Adaptation factors and futures of agroforestry systems in Nepal

  • Edwin Cedamon
  • Ian Nuberg
  • Bishnu H. Pandit
  • Krishna K. Shrestha
Article

Abstract

Farmers in Nepal mid-hills have practiced agroforestry for generations as main source or supplement of timber, firewood and fodder from government forests. The nature and extent of agroforestry practice is being challenged by rapid social and economic change particularly in the recent rise of labour out-migration and remittance income. Understanding is required of the critical factors that influence farmers in the way they adapt agroforestry to their circumstances. This paper analyses the relationship of households’ livelihood resources and agroforestry practice to identify trajectories of agroforestry adaptation to improve livelihood outcomes. Using data from a survey of 668 households, it was found that landholding, livestock holding and geographic location of farmers are key drivers for agroforestry adaptation. A multinomial logistic regression model showed that in addition to these variables, household income, household-remittance situation (whether the household is receiving remittance or not) and caste influence adaptation of agroforestry practice. The analysis indicates that resource-poor households are more likely to adapt to terraced-based agroforestry while resource-rich households adapt to woodlot agroforestry. Appropriate agroforestry interventions are: (1) develop simple silvicultural regimes to improve the quality and productivity of naturally-regenerating timber on under-utilised land; (2) develop a suite of tree and groundcover species that can be readily integrated within existing terrace-riser agroforestry practices; (3) acknowledge the different livelihood capitals of resource-poor and resource-rich groups and promote terrace-riser and woodlot agroforestry systems respectively to these groups; and (4) develop high-value fodder production systems on terrace-riser agroforestry, and also for non-arable land. The analysis generates important insights for improving agroforestry policies and practices in Nepal and in many developing countries.

Keywords

Farming system Planted trees Woodlots Livelihood assets Multinomial logistic regression Remittance economy 

Notes

Acknowledgement

This research was funded by Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (ACIAR) as project FST/2011/076 and the following organisations were involved in the design and implementation of the survey reported: The University of Adelaide (Australia), The University of New South Wales (Australia), World Agroforestry Centre (Indonesia), International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Nepal, Forest Action Nepal, Nepal Agroforestry Foundation, SEARCH-Nepal, Institute of Forestry Pokhara-Tribhuvan University Nepal.

