Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Agroforestry research for development in India: 25 years of experiences of a national program

  • Published:
Agroforestry Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

India has been in the forefront of agroforestry research ever since organized research in agroforestry started worldwide about 25 years ago. Considering the country's unique land-use, demographic, political, and sociocultural characteristics as well as its strong record in agricultural and forestry research, India's experience in agroforestry research is important to agroforestry development, especially in developing nations. Agroforestry has received much attention in India from researchers, policymakers and others for its perceived ability to contribute significantly to economic growth, poverty alleviation and environmental quality, so that today agroforestry is an important part of the ‘evergreen revolution’ movement in the country. Twenty-five years of investments in research have clearly demonstrated the potential of agroforestry in many parts of the country, and some practices have been widely adopted. But the vast potential remains largely underexploited, and many technologies have not been widely adopted. This situation is a result of the interplay of several complex factors. The understanding of the biophysical issues related to productivity, water-resource sharing, soil fertility, and plant interactions in mixed communities is incomplete and insufficient, mainly because research has mostly been observational in nature rather than process oriented. Methods to value and assess the social, cultural and economic benefits of various tangible and nontangible benefits of agroforestry are not available, and the socioeconomic processes involved in the success and failure of agroforestry have not been investigated. On the other hand, the success stories of wasteland reclamation, and poplar-based agroforestry show that the technologies are widely adopted when their scientific principles are understood and socioeconomic benefits are convincing. An examination of the impact of agroforestry technology generation and adoption in different parts of the country highlights the major role of smallholders as agroforestry producers of the future. It is crucial that progressive legal and institutional policies are created to eschew the historical dichotomy between agriculture and forestry and encourage integrated land-use systems. Government policies hold the key to agroforestry adoption.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ahuja L.D. 1980. Grass production under Khejri, pp. 28–30. In: Mann H.S. and Saxena S.K. (eds), Khejri (Prosopis cineraria) in Indian Desert-Its Role in Agroforestry. Monograph No. 11.CAZRI, Jodhpur, India.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alavalapati J.R.R., Luckert M.K. and Gill D.S. 1995. Adoption of agroforestry practices: a case study from Andhra Pradesh, India. Agroforest Syst 32: 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arya S., Toky O.P., Bisht R.P., Tomer R. and Harris P.J.C. 1999. Variation in growth and biomass production of one-year seedling of 30 provenances of Prosopis cineraria (L.) Druce in arid India. Indian J Forestry 22: 169–173.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bangarwa K.S. 1996. Sissoo Breeding. Agriculture & Forestry Information Centre, Hisar, India. 156 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bangarwa K.S. 2002 Plus tree selection and progeny testing for establishment of first generation seed orchard in Dalbergia sissoo Roxb. Indian J Agroforest 4: 122–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhatt B.P. and Todaria N.P. 1990. Fuelwood characteristics of some mountain trees and shrubs. Biomass 21: 233–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boffa J.M. 1999. Agroforestry parklands in sub-Saharan Africa. FAO Conservation Guide 34. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burley J., Hughes C.E. and Styles B.T. 1986. Genetic systems of tree species for arid and semiarid lands. Forest Ecol Manag 16: 317–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calder I.R., Rosier P.T.W., Prasanna K.T. and Parameswarappa S. 1997. Eucalyptus water use greater than rainfall input-a possible explanation from southern India. Hydrology and Earth System Science 1: 249–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chandra J.P. 2001. Scope of poplar cultivation. Indian Forester 127: 51–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chaturvedi O.P. and Das D.K. 2002. Studies on rooting patterns of 5–year-old important agroforestry tree species in north Bihar, India. Forests, Trees and Livelihood 12: 329–339.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chaturvedi O.P. and Jha M.K. 1998. Crop production and economics under Litchi chinensis Sonn. Plantation across 1 to 9 year age series in north Bihar, India. Int Tree Crops J 9: 159–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chaturvedi O.P. and Pandey N. 2001. Genetic divergence in Bombax ceiba L. germplasms. Silvae Genetica 50: 99–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dhanda R.S. and Kaur I. 2000. Production of poplar (Populus deltoides Bartr.) in agri-silviculture system in Punjab. Indian J Agroforestry 2: 93–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • FAO 1995 Plantations in tropical and subtropical regions-mixed and pure. FAO of the UN, Rome, Italy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Follis M.B. and Nair P.K.R. 1994 Policy and institutional support for agroforestry: An analysis of two Ecuadorian case studies. Agroforest Syst 27: 223–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garg V.K. 1998. Interaction of tree crops with a sodic soil environment: potential for rehabilitation of degraded environments. Land Degradation and Development 9: 81–93.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Garg V.K. and Jain R.K. 1992. Influence of fuelwood trees on sodic soil. Can J Forestry Res 22: 729–735.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gill H.S. and Abrol I.P. 1991. Salt affected soils, their afforestation and its ameliorating influence. Int Tree Crops J 6: 239–260.

    Google Scholar 

  • Government of India 1992. Indian Agriculture in Brief. Directorate Economic Statistics, Department of Agriculture, Ministry of Agriculture, New Delhi. 460 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gupta V.K., Pathak P. and Solanki K.R. 1996 Genetic improvement of genus Leucaena in India, pp. 455–458. In: Dieters M.J., Matheson A.C., Nikles D.G., Harwood C.E. and Walker S.M. (eds). Tree Improvement of Sustainable Tropical Forestry. Proc. QFRI-IUFRO Conference, Caloundra, Queensland, Australia.

  • Hobley M. 1996. Participatory Forestry: The Process of Change in India and Nepal. Rural Development Forestry Study Guide 3, Rural Development Forestry Network, ODI, London. 337 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • ICAR 1981. Proceedings of the Agroforestry Seminar, Imphal, 1979. Indian Council of Agricultural Research, New Delhi. 268 pp.

  • Jones N. and Lal P. 1991. Commercial poplar planting in India under agro-forestry system. Commonw Forest Rev 68: 19–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joshi B.C. 1996. Poplar cultivation under agroforestry, pp. 409–423. In: Bach I. (ed.). Environmental and Social Issues in Poplar and Willow Cultivation and Utilization. FAO Proceedings 20th Session of the International Poplar Commission. Budapest, Hungary.

  • Kallarackal J. and Somen C.K. 1997 Water use by Eucalyptus tereticornis stands of differing density in southern India. Tree Physiol 17: 195–203.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kareemulla K., Rai P., Rao G.R. and Solanki K.R. 2002. Economic analysis of a silvopastoral system for degraded lands under rainfed condition. Indian Forester 128: 1346–1350.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaur B., Gupta S.R. and Singh G. 2002. Carbon storage and nitrogen cycling in silvipastoral system on a sodic soil northwestern India. Agroforest Syst 54: 21–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaushik W., Kaushik R.A., Saini R.S. and Deswal R.P.S. 2002. Performance of agri-silvi-horticulture systems in arid India. Indian J Agroforest 4: 31–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kedharnath S. 1984. Forest tree improvement in India. Proceedings of Indian Academy of Sciences (Plant Sci.) 93: 401–412.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kedharnath S. 1986. Genetics and improvement of forest trees. Indian J Genetics 46(Suppl.): 172–180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khosla P.K. 1985. Genetic improvement of agroforestry trees. In: Khosla P.K. and Puri S. (eds). Agroforestry Systems-A New Challenge, pp. 151–160. Indian Society of Tree Scientists, Solan (HP), India.

    Google Scholar 

  • King K.F.S. 1987. The history of agroforestry, pp. 1–11. In: Steppler H.A. and Nair P.K.R. (eds) Agroforestry: A Decade of Development. ICRAF, Nairobi, Kenya.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kinhal G.A. 1995. Technical and financial evaluation of green equities. Indian Forester 121: 566–572.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumar B.M. 1999. Agroforestry in the Indian tropics. Indian J Agroforest 1: 47–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumar B.M. and Nair P.K.R. 2004. The enigma of tropical homegardens. (This volume).

  • Kumar B.M., Thomas J. and Fisher R.F. 2001. Ailanthus triphysa at different density and fertiliser levels in Kerala, India: tree growth, light transmittance and understorey ginger yield. Agroforest Syst 52: 133–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kumar S.S., Kumar B.M., Wahid P.A., Kamalam N.V. and Fisher R.F. 1999. Root competition for phosphorus between coconut, multipurpose trees and kacholam (Kaempferia galanga L) in Kerala, India. Agroforest Syst 46: 131–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lakhmipathy C.H. 1992. Tree Farming, pp. 159–168. In: Khosla P.K. (ed.) Status of Indian Forestry Problems and Perspectives. ISTS, Solan, India.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lal P., Kulkarni H.D., Srinivas K., Venkatesh K.R. and Santakumar P. 1997. Genetically improved clonal planting stock of Eucalyptus-a success story from India. Indian Forester 123: 1117–1138.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maikhuri R.K., Semwal R.L., Rao K.S. and Saxena K.G. 1997. Rehabilitation of degraded community lands for sustainable development in Himalaya: a case study in Garhwal Himalaya, India. Int J Sust Dev World 4: 192–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malik R.S. and Sharma S.K. 1990. Moisture extraction and crop yield as a function of distance from a row of Eucalyptus tereticornis. Agroforest Syst 12: 187–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mandal A.K., Ennos R.A. and Fagg C.W. 1994. Mating system analysis in a natural population of Acacia nilotica subspecies leiocarpa. Theoretical Applied Genetics 89: 931–935.

