Advertisement

Agroforestry Systems

, Volume 38, Issue 1–3, pp 165–176 | Cite as

The domestication and commercialization of indigenous trees in agroforestry for the alleviation of poverty

  • R. R. B. Leakey
  • A. J. Simons
Article

Abstract

New initiatives in agroforestry are seeking to integrate into tropical farming systems indigenous trees whose products have traditionally been gathered from natural forests. This is being done in order to provide marketable products from farms that will generate cash for resource-poor rural and peri-urban households. This poverty-alleviating agroforestry strategy is at the same time linked to one in which perennial, biologically diverse and complex mature-stage agroecosystems are developed as sustainable alternatives to slash-and-burn agriculture.

One important component of this approach is the domestication of the local tree species that have commercial potential in local, regional or even international markets. Because of the number of potential candidate species for domestication, one crucial first step is the identification of priority species and the formulation of a domestication strategy that is appropriate to the use, marketability and genetic potential of each species.

For most of these hitherto wild species little or no formal research has been carried out to assess their food value, potential for genetic improvement or reproductive biology. To date their marketability can only be assessed by their position in the local rural and urban marketplaces, since few have attracted international commercial interest. To meet the objective of poverty alleviation, however, it is crucial that market expansion and creation are possible, hence for example it is important to determine which marketable traits are amenable to genetic improvement. While some traits that are relatively easy to identify do benefit the farmer, there are undoubtedly others that are important to the food, pharmaceutical or other industries that require more sophisticated evaluation.

This paper presents the current thinking and strategies of ICRAF in this new area of work and draws on examples from our program.