References

  1. Acharya K (2006) Linking trees on farms with biodiversity conservation in subsistence farming systems in Nepal. Biodivers Conserv 15:631–646CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Adesina AA, Mbila D, Nkamleu GB, Endaman D (2000) Econometric analysis of the determinants of adoption of alley farming by farmers in the forest zone of southwest Cameroon. Agric Ecosyst Environ 80(3):255–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Agrawal A, Perin N (2008), Climate adaptation, local institutions and rural livelihoods, IFRO Working Paper # W081-6, http://www.umich.edu/~ifri/Publications/W08I6%20Arun%20Agrawal%20and%20Nicolas%20Perrin.pdf. Accessed 11 Mar 2017
  4. Amatya SM (1990) Fodder trees and their lopping cycle in Nepal. B.M. Amatya Tahachal, KathmanduGoogle Scholar
  5. Amatya S, Newman S (1993) Agroforestry in Nepal: research and practice. Agrofor Syst 23:215–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Amtaya SM, Nuberg I, Cedamon E, Pandit B (2015), Removing barrier to commercialisation of agroforestry trees in Nepal, conference presentation, IUFRO research group 3.08 small-scale forestry conference, 11–15 October 2015, Sunshine Coast, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  7. Anderson JR (1993) The economics of new technology adaptation and adoption. Rev Mark Agric Econ 61(2):301–309Google Scholar
  8. Bayard B, Jolly CM, Shannon DA (2007) The economics of adoption and management of alley cropping in Haiti. J Environ Manag 84(1):62–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bhandari P (2013) Rural livelihood change? househld capital, community resources and livelihood transition. J Rural Stud 32:126–136CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. Birendra KC, Stainback GA, Rayens K (2015) Comparison of three major forest types of mid-hills region of Nepal for conservation and local benefits. Small-scale For. doi: 10.1007/s11842-015-9299-5 Google Scholar
  11. Cedamon E, Emtage N, Suh J, Herbohn J, Harrison S, Mangaoang E (2004) Present tree planting and management activities in four rural communities in Leyte Province, the Philippines. Ann Trop Res 27(1):19–34Google Scholar
  12. Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS) Government of Nepal (2012) Nepal living standard survey 2010–2011, KathmanduGoogle Scholar
  13. Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS) Government of Nepal (2014) National population and housing census 2011, general and social characteristics table (household and population, age, sex distribution, relationship, marital status and religion), Volume 05, Part 1, NPHC2011 National Planning Commission Secretariat, KathmanduGoogle Scholar
  14. Chambers R, Conway G (1991) Sustainable rural livelihoods: practical concepts for the 21st Century. IDS Discussion Paper 296Google Scholar
  15. Chambers R, Leach M (1987) Trees to meet contingencies: savings and security for the rural poor. Social Forestry Network, Network paper 5a ODIGoogle Scholar
  16. Chambers R, Leach M (1990) Trees as savings and security for the rural poor. Unasylva No. 161 –Wildlife management for rural development, Forestry Department FAO RomeGoogle Scholar
  17. Conroy C (1992) Trees as insurance against contingencies: case of Panchmahals District. Gujarat, Economic and Political Weekly 27(43/44):2381–2387Google Scholar
  18. Degen A, Pandey LN, Kam M, Pandey S, Upreti C, Osti N (2010) Goat production and fodder leaves offered by local villagers in the mid-hill of Nepal. Hum Ecol 38:625–637CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Department for International Development (DFID) (1999) Sustainable Livelihoods Guidance Sheets, http://www.eldis.org/vfile/upload/1/document/0901/section2.pdf. Accessed 10 Jun 2015
  20. Department of Hydrology and Meteorology Government of Nepal (2015), Rainfall data, climate portal Nepal, http://www.dhm.gov.np/dpc/. Accessed 1 Jun 2015
  21. Dhakal A, Cockfield G, Maraseni T (2012) Evolution of agroforestry based farming systems: a study of Dhanusha District, Nepal. Agrofor Syst 86:17–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Dhakal A, Cockfield G, Maraseni TN (2015) Deriving an index of adoption rate and assessing factors affecting adoption of an agroforestry-based farming system in Dhanusha District¸ Nepal. Agrofor Syst 89(4):645–661. doi: 10.1007/s10457-015-9802-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Evans P (1988) Designing agroforestry innovations to increase their adoptability: a case study from Paraguay. J Rural Stud 4(1):45–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. FAO (1999) Tropical livestock unit, Livestock and environment tool box, http://www.fao.org/ag/againfo/programmes/en/lead/toolbox/Mixed1/TLU.htm. Accessed 1 June 2015
  25. FAO (2010) Assessment of food security and nutrition situation in Nepal (an input for the preparation of NMTPF for FAO in Nepal). Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations UN Complex, PulchowkGoogle Scholar
  26. Garforth C, Malla Y, Neopane R, Pandit B (1999) Socioeconomic factors and agroforestry improvement in the hills of Nepal. Mt Res Dev 19:273–278Google Scholar
  27. Gilmour D, Nurse M (1991) Farmer initiatives in inceasing tree cover in Central Nepal. Mt Res Dev 11:329–337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gilmour D, Pradhan U, Malla Y, Bartlett T, Finlayson R, Shah R (2014), In: Johari R (ed) Enhancing livelihood and food security from agroforestry and community forestry systems in nepal: current status, trends, and future directions, World Agroforestry Centre, BogorGoogle Scholar
  29. Gurung K (2010), Livestock and livelihoods: dynamics of gender, class, caste and ethnicity in rural agrarian communities of Nepal, PhD Thesis, James Cook UniversityGoogle Scholar
  30. Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S, and Sturdivant RX (2013) Wiley series in probability and statistics: applied logistic regression 3rd ed. Wiley, ProQuest ebrary, New York: http://site.ebrary.com.proxy.library.adelaide.edu.au/lib/adelaide/detail.action?docID=10677827. Accessed 29 May 2015
  31. Khanal U, Alam K, Khanal R, Regmi P (2015) Implications of out-migration in rural agriculture: a case study of Manapang Village¸ Tanahunm Nepal. J Dev Areas 49(1):331–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Maharjan A, Bauer S, Kneer B (2012) Do rural women who stay behind benefit from male out-migration? A case study in the Hills of Nepal. Gend Technol Dev 16(1):91–123Google Scholar
