Skip to main content
Log in

Imperata management strategies used in smallholder rubber-based farming systems

  • Published:
Agroforestry Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A large proportion of global natural rubber production takes place in Southeast Asia. The majority of this rubber is produced by smallholders. Thailand, Indonesia and Malaysia are the three principal countries involved. In Malaysia and Indonesia the smallholder sector accounts for 72% and 84% of total rubber production respectively. In other countries rubber plays a significant role on a more local basis. Imperata is a serious problem for the smallholder rubber farmer in most of Southeast Asia in three respects: the high cost (labour and/or capital) of opening Imperata-infested land, its competitive effect on rubber and annual intercrops, and the fire hazard that it poses during the dry season as a major source of combustible material. The costs of Imperata to smallholders are substantial in terms of a direct loss through fire and revenue foregone or delayed as a result of competition. Most smallholders intercrop their rubber during the first 1–3 years after planting it, and during this period Imperata is reasonably well controlled. Intercropping is only feasible for a limited period because of limited soil fertility and/or the shading effect of the rubber trees. After intercropping, Imperata tends to establish itself for a few years until it too is shaded out by the rubber. This is the problem period, during which farmers practise only limited weed management, if any.

A large amount of research has been done on methods of controlling Imperata, but the recommended methods have been generally spurned by smallholders unless they have been given subsidies to apply them. This paper describes the precise nature of the Imperata problem, with reference to some of the smallholder rubber-based farming systems within Southeast Asia; the different Imperata control strategies currently practised in these farming systems; and some of the constraints on the adoption of currently and recently recommended practices. It then proposes a ten-point agenda for research on Imperata control, including two ways in which current research programmes could be usefully reoriented: first, they need to take greater account of smallholder farming systems and constraints; and second they should shift their emphasis from single-method to integrated control systems.

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.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anon (1938) The effect of Lalang on the growth of young rubber trees. Journal of the Rubber Research Institute of Malaysia 8(3): 227–231

    Google Scholar 

  • Anwar, C and Conroy, C (1993) Interim report on a survey of smallholder rubber farmers in South Sumatra. Indonesian Rubber Research Institute and Natural Resources Institute, Sembawa, South Sumatra, Indonesia

    Google Scholar 

  • Directorat Jendral Perkebunan (1992) Statistik Perkebunan Indonesia 1990–1992, Jakarta, Indonesia

  • Faiz, A (1993) Comparative performance of herbicides for Lalang control. Planters Bulletin 199: 74–78

    Google Scholar 

  • Faiz A (1995) The management of Imperata cylindrica in smallholder rubber-based farming systems. Mimeo. Rubber Research Institute of Malaysia

  • Gouyon A and Nancy C (1989) Increasing the productivity of rubber smallholders in Indonesia: a study of agro-economic constraints and proposal. Paper presented at the Rubber Growers Conference, Mallaca, Malaysia 21–23 August 1989

  • Gouyon, A (1995) Management of Imperata cylindrica in rubber smallholdings: insights from observations for farming systems in Cotabato Province (Philippines). Mimeo. CIRAD — CP, Montpellier, France

    Google Scholar 

  • Gouyon, A, de Foresta, H and Levang, P (1993) Does Jungle rubber deserve its name? An analysis of rubber based agroforests in the South East of Sumatra. Agroforestry Systems 22: 181–206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gunawan, A, Suryana, A, Bagnall-Oakeley, H and Conroy, C (1995) Report of some topical rapid rural appraisals in Batumarta, South Sumatra, 23–25 August 1994. Indonesian Rubber Research Institute and Natural Resources Institute, Sembawa, S. Sumatra, Indonesia

    Google Scholar 

  • Gunawan, A, Suryana, A, Bagnall-Oakeley, H (1995) A grassroots perspective on fires and rubber-based farm forestry: report of a survey on fires associated with Imperata cylindrica in Batumarta Transmigration Area, South Sumatra. Indonesia Rubber Research Institute and Natural Resources Institute, Sembawa, South Sumatra, Indonesia

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamin J (1979) The settlement and development of FELDA settlers — with special reference to rubber schemes. Proceedings of Rubber Research Institute of Malaysia, Planters Conference 1979, pp 29–47. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

  • Liangsutthisagon, S (1995) The management of the Imperata in rubber smallholder plantations in Thailand. Mimeo. Office of the Rubber Replanting Aid Fund, Bangkok, Thailand

    Google Scholar 

  • Juman M and Teng G (1979) FELCRA's experience in group farming. Proceedings of Rubber Research Institute of Malaysia, Planters Conference 1979, pp 20–28. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

  • Rahim M Sail, Raja Badrul Shah Raja Shah Kobat, Abdul Ghani Ibrahim, Ahmad Fuad Muhammed, Mazanah Muhammed, Mohd Harun Mohd Tahir, Mohd Yusof Mohd Noor and Wan Mansor Wan Saleh (1990) From smallholder practices constraints and needs to appropriate technology generation, development, development and adoption. The case of rubber smallholdings in Peninsular Malaysia. Research report, Rubber Research Institute of Malaysia, 188 pp

  • Rubber Research Institute of Malaysia (1993) Annual Report, 85 pp

  • Santoso, D, Adiningsih, S, Mutert, E, Fairhurst, T and van Noordwijk, M (1997) Soil fertility management for reclamation of Imperata grasslands by smallholder agroforestry. Agroforestry Systems 36: 181–202 (this issue)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scholz, U (1983) The Natural Regions of Sumatra and Their Agricultural Production Pattern, a Regional Analysis. CRIFC, Bogor, Indonesia

    Google Scholar 

  • Syofyan and Fairhurst, T (1994) GTZ experience in Imperata cylindrica control and rubber establishment. In: Gozali, AD, Amypalupy, Gunawan A, Lasminingsih, M and Thomas (eds) Proceedings of the Panel Discussion on management of Imperata Control and Transfer of Technology for Smallholder Rubber farming Systems, pp 16–23, Padang, West Sumatra

    Google Scholar 

  • Terry, PJ, Adjers, G, Akobundu, IO, Anoka, AU, Drilling, ME, Tjitrosemito, S and Utomo, M (1997) Herbicides and mechanical control of Imperata cylindrica as a first step in grassland rehabilitation. Agroforestry Systems 36: 151–179 (this issue)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tomich, TP (1990) Smallholder rubber development in Indonesia 1990. In: Perkins, D and Roemer, M (eds) Reforming Economic Systems in Developing Countries. Harvard Studies in International Development. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Wibowo, A, Suharti, M, Sagala, A, Hibani, H and van Noordwijk, M (1997) Fire management on Imperata grasslands as part of agroforestry development in Indonesia. Agroforestry Systems 36: 203–217

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bagnall-Oakeley, H., Conroy, C., Faiz, A. et al. Imperata management strategies used in smallholder rubber-based farming systems. Agroforest Syst 36, 83–104 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00142868

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00142868

Key words

Navigation