Advertisement

Agroforestry Systems

, Volume 1, Issue 4, pp 347–360 | Cite as

Approaches to the economic evaluation of agroforestry farming systems

  • Dan M. Etherington
  • Peter J. Matthews
Article

Abstract

The economics of agroforestry systems can be approached in a purely analytical fashion with mathematical equations and diagrams explaining the principles of analysis. This paper argues that such an approach may be useful for teaching purposes but has little practical relevance. There is an urgent need for a practical tool with which multi-disciplinary teams can asses agroforestry systems. The simplest and most common approaches to the economic analysis of farm management problems are various forms of budgeting. Recent advances in micro-computer technology provide the means by which the principles of partial budgeting can be adapted to the needs of agroforestry taking account of its multiple component nature, seasonal variability and long life span. The paper sets out the specifications for such an approach and indicates how it might be used.

Keywords

Life Span Economic Evaluation Economic Analysis Farming System Agroforestry System 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Ahmed MMA, De Silva M and Wijekoon LD (1975) Comparative Economic Analyses of Selected Farm Enterprises. Ministry of Plantation Industries, Agricultural Diversification Project, Peradeniya, SRL/70/522, Project Document 34, AprilGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Alviar NG and Guevas SE (1976) Management of selected coconut intercropping farms in Laguna, Balangao and Cavite. Journal of Agricultural Economics and Development (Philippines), 6(2), JulyGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Anderson JR, Dillon J and Hardaker JB (1978) Agricultural Decision Anal ysis (Iowa State University Press)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Barlow C (1978) The Natural Rubber Industry. Its Development, Technology and Economy in Malaysia (Oxford University Press, Kuala Lumpur)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bhat KS (1979) Performance of cacao as mixed crop with arecanut. In: Ne lliat (ed) [25]Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Brown ML (1979) Farm Budgets: From Farm Income Analysis to Agricultural Project Analysis. World Bank Occasional Papers Number 29Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Burgess RJ (1977) The Intercropping of Smallholder Coconuts in Western Samoa: An Analysis using Multi-Period Linear Programming. (MADE), Australian National University, AugustGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Collinson MP (1981) Micro-level accomplishment and challenges for the less developed world. In: Rural Change. Proceedings of the 17th International Conference of Agricultural Economists, Banff, Canada, September 1979 (Oxford)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Etherington DM (1977) A stochastic model for the optimal replacement of rubber trees, Australian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 21(1):40–58Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Etherington DM (1981) Multi-period budgeting and the economic assessment of perennial crop intercropping Systems. Development Studies Centre Occasional Paper No. 26, The Australian National University, CanberraGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Etherington DM and Karunanayake K (1981) An economic analysis of some options for intercropping under coconuts in Sri Lanka. Sri Lanka J. Agrarian Studies. 2(1):1–25Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Etherington DM and Matthews PJ (1982) MULBUD User's Manual. (Development studies Centre, The Australian National University)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Feruson CE (1979) The Neoclassical Theory of Production and Distribution. Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Flinn JC (1979) Agroeconomic considerations in cassava intercropping systems (in Weber et al. eds [35])Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hoekstra DA (1983) Leucaena Leucocephala hedgerows intercropped with maize and beans: an ex ante analysis of a candidate agroforestry land use system for the semi-arid areas in Machakos District. ICRAF Working Paper No. 3. NairobiGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Huxley PA (1981) The Role of Trees in Agroforestry—Some Comments. Proceedings of the Consultative Meeting on Plant Research for Agroforestry. April (forthcoming 1982)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Incorporated Society of Planters (ISP), (1980). Proceedings of the International Conference on Cocoa and Coconuts 1978, Kuala LumpurGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Karunanayake K (1982) An Economic Assessment of Intercropping under Coconuts in Sri Lanka. Dev Studies Centre, Australian National University, MADE ThesisGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kennedy JOS (1981) Agricultural applications of dynamic programming: review and prognosis. Aust Ag Ec Soc. 25th Annual Conference, Christchurch, NZGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lim KP and Chai W (1980) Cocoa-coconuts and oil palm as possible alternatives in replacing old rubber — an economic appraisal. In [17] aboveGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    McConnell DJ (1974) Planning Notes for Some Tropical Perennial Crops. UNDP/SF-FAO Peradeniya, Sri Lanka, AprilGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Marschak J and Radner R (1972) Economic Theory of Teams. New Haven: Yale Univ PressGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mathew M, Potti SN, Punnoose KI, George CM (1979) Intercropping in rubber plantations. In [25]Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Nair PKR (1979) Definition of agroforestry. ICRAF Newsletter Vol 1, No 1Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Nelliat EV (ed) (1978) Placrosym I: Proceedings of the First Annual Symposium on Plantation Crops. (Indian Soc. for Plantations Crops, Kasaragod)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Nik Faud bin MK and Md Sharif bin A (1980) The socio-economic status of coconut smallholders in Lower Perak’. In ISP [17]Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Norman DW (1978) Farming systems research to improve the livelihood of small farmers. American Journal of Agric. Economics 60:5, DecemberGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Rae AN (1977) Crop Management Economics. Crosby Lockwood Staples, LondonGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Raintree J (in press) Bioeconomic considerations in the design of agroforestry cropping systems. In: Huxley, P.A. (ed). Plant Research in AgroforestryGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sefanaia S (1982) Smallholder Intercropping under Coconuts in Tonga. Dev Studies Centre, Australian National University, MADE ThesisGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Stanton BF (1973) Farm budgeting for project analysis. Econ Dev Inst, World BankGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Trenbath BR (1976) Plant interactions in mixed crop communities. Multiple Cropping (American Society of Agronomy) pp 129–169Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Varghese PT, Nair PKR, Nelliat EV, Rama Varma and Gopalasundaram (1979) Intercropping with tuber crops in coconut gardens’. In [25] aboveGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Vergara NT (ed) (1982) The economic evaluation of agroforestry projects. In: New Directions in Agroforestry: The Potential for Tropical Legume Trees. (Environment & Policy Inst, E-W Center, Honolulu, June)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Vries D TH de (1974) Optimum Intercropping Patterns for Rubber Smallholders, Economics Division, Rubber Research Centre, Hat Yai, ThailandGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Weber E, Nestel B and Campbell M (eds) (1979) Intercropping with Cassava. Proceedings of an international workshop held at Trivandrum, India, 27 November-1 December 1978 (IDRC, Ottawa)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Willey RW (1979) Intercropping — Its Importance and Research Needs.Part 1: Competition and Yield Advantages. Field Crop Abstracts 32, 1, January. Part 2: Agronomy and Research Approaches. Field Crop Abstracts 32, 2, FebruaryGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Martinus Nijhoff/Dr W. Junk Publishers 1983

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dan M. Etherington
    • 1
  • Peter J. Matthews
    • 1
  1. 1.Australian National UniversityCanberra CityAustralia

Personalised recommendations