  33. Maharjan A, Bauer S, Kneer B (2013), Migration for labour and its impact on farm production in Nepal, working paper VI, centre for the study of labour and mobility, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  34. Malla Y (2000) Farmers’ tree management strategies in a changing rural economy, and factors influencing decision on tree growing in Nepal. Int Tree Crops J 10:226–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Malla Y, Neupane H, Branney P (2003) Why aren't poor people benefiting more from community forestry? J For Livelihood 3(1):78–92Google Scholar
  36. Maltsoglou I, Taniguchie K (2004) Poverty, livestock and household typologies in Nepal, PPLPI Working Paper. Food and Agriculture Organization, RomeGoogle Scholar
  37. Meijer SC, Ajayi O, Sileshi G, Nieuwenhuis M (2015) The role of knowledge, attitudes and perceptions in the uptake of agricultural and agroforestry innovations among smallholder farmers in sub-Saharan Africa. Int J Agric Sustainabil 13:40–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mercer D (2004) Adoption of agroforestry innovations in the tropics: a review. Agrofor Syst 61–62:311–328Google Scholar
  39. Nelson DR, Adger WN, Brown K (2007) Adaptation to environmental change: contribution for a resilience framework. Annu Rev Environ Resour 32(1):395–419CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Nuepane R, Thapa G (2001) Impact of agroforestry intervention farm income under the subsistence farming system in the middle hills Nepal. Agrofor Syst 53:31–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Nuepane R, Sharma K, Thapa G (2002) Adoption of agroforestry in the hills of Nepal: a logistic regression analysis. Agric Syst 72:177–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Oli B, Treue T, Larsen H (2015) Socio-economic determinants of growing trees on farms in the middle-hills of Nepal. Agrofor Syst. doi: 10.1007/s10457-015-9810-1 Google Scholar
  43. Orlove B (2009) The past, the present and some possible futures of adaptation. In: Adger WN, Lorenzoni I, O’Brien KL (eds) Adapting to climate change: thresholds, values, governance. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 131–163. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511596667.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Otte M, Chilonda P (2002) Cattle and ruminant production systems in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review, Food and Agricutlure Organisation, Rome. ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/005/y4176E/y4176E00.pdf. Accessed 25 Jun 2015
  45. Palikhe A, Fujimoto A (2010) An economic analysis of major farming components in the mid-hills of Nepal: cases of Nuwakot, Kavre and Lalitpur Districts. Journal of Agricultural Science, Tokyo University of Agriculture 54:256–266Google Scholar
  46. Pandey LN, Kam M, Pandey S, Upreti C, Osti N, Degen A (2009) Indigenous knowledge of fodder tree selectivity by local goats in the mid-hills of Nepal. J Enterp Commun 3:241–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Pandit B, Thapa G (2004) Poverty and resource degradation under different common forest resource management systems in the mountains of Nepal. Soc Nat Resour 17:1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Pandit B, Shrestha K, Bhattarai S (2014) Sustainable local livelihood through enhancing agroforestry systems in Nepal. J For Livelihood 12:47–63Google Scholar
  49. Pannell DJ, Marshall GR, Barr N, Curtis A, Vanclay F, Wilkinson R (2006) Understanding and promoting adoption of conservation practices by rural landholders. Aust J Exp Agric 46:1407–1424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Pattanayak S, Mercer DES, Yang J (2003) Taking stocks of agroforestry adoption studies. Agrofor Syst 57:173–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Paudel K, Subedi YR, Tamang S (2014) Research site selection report, enhancing livelihoods and food security from agro-forestry and community forestry in Nepal (EnLiFT). EnLiFT Project, KathmanduGoogle Scholar
  52. Regmi B, Garforth C (2010) Trees outside forests and rural livelihoods: a study of Chitwan District, Nepal. Agrofor Syst 79:393–407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Scoones I (1998) Sustainable rural livelihoods: a framework for analysis. In: STUDIES, I. O. D. (ed.). BrightonGoogle Scholar
  54. Sen A (1993) Capability and well-being. In: Nussbaum M, Sen A (eds) The quality of life. Clarendon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  55. Sherpa D (2010) Labour migration and remittance in Nepal, case study report. ICIMOD, KathmanduGoogle Scholar
  56. Smit B, Pilifosova O (2001) Adaptation to climate change on the context of sustainable development and equity. In: McCartthy J, Canciani O, Leary N, Dokken D, White K (eds) Climate change 2001: impacts¸ adaptation and vulnerability, intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambrige University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  57. Sood KK, Mitchell C (2011) Household level domestic fuel consumption and forest resource in relation to agroforestry adoption: Evidence against need-based approach. Biomass and Bioenergy 35(1):337–345CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Tamang S, Paudel K, Shrestha K (2014) Feminization of agriculture and its implications for food security in rural Nepal. J For Livelihood 12:20–32Google Scholar
  59. Thapa G, Poudel G (2002) Farmland degradation in the mountains of Nepal: a study of watershed “with” and ‘without” external intervention. Land Degrad Dev 13:479–493CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Tuladhar R, Sapkota C, Adhikari N (2014) Effects of migration and remittance income in Nepal’s agriculture yield. Asian Development Bank, ManilaGoogle Scholar
  61. Upreti C, Shresta B (2006) Nutrient contents of feeds and fodder in Nepal. Animal Nutrition Division, Nepal Agricutural Research Center, KathmanduGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Edwin Cedamon
    • 1
  • Ian Nuberg
    • 1
  • Bishnu H. Pandit
    • 2
  • Krishna K. Shrestha
    • 3
  1. 1.School of Agriculture, Food and WineThe University of Adelaide,Waite CampusUrrbraeAustralia
  2. 2.Nepal Agroforestry FoundationKathmanduNepal
  3. 3.School of Social SciencesUniversity of New South WalesSydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations