Skip to main content

Part of the book series: Forestry Sciences ((FOSC,volume 56))

Abstract

Planted forests are often considered to consist of tree plantings at a scale large enough to satisfy such objectives as commercial production of timber and fiber, protection of watersheds, and preservation of natural habitats. However, trees are planted also at greatly reduced scales in agroforestry systems or as community woodlots to provide a mixture of products and services to resident households, local communities, and regional cultures.

Agroforestry systems represent a major form of small-scale tree planting, where trees are grown in purposeful combinations with agricultural crops and/or livestock in order to take advantage of tree-crop interactions, and thereby enhance crop production, diversify farm output, stabilize or improve soils, or ameliorate harsh environmental conditions. Some important examples of these systems in tropical countries include homegardens, alley cropping, improved fallows, intercropped trees for shade and fodder production, and trees planted in hedgerows and along fence lines. Throughout the tropics, there is a large variety of indigenous practices and species mixtures that represent adaptations of these systems to meet localized needs and opportunities. Research and development programs have supported the expansion and refinement of many of these systems during the last 20 years, but substantial constraints on tree planting still exist in the form of land-tenure practices, population pressures that relegate agroforestry practices to degraded lands, subsistence needs that prevent extended periods of tree growth, and insufficient technical information or technology dissemination.

Agroforestry systems in temperate, industrialized countries include combinations of trees, pasture, and livestock; fruit or nut trees interplanted with vegetable or grain crops; windbreaks and shelterbelts; multispecies riparian buffer strips; and forest farming systems for specialty crops. Compared to the tropics, however, temperate-zone systems tend to focus on one or two high-value crops, often involve some level of mechanization, and frequently represent an opportunistic approach to improving the economic profitability of farms rather than meeting subsistence needs. In both tropical and temperate regions, agroforestry systems and community woodlots will be an important component of new sustainable agriculture and environmental protection programs.

Although species diversity is an essential feature of all agroforestry systems, community forests generally involve planting only a few species in small woodlots near farms, around villages, along roads, and as riparian buffers. Provincial or state governments and the local populace are often involved in landownership and plantation establishment. Major objectives of these forests are production of fuelwood for local consumption and of other tree products for market; soil stabilization, reclamation, or improvement; and protection of water quality. As with many other planted forests, the number of species widely used in community forests has been relatively small, with the genera Eucalyptus,Pinus, and Acacia providing the bulk of the species. Major issues with these “planted forests” focus on rights for use of the products, tending responsibilities once trees are established, protection until trees are large enough for their designated use, increasing interest in using “native” species, and greater community involvement in planning and management.

Trees planted along streets and waterways, or as woodlots in parks and other public places, represent a major group of planted forests in many urban and periurban landscapes. In addition to providing many of the same environmental services that agroforests and community forests do, these urban plantings have unique aesthetic and recreational value. For much of the world’s ever-increasing urban population, these may be the only tangible reference points for understanding planted forests.

These relatively little-recognized forms of planted forests — planted trees, to be more appropriate — are now receiving much greater attention. There are, however, some serious technical and sociopolitico-institutional constraints to their development as more widely adopted systems in both tropical and temperate regions.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Agboola, A.A., Wilson, G.F. and Yamoah Getahun, A. 1982. Gliricidia sepium: A possible means to sustained cropping, pp. 141–143. In: MacDonald, L.H. (Ed) Agroforestry in the African Humid Tropics. United Nations University, Tokyo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alvim, R. and Nair, P.K.R. 1986. Combination of cacao with other plantation crops: An agroforestry system in southeastern Bahia, Brazil. Agrofor. Syst. 4: 3–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnold, J.E.M. 1992. Policy issues related to the role of trees in rural income and welfare security, pp. 15–32. In: Gregersen, H., Oram, P. and Spears, J. (Eds) Priorities for Forestry and Agroforestry Policy Research: Report of an International Workshop. International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Balmer, M. 1987. Agroforesterie et désertification. Centre Technique de Coopération Agricole et Rurale, Wageningen, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bavappa, K.V.A., Nair, M.K. and Kumar, R.P. 1982. The Arecanut Palm (Areca catechu Linn). Central Plantation Crops Research Institute, Kasaragod, India.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benneh, G. 1972. Systems of agriculture in tropical Africa. Econ. Geogr. 48 (3): 244–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boonkird, S.A., Fernandez, E.C.M. and Nair, P.K.R. 1984. Forest villages: An agroforestry approach to rehabilitating forest land degraded by shifting cultivation in Thailand.Agrofor. Syst. 2: 87–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruce, J.W., Rudrappa, S. and Zongmin, L. 1995. Experimenting with approaches to common property forestry in China. Unasylva 180 46: 44–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Budowski, G. 1987. The development of agroforestry in Central America, pp. 69–88. In: Steppler, H.A. and Nair, P.K.R. (Eds) Agroforestry: A Decade of Development. International Centre for Research in Agroforestry, Nairobi, Kenya.

    Google Scholar 

  • Byington, E.K. 1990. Agroforestry in the temperate zone, pp. 228–289. In: MacDicken, K.G. and Vergara, N.T. (Eds) Agroforestry Classification and Management. John Wiley and Sons, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, G.W., Lottes, G.J. and Dawson, J.0. 1991. Design and development of agroforestry systems for Illinois, USA: Silvicultural and economic considerations. Agrofor. Syst. 13: 203–224.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chew, S. 1989. Agroforestry Projects for Small Farmers: A Project Manager’s Reference. Special Study No. 59. United States Agency for International Development, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conklin, H.C. 1980. Ethnographic Atlas of Ifuagao: A Study of Environment, Culture and Society in Northern Luzon. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dangerfield, C.W., Jr. and Harwell, R.L. 1990. An analysis of a silvopastoral system for marginal land in the southeast United States. Agrofor. Syst. 10: 187–197.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dijkman, M.J. 1950. Leucaena - a promising soil erosion control plant. Econ. Bot. 4: 337–347.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dwyer, J.F. and Schroeder, H.W. 1994. The human dimensions of urban forestry. J. For. 92 (10): 12–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehrlich, M., Conway, F., Adrien, N., LeBeau, F., Lewis, L., Lauwerysen, H., Lowenthal, I., Mayda, Y., Paryski, P., Smucker, G., Talbot, J. and Wilcox, E. 1987. Haiti: Country Environmental Profile. United States Agency for International Development, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations). 1984. Changes in Shifting Cultivation in Africa. FAO Forestry Paper No. 50. FAO, Rome.

    Google Scholar 

  • FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations). 1992. Mixed and Pure Forest Plantations in the Tropics and Subtropics. FAO Forestry Paper No. 103. FAO, Rome.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fassbender, H.W., Beer, J., Heuveldop, J., Imbach, A., Enrique, G. and Bonnemann, A. 1991. Ten-year balances of organic matter and nutrients in agroforestry systems of CATIE, Costa Rica, pp. 173–183. In: Jarvis, P.G. (Ed) Agroforestry: Principles and Practice. Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fernandes, E.C.M. and Nair, P.K.R. 1986. An evaluation of the structure and function of tropical homegardens. Agri. Syst. 21: 279–310.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrett, H.E., Jones, J.E. and Slusher, J.P. 1989. Integrated forestry-farming (agroforestry) with eastern black walnut–a case study, pp. 248–259. In: Proceedings of the Fourth Black Walnut Symposium. Walnut Council, Indianapolis, IN.

