):16–36

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pingali PL, Rozelle SD, Gerpacio R (2001) The farmer’s voice in priority setting: a cross-country experiment in eliciting technological. Econ Dev Cult Change 49(3):591

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts B, Ocaka KF, Browne J, Oyok T, Sondorp E (2009) Factors associated with the health status of internally displaced persons in northern Uganda. J Epidemiol Community Health 63(3):227–232

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Romanoff S (1993) Farmers’ organization, research and diffusion of technology. In: Dvorak KA (ed) Social science research for agricultural technology development: spatial and temporal dimensions. CAB International, Wallingford, England, pp 51–64

    Google Scholar 

  • UNHCR (2011) 2011 UNHCR country operation profile–Cameroon Retrieved November 16, 2011

  • Unruh JD (1993) Refugee resettlement on the Horn of Africa: the integration of host and refugee land use patterns. Land Use Policy 10(1):49–66

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitaker BE (1999. Changing opportunities: Refugees and host communities in western Tanzania. Humanitarian Assistance, Working Paper 11

  • Zheng S, Wang Z, Awokuse TO (2012) Determinants of producers’ participation in agricultural cooperatives: evidence from Northern China. Appl Econ Perspect Policy 34(1):167–186

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Alfa Barry for translation and logistics support. We are grateful to Trees for the Future, who provided partial funding for this research project, the International Medical Corps and United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, whose Cameroon staff provided support for the field research, as well as all the research participants who shared hospitality and made the research possible through their participation and the valuable information they shared.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to John F. Munsell.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Moore, E.A., Munsell, J.F., Hammett, A.L.T. et al. Agroforestry preferences in refugee hosting communities in Cameroon. Agroforest Syst 88, 735–752 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-014-9695-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-014-9695-4

Keywords

Navigation