fruit trees non-timber forest products tree improvement 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Arnold JEM (1995) Socio-economic benefits and issues in non-wood forest product use. Report of the International Expert Consultation on Non-wood Forest Products. Non-wood Forest Products No. 3, pp 89–123Google Scholar
  2. Arnold JEM (1996) Economic factors in farmer adoption of forest product activities. In: Leakey RRB, Temu AB, Melnyk M and Vantomme P (eds), Domestication and Commercialization of Non-timber Forest Products in Agroforestry Systems, pp 131–146. Non-wood Forest Products No. 9. FAO, Rome, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  3. Burley J and von Carlowitz P (1984) Multi-purpose tree germplasm. Proceedings of a planning workshop at National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC, June 1983. ICRAF, Nairobi, KenyaGoogle Scholar
  4. Cooper PJ, Leakey RRB, Rao MR and Reynolds L (1996) Agroforestry and the mitigation of land degradation in the humid and sub-humid tropics of Africa. Experimental Agriculture 32: 235–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dewees PA and Scherr SJ (1996) Policies and markets for non-timber tree products. EPTD Discussion Paper No. 16. IFPRI, Washington DC, USAGoogle Scholar
  6. Djimde M (1991) Synthese zonal des systemes d'utilisation des terres et des potentialites agroforestieres dans le cadre de la Planification du Reseau Collaboratif de Recherche en Agroforesterie de l'ICRAF pour les Zones Semi-Arides du Burkina Faso, Mali, Niger et Senegal. AFRENA Report No. 48. ICRAF, Nairobi, KenyaGoogle Scholar
  7. Falconer J (1990) The Major Significance of ‘Minor’ Forest Products. The local use and value of forests in the West African humid forest zone. Forests, Trees and People, Community Forestry Note No. 6, FAO, Rome, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  8. Franzel S, Jaenicke H and Janssen W (1996) Choosing the right trees: setting priorities for multipurpose tree improvement. ISNAR Research Report 8. ISNAR, The Hague, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  9. Jaenicke H, Franzel S and Boland DJ (1995) Towards a method to set priorities among species for tree improvement research: a case study from West Africa. Journal of Tropical Forest Science 7: 490–506Google Scholar
  10. Ladipo DO, Foundoun JM and Ganga N (1996) Domestication of the Bush Mango (Irvingia spp.): some exploitable intraspecific variations in West and Central Africa. In: Leakey RRB, Temu AB, Melnyk M and Vantomme P (eds), Domestication and Commercialization of Nontimber Forest Products for Agroforestry, pp 193–205. Non-Wood Products No. 9. FAO, Rome, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  11. Lamien N, Sidibe A and Bayala J (1996) Use and commercialization of non-timber forest products in Western Burkina Faso. In: Leakey RRB, Temu AB, Melnyk M and Vantomme P (eds), Domestication and Commercialization of Non-timber Forest Products in Agroforestry Systems, pp 51–64. Non-Wood Forest Products No. 9. FAO, Rome, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  12. Leakey RE and Lewin R (1996) The Sixth Extinction: Biodiversity and it's Survival. Weidenfeld and Nicholson, London, 271 ppGoogle Scholar
  13. Leakey RRB (1996) Definition of agroforestry revisited. Agroforestry Today 8(1): 5–7Google Scholar
  14. Leakey RRB (In press). The use of biodiversity and implications for agroforestry. In: Proceedings of FORUM BELEM. POEMA, Belém, BrazilGoogle Scholar
  15. Leakey RRB and Izac A-MN (1996) Linkages between domestication and commercialization of non-timber forest products: implications for agroforestry. In: Leakey RRB, Temu AB, Melnyk M and Vantomme P (eds), Domestication and Commercialization of Non-timber Forest Products for Agroforestry, pp 1–7. Non-Wood Forest Products No. 9. FAO, Rome, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  16. Leakey RRB and Jaenicke H (1995) The domestication of indigenous fruit trees: opportunities and challenges for agroforestry. In: Suzuki K, Sakurai S, Ishii K and Norisada M (eds). Procedings of 4th International BIO-REFOR Workshop, pp 15–26. BIO-REFOR, Tokyo, JapanGoogle Scholar
  17. Leakey RRB and Ladipo DO (1996) Trading on genetic variation — fruits of Dacryodes edulis. Agroforestry Today 8(2): 16–17Google Scholar
  18. Leakey RRB and Newton AC (1994) Domestication of ‘Cinderella’ species as a start of a woody plant revolution. In: Leakey RRB and Newton AC (eds), Tropical Trees: Potential for Domestication and the Rebuilding of Forest Resources, pp 3–6. HMSO, LondonGoogle Scholar
  19. Leakey RRB and Simons AJ (In press) When does vegetative propagation provide a viable alternative to propagation by seed: opportunities and strategies for forestry/agroforestry in tropical and subtropical countries. In: Wolf H (ed) The Problems of Forestry in Tropical and Subtropical Countries: The Procurement of Forestry Seeds with Special Reference to Kenya. Ecomed Publishers, Landsberg/Lech, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  20. Leakey RRB, Temu AB, Melnyk M and Vantomme P (eds) (1996) Domestication and Commercialization of Non-timber Forest Products in Agroforestry Systems. Non-Wood Forest Products No. 9. FAO, Rome, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  21. Melnyk M (1996) Indigenous enterprise for the domestication of trees and the commercialization of their fruits, In: Leakey RRB, Temu AB, Melnyk M and Vantomme P (eds), Domestication and Commercialization of Non-timber Forest Products in Agroforestry Systems, pp. 97–103. Non-Wood Forest Products No. 9. FAO, Rome, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  22. Michon G and de Foresta H (1996) The agroforest model as an alternative to the pure plantation model for domestication and commercialization of NTFP's. In: Leakey RRB, Temu AB, Melnyk M and Vantomme P (eds), Domestication and Commercialization of Non-timber Forest Products in Agroforestry Systems, pp 160–175. Non-Wood Forest Products No. 9. FAO, Rome, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  23. Nair PKR (1993) An Introduction to Agroforestry. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  24. Ndungu JN and Boland DJ (1994) Sesbania sesban collections in Southern Africa: developing a model for co-operation between a CGIAR Centre and NARS. Agroforestry Systems 27: 129–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ndoye O (1995) The markets for non-timber forest products in the humid forest zone of Cameroon and its borders: Structure, conduct, performance and policy implications. Report to CIFOR, Bogor, IndonesiaGoogle Scholar
  26. Ong CK and Huxley P (1996) Tree-Crop Interactions: A Physiological Approach. CAB International, Wallingford, UKGoogle Scholar
  27. Peters CM, Gentry AH and Mendelsohn RO (1989) Valuation of an Amazonian rainforest. Nature 339: 655–656CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sanchez PA and Leakey RRB (1997) Land use transformation in Africa: three determinants for balancing food security with natural resource utilization. European Journal of Agronomy (in press)Google Scholar
  29. Simons AJ (1996a) Delivery of improvement for agroforestry trees. In: Dieters MJ, Matheson AC, Nikles DG, Harwood CE and Walker SM (eds), Tree Improvement for Sustainable Tropical Forestry, Vol 2, pp 391–400. Queensland Forestry Research Institute, Gympie, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  30. Simons AJ (1996b) ICRAF's strategy for domestication of non-wood tree products, In: Leakey RRB, Temu AB, Melnyk M and Vantomme P (eds), Domestication and Commercialization of Non-timber Forest Products in Agroforestry Systems, pp 8–22. Non-Wood Forest Products No. 9. FAO, Rome, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  31. van Noordwijk M, van Schaik CP, de Foresta H and Tomich TP (1995) Segregate or integrate nature and agriculture for biodiversity conservation. In: Proceedings of Biodiversity Forum, 4–5 November 1995, Jakarta, IndonesiaGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. R. B. Leakey
    • 1
  • A. J. Simons
    • 2
  1. 1.Institute of Terrestrial EcologyMidlothianScotland, UK
  2. 2.International Centre for Research in Agroforestry (ICRAF)NairobiKenya

Personalised recommendations