    Google Scholar 

  • Getahun, A., Wilson, G.F. and Kang, B.T. 1982. The role of trees in farming systems in the humid tropics, pp. 28–35. In: McDonald, L.H. (Ed) Agroforestry in the African Humid Tropics. United Nations University, Tokyo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gittinger, J. 1982. Economic Analysis of Agricultural Projects. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gold, M.A. and Hanover, J.W. 1987. Agroforestry systems for the temperate zone. Agrofor. Syst. 5: 109–121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gregersen, H.M. and McGaughey, S.E. 1985. Improving Policies and Financing Mechanisms for Forestry Development. Economic and Social Development Department, Inter-American Development Bank, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gregersen, H., Draper, S. and Elz, D. 1989. People and Trees: The Role of Social Forestry in Sustainable Development. The World Bank, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gregersen, H.M., Oram, P. and Spears, J. 1992. Priorities for Forestry and Agroforestry Policy Research. International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gregersen, H., Arnold, J.E.M., Lundgren, A., Contreras, A., de Montalembert, M.R. and Gow, D. 1993. Assessing Forestry Project Impacts: Issues and Strategies. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) Forestry Paper No. 114. FAO, Rome.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, J.W. 1977. Publius Vergilius Maro on trees plus crops plus cattle. Farm For. 19 (3): 83–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hegde, N.G. 1987. Scope for increasing the profitability of social forestry programme, pp. 6885. In: Khosla, P.K. and Kohli, R.K. (Eds) Social Forestry for Rural Development. Indian Society of Tree Scientists, Solan, H. P., India.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoskins, M.W. 1987. Agroforestry and the social milieu, pp. 191–203. In: Steppler, H.A. (Eds) Agroforestry: A Decade of Development. International Centre for Research in Agroforestry, Nairobi, Kenya.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jama, B.A., Nair, P.K.R. and Rao, M.R. 1995. Productivity of hedgerow shrubs and maize under alley cropping systems in semiarid Kenya. Agrofor. Syst. 31: 257–274.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jodha, N.S. 1995. Common property resources and the dynamics of rural poverty in India’s dry regions. Unasylva 180 46: 23–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, D.V. and Nair, P.K.R. 1984. Perennial-crop based agroforestry systems in northeast Brazil. Agrofor. Syst. 2: 281–292.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jordan, C.F., Gajaseni, J. and Watanabe, H. 1993. Taungya: Forest Plantations with Agriculture in Southeast Asia. CAB International, Wallingford, United Kingdom.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kang, B.T., Wilson, G.F. and Sipkens, L. 1981. Alley cropping maize (Zea mays) and Leucaena leucocephala ( Lam.) in southern Nigeria. Plant Soil 63: 165–179.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kang, B.T., Wilson, G.F. and Lawson, T.L. 1984. Alley Cropping: A Stable Alternative to Shifting Cultivation. International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, Ibadan, Nigeria.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kang, B.T., Reynolds, L. and Atta-Krah, A.N. 1990. Alley farming. Adv. Agron. 43: 315–359.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kedharnath, S. 1987. Social forestry in India–some research issues, pp. 1–6. In: Khosla, P.K. and Kohli, R. K. (Eds) Social Forestry for Rural Development. Indian Society of Tree Scientists, Solan, H. P., India.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khosla, P.K. and Kohli, R.K. 1987. Social forestry for Rural Development. Indian Society of Tree Scientists, Solan, H. P., India.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knowles, R.L. 1991. New Zealand experience with silvopastoral systems: A review, pp. 251267. In: Jarvis, P.G. (Ed) Agroforestry: Principles and Practice. Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, R. and Kohli, R.K. 1987. Social forestry–a hope for rural uplift, pp. 7–13. In: Khosla, P. K. and Kohli, R.K. (Eds) Social Forestry for Rural Development. Indian Society of Tree Scientists, Solan, H. P., India.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kurtz, W.B., Garrett, H.E. and Kincaid, W.H., Jr. 1984. Investment alternatives for black walnut plantation management. J. For. 82: 604–608.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laarman, J. and Sedjo, R. 1992. Global Forests: Issues for Six Billion People. McGraw-Hill, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamprecht, H. 1989. Silviculture in the Tropics: Tropical Forest Ecosystems and Their Tree Species: Possibilities and Methods for Their Long-Term Utilization. Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit, Eschborn, Germany.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landauer K. and Brazil, M. (Eds) 1990. Tropical Homegardens. United Nations University Press, Tokyo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lassoie, J.P. and Buck, L.E. 1991. Agroforestry in North America: New challenges and opportunities for integrated resource management, pp. 1–19. In: Garrett, H. (Ed) Proceedings of the Second Conference on Agroforestry in North America. University of Missouri, Columbia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Le Houérou, H.N. 1987. Indigenous shrubs and trees in the silvopastoral systems of Africa, pp. 139–151. In: Steppler, H.A. and Nair, P.K.R. (Eds) Agroforestry: A Decade of Development. International Centre for Research in Agroforestry, Nairobi, Kenya.

    Google Scholar 

  • Long, A.J. and Nair, P.K. 1991. Agroforestry system design for the temperate zones: Lessons from the tropics, pp. 133–139. In: Garrett, H. (Ed) Proceedings of the Second Conference on Agroforestry in North America. University of Missouri, Columbia.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacDicken, K.G. 1990. Agroforestry management in the humid tropics, pp. 98–149. In: MacDicken, K.G. and Vergara, N.T. (Eds) Agroforestry: Classification and Management. John Wiley and Sons, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • May, P.H., Anderson, A.B., Frazao, J.M.F. and Balik, J.M. 1985. Babassu palm in the agroforestry systems in Brazil’s mid-north region. Agrofor. Syst. 3: 275–295.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKean, M. and Ostrom, E. 1995. Common property regimes in the forest: Just a relic from the past? Unasylva 180 46: 3–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mead, D.J. 1995. The role of agroforestry in industrialized nations: The southern hemisphere perspective with special emphasis on Australia and New Zealand. Agrofor. Syst. 31: 143156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mercer, D. E. 1992. The economics of agroforestry, pp. 111–143. In: Burch, W.R. and Parker, J.K. (Eds) Social Science Applications in Asian Agroforestry. Winrock International, USA and South Asia Books, Arlington, VA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merlo, M. 1995. Common property forest management in northern Italy: A historical and socio-economic profile. Unasylva 180 46: 58–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moll, G. 1989. The state of our urban forest. Am. For. 95 (11/12): 61–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montagnini, F. and 18 collaborators 1992. Sistemas Agroforestales: Principios y Applicaciones en los tropicos ( second edition ). Organization for Tropical Studies, Inc., San José, Costa Rica.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nair, P.K.R. 1983. Agroforestry with coconuts and other tropical plantation crops