    Google Scholar 

  • McIntyre B.D., Riha S.J. and Ong C.K. 1996. Light interception and evapotranspiration in hedgerow agroforestry systems. Agr Forest Meteorol 81: 31–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mishra R.N. 1995. Neem improvement research at Arid Forest Research Institute, Jodhpur. Indian Forester 121: 997–1002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Misra V.K. 2002 Greening the wastelands: experiences from the Tree Grower's Cooperatives Project, pp. 334–354. In: Marothia D.K. (ed.) Institutionalizing Common Pool Resources. Concept Publishing Company, New Delhi, India.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohanan C., Mathew G., Krishnankutty C.N., Seethalakshmi K.K. and Renuka C. 2001. Policy and Legal Issues in Cultivation & Utilization of Bamboo, Rattan and Forest Trees in Private & Community Lands. KFRI, Peechi, India. 175 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montagnini F. and Nair P.K.R. 2004. Carbon sequestration: An underexploited environmental benefit of agroforestry systems. (This volume).

  • Naina N.S., Gupta P.K. and Mascarenhas A.F. 1989. Genetic transformation and regeneration of transgenic neem (Azadirachta indica) plants using Agrobacterium tumefaciens. Current Science 58: 164–187.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nair K.S.S., Chundamannil M., Chacko K.C., Ganapathy P.M. and Iyer C.S. 1996. Characteristics of private sector forestry research in India, pp. 65–80 In: Enters T., Nair C.T.S. and Apichart K. (eds) Emerging Institutional Arrangements for Forestry Research. FORSPA Publication No. 20/11998. Bangkok, Thailand.

  • Nair P.K.R. 1979. Intensive multiple cropping with coconuts in India. Advances Agro Crop Sci 6: 1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nair P.K.R. 1984. Soil Productivity Aspects of Agroforestry. Science and Practice of Agroforestry 1. ICRAF, Nairobi, Kenya. 85 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nair P.K.R. 1985. Classification of agroforestry systems. Agroforest Syst 3: 97–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nair P.K.R. (ed) 1989. Agroforestry Systems in the Tropics. Kluwer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands. 664 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nair P.K.R. 1993. An Introduction to Agroforestry. Kluwer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands. 499 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nair P.K.R 1999. Agroforestry research at a crossroads. Ann Arid Zone 38: 415–430.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nair P.K.R. 2001. Agroforestry. In Our Fragile World: Challenges and Opportunities for Sustainable Development, Forerunner to The Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems, Chapter 1.25, pp. 375–393, vol. I. UNESCO, Paris, France, & EOLSS, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nair P.K.R., Buresh R.J., Mugendi D.N. and Latt C.R. 1999. Nutrient cycling in tropical agroforestry systems: myths and science, pp. 1–31. In: Buck L.E., Lassoie J.P. and Fernandes E.C.M. (eds). Agroforestry in Sustainable Agricultural Systems. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nambiar E.K.S., Cossalter C. and Tiarks A. (eds) 1998. Site management and productivity in tropical plantation forests. CIFOR, Indonesia. 76 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Naugraiya M.N. and Puri S. 2001. Performance of multipurpose tree species under agroforestry systems on entisols of Chhattisgarh plains. Range Manag Agroforest 22: 164–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Negi Y.S., Tewari S.C. and Kumar J. 1996. Eucalyptus marketing in Punjab-a comparative inter-market analysis. Indian Forester 122: 1127–1135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ong C.K. and Huxley P. 1996. Tree-Crop Interactions: A Physiological Approach. CAB International UK. 386 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ong C.K. and Leakey R.R.B. 1999. Why tree crop interactions in agroforestry appear at odds with tree-grass interactions in tropical savannahs. Agroforest Syst 45: 109–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ong C.K., Odongo J.C.W., Marshall F. and Black C.R. 1992. Water use of agroforestry systems in semiarid India, pp. 347–358. In: Calder I.R., Hall L.R. and Adlard P.G. (eds) Growth and Water Use of Plantations. Proceedings of the International Symposium on the Growth and Water Use of Forest Plantations, Bangalore. Wiley, Chichester, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palanisamy K., Anasari S.A., Kumar P. and Gupta B.N. 1998. Adventitious rooting in shoot cuttings of Azadirachta indica and Pongamia pinnata. New Forests 16: 81–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pathak P.S. 2002. Common pool degraded lands: technological and institutional options, pp. 402–433. In: Marothia D.K. (ed.) Institutionalizing Common Pool Resources. Concept Publishing Co., New Delhi, India.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pathak P.S. and Pateria H.M. 1999. Agroforestry in the Indo-Gangetic Plains: an analysis. Indian J Agroforestry 1: 15–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pathak P.S. and Solanki K.S. 2002. Agroforestry Technologies for Different Agroclimatic Regions of India. National Research Centre for Agroforestry, ICAR, New Delhi. 42 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Puri S. 1998. Tree Improvement: Applied Research and Technology Transfer. Science Publishers, New Hampshire, USA. 390 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Puri S. and Bangarwa K.S. 1992 Effects of trees on the yield of irrigated wheat crop in semiarid regions. Agroforest Syst 20: 229–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Puri S. and Kumar K. 1995. Establishment of Prosopis cineraria (L.) Druce in the hot desert of India. New Forests 9: 21–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Puri S. and Swamy S.L. 1999. Geographical variation in rooting ability of stem cuttings of Azadirachta indica and Dalbergia sissoo. Genetic Resource and Crop Evolution 46: 29–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Puri S., Kumar A. and Singh S. 1994a. Productivity of Cicer arietinum (chickpea) under Prosopis cineraria based agroforestry system in arid regions of India. J Arid Environ 27: 85–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Puri S., Singh S. and Bhushan B. 1994b. Evaluation of fuelwood quality of indigenous and exotic tree species of India's semiarid region. Agroforest Syst 26: 123–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Puri S., Singh S. and Kumar A. 1994c. Growth and productivity of crops in association with an Acacia nilotica tree belt. J Arid Environ 27: 37–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Puri S., Singh V., Bhusan B. and Singh S. 1994d. Biomass production and distribution of roots in three stands of Populus deltoides. Forest Ecol Manag 65: 135–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Puri S., Swamy S.L. and Jaiswal A.K. 2002. Evaluation of Populus deltoides clones under nursery, field and agrisilviculture system in subhumid tropics of Central India. New Forests 23: 45–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rai P., Solanki K.R. and Rao G.R. 1999. Silvipasture research in India-a review. Indian J Agroforest 1: 107–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rai P., Yadav R.S., Solanki K.R., Rao G.R. and Singh R. 2001 Growth and pruned production of multipurpose tree species in silvo-pastoral systems on degraded lands in semi-arid region of Uttar Pradesh, India. Forests, Trees and Livelihoods 11: 347–364.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rao M.R., Palada M.C. and Becker B.N. 2004. Medicinal and aromatic plants in agroforestry systems (This volume).

  • Rao J.P. and Osman M. 1994. Studies on silvipastoral systems in non-arable drylands, pp. 755–760. In: Singh P., Pathak P.S. and Roy M. (eds). Agroforestry Systems for Degraded Lands. Oxford & IBH, New Delhi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rao M.R., Nair P.K.R. and Ong C.K. 1998. Biophysical interactions in tropical agroforestry systems. Agroforest Syst 38: 3–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ravindranath N.H., Chanakya H.N. and Kerr J.M. 1997. An ecosystem approach for analysis of biomass energy, pp. 561–587. In: Ker J.M., Marothia D.K., Singh K., Ramaswamy C. and Bentley W.R. (eds) Natural Resource Economics Theory and Application in India. Oxford & IBH, New Delhi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reddy P.R. and Reddy P.S. 1995. Commentaries on Land Reforms Laws in Andhra Pradesh. 3rd edition, Asia Law House, Hyderabad, India. 100 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanchez P.A. 1995. Science in agroforestry. Agroforest Syst 30: 5–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saxena N.C. 1995. Wood markets for farm eucalyptus in north-west India, pp. 351–378. In: Saxena N.C. and Ballabh V. (eds) Farm Forestry in South Asia. Sage Publications India, New Delhi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schroth G. 1999. A review of belowground interaction in agroforestry focusing on mechanisms and management options. Agroforest Syst 43: 5–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sen D. 1995. The management of transfer of farm forestry technologies-emerging trends, pp. 197–218. In: Saxena N.C. and Ballabh V. (eds). Farm Forestry in South Asia. Sage Publications India, New Delhi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shankaranarayan K.A., Harsh L.N. and Kathju S. 1987. Agroforestry in the arid zones of India. Agroforest Syst 9: 259–274.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharma K. and Ogra J.L. 1990. Influence of continuous grazing by goats and sheep under three tier pasture on their performance and constituent vegetation. Range Manag & Agroforest 11: 99–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharma S.K., Datta B.K. and Tiwari J.C. 1996. Prosopis cineraia (L) Druce in silvipastoral system in arid regions of Western Rajasthan. Range Manag & Agroforest 17: 81–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharma S.K., Singh R.S., Tiwari J.C. and Burman U. 1994. Silvopastoral studies in arid and semiarid degraded lands of western Rajasthan, pp. 749–754. In: Singh P., Pathak P.S. and Roy M. (eds). Agroforestry Systems for Degraded Lands. Oxford & IBH, New Delhi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shujauddin N. and Kumar B.M. 2003. Ailanthus triphysa at different densities and fertiliser regimes in Kerala, India: Biomass productivity, nutrient export and nutrient use efficiency. For Ecol Manag 180: 135–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singh B. 1988. Biomass potentials of some firewood shrubs of North India. Biomass 4: 235–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singh G., Abrol I.P. and Cheema S.S. 1988. Agroforestry in alkali soils-effect of planting methods and amendments in initial growth, biomass accumulation and chemical composition of mesquite grown with and without Karnal grass (Leotochloa fusca) in inter-space. Agroforest Syst 7: 135–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singh G.B. 1999. Agroforestry research in India-issues and strategies. Indian J Agroforest 1: 1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh K., Yadav J.S.P. and Singh B. 1992. Tolerance of trees to soil sodicity. J Indian Soc Soil Sci 40: 173–179.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh P. and Roy M.M. 1993. Silvopastoral systems for ameliorating productivity of degraded lands in India. Annals Forestry 1: 61–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh P. and Upadhyaya S.D. 2001 Biological interaction in tropical grassland ecosystem, pp. 113–143. In: Shiyomi M. and Koizumi H. (eds) Structure and Function in Agroecosystem Design and Management. CRC Press, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh R.V. 1982. Fodder Trees of India. Oxford & IBH, New Delhi. 285 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swamy S.L., Mishra A. and Puri S. 2003a. Biomass production and root distribution of Gmelina arborea under an agrisilviculture system in subhumid tropics of central India. New Forests 26: 167–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swamy S.L., Puri S. and Singh A.K. 2003b. Growth, biomass, carbon storage and nutrient distribution in Gmelina arborea Roxb. stands on red lateritic soils in Central India. Bioresource Technol 90: 109–126.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tejwani K.G. 1994. Agroforestry in India. Oxford & IBH, New Delhi. 233 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tewari D.D. 2001. Domestication of non-timber forest products (NTFP)-a case of bamboo farming in Kheda district, Gujarat, India. Indian Forester 127: 788–798.

    Google Scholar 

  • Toky O.P., Bisht R.P. and Singh R.R. 1992. Potential multipurpose trees of Indian forests vegetation, pp. 359–378. In: Khosla P.K. (ed.) Status of Indian Forestry Problems and Perspectives. ISTS, Solan, India.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomar O.S. 1997. Technologies of afforestation of salt-affected soils. Int Tree Crops J 9: 131–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Viswanath S., Nair P.K.R., Kaushik P.K. and Praksasam U. 2000. Acacia nilotica trees in rice fields: a traditional agroforestry system in central India. Agroforest Syst 50: 157–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yadav J.P. and Blyth J.B. 1996. Combined productivity of Prosopis cineraria-mustard agrosilviculture practice. Int Tree Crops J 9: 47–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yadav J.P., Sharma K.K. and Khanna P. 1993. Effect of Acacia nilotica on mustard crop. Agroforest Syst 21: 91–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Forestry, Indira Gandhi Agricultural University, Raipur, 492 006, India

    S. Puri

  2. School of Forest Resources and Conservation, University of Florida, 118 Newins-Ziegler Hall, P.O. Box 110410, Gainesville, FL, 32611-0410, USA

    P.K.R. Nair

Authors
  1. S. Puri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. P.K.R. Nair
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Puri, S., Nair, P. Agroforestry research for development in India: 25 years of experiences of a national program. Agroforestry Systems 61, 437–452 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1023/B:AGFO.0000029014.66729.e0

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:AGFO.0000029014.66729.e0

Search

Navigation