Agroforestry Systems

, Volume 10, Issue 2, pp 99–112 | Cite as

Economic potential of agroforestry for public recreational parks

  • Josef M. Broder
  • Brehon H. Odronic


The availability of public recreational facilities is being threatened by growing demands, limited supplies, and declining government funding. In response to these pressures, the economic potential of agroforestry for supplementing operating budgets of public recreational parks is examined in a case study park consisting of 324 hectares. Agroforestry enterprises native to the area were selected for development on 70 hectares of the site. Linear programming was used to determine the optimum combinations of 23 agroforestry regimes composed of the following activities: 1) conventional forestry planting, tree density of 1682 trees/hectare, 2) the selected agroforestry planting with hay, tree density of 1495 trees/hectare, 3) the selected agroforestry planting with grazing, 4) hay production, and 5) rental of pasture for grazing. The objective function of the study was to maximize the net present value of the study site subject to land, labor, capital, and minimum annual income constraints. The preferred optimal regime generated $1782 per hectare from an agroforestry planting configuration of 1495 trees/hectare with 75 percent hay, 25 percent grazing, and no annual income requirements. Minimum annual income requirements of $2400 and $4800 were feasible but suboptimal from a net present value criteria. The study found that agroforestry could be used to privatize selective activities of public recreational parks and thus enable public agencies to provide these facilities more effectively.

Key words

Agroforestry outdoor recreation public parks linear programming land management privatization 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Anderson GW, Moore RW and Jenkins PJ (1988) The integration of pasture, livestock and widely-spaced pine in South West Western Australia. Agroforestry Systems 6: 195–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Applegate GB and Nicholson DI (1988) Caribbean pine in an agroforestry system on the Atherton Tableland in north east Australia. Agroforestry Systems 7: 3–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Baldwin PJ, Stewart HTL, Bird PR, Hamer WI, Flinn DW, Cumming KN and Connor DJ (1988) Establishment of an agroforestry research network in Victoria, Australia (1983–85). Agroforestry Systems 6: 213–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Arnold JEM (1983) Economic considerations in agroforestry projects. Agroforestry Systems 1: 299–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brannen SJ (1985) Georgia agriculture at a glance. Division of Agricultural Economics, University of Georgia, AthensGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Byrd NA and Lewis CA (1983) Managing pine trees and bahiagrass for timber and cattle production. U.S.D.A. Forest Service, Atlanta, Georgia, General Report R8-GR2, OctoberGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Clutter JL, Harms WR, Brister GH and Rheney JW (1984) Stand structure and yields of site-prepared loblolly pine plantations in the lower coastal plain of the Carolinas, Georgia, and North Florida. Southeastern Forest Experiment Station, Asheville, North Carolina, General Technical Report SE-27, SeptemberGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Davis JW and Cubbage FW (1986) Analyzing historical and regional stumpage price trends. Georgia Forestry Commision, Georgia Forest Research Paper No. 64, MayGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Filius AM (1982) Economic aspects of agroforestry. Agroforestry Systems 1: 29–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Georgia Department of Agriculture (1984) Georgia Farm Report, Georgia Crop Reporting Service, 23: 1–8Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Georgia Department of Community Affairs (1984) Georgia Local Government Finances, 1984: An Overview. Atlanta, Georgia: Department of Community AffairsGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Givan W, Dorminey C, Westberry G and Eason M (1985) Crop enterprise cost analysis, Cooperative Extension Service, College of Agriculture, University of Georgia, AthensGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hockstra DA (1983) An economic analysis of a simulated alley cropping system for semi arid conditions using micro computers. Agroforestry Systems 1: 335–345Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hoekstra DA (1987) Economics of Agroforestry. Agroforestry Systems 5: 293–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    IBM, IBM Mathematical Programming System Extended/370 (1979) IBM Corporation Technical Publication, White Plains, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Johnson MK, Pearson HA and Lewis CE Agroforestry in the south. The Louisiana Cattleman 16: 7–9Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Langer RW (1972) Grow it. Avon Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Leuschner WA (1984) Introduction to forest resource management. New York: John Wiley and SonsGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lewis CE, Tanner GW and Terry WS (1985) Double vs single row pine plantations for wood and forage production. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry 9: 55–61Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lewis CE, Burton GW, Munson WG and McCormick WC (1983) Integration of pines, pastures, and cattle in south Georgia, USA. Agroforestry Systems 1: 277–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mendoza GA (1987) A mathematical model for generating land-use allocation alternatives for agroforestry systems. Agroforestry Systems 5: 443–453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Odronic BH (1986) Agroforestry: An income producing land use designed for supplementing operating budgets of recreational parks. unpublished masters thesis, Department of Landscape Architecture, University of Georgia, AthensGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Schmid AA (1978) Property, power, and public choice. New York: Praeger PublishersGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Smith CO (1979) The economics of pine pulpwood production in planted stands, Cooperative Extension Service. College of Agriculture, University of Georgia, AthensGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    U.S.D.A. Forest Service (1980) An assessment of the forest and range land situation in the United States. Washington, DC, JanuaryGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Verinumbe I, Knipschner HC and Enabore EE (1984) The conomic potential of leguminous tree crop in zero-tillage cropping in Nigeria: a linear programming model. Agroforestry Systems 2: 129–138Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Wharton CH (1978) The natural environments of Georgia. Geologic and Water Resources Division and Resource Planning Section and Office of Planning and Research, Georgia Department of Natural Resources, AtlantaGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Wojtkowski PA, Brister GH and Cubbage FW (1988) Using multiple objective linear programming to evaluate multi-participant agroforestry systems. Agroforestry Systems 7: 185–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • Josef M. Broder
    • 1
  • Brehon H. Odronic
    • 2
  1. 1.Dept. of Agricultural EconomicsUniversity of GeorgiaAthensUSA
  2. 2.Leonard Hannula Project Planners Inc.WinchesterUSA

Personalised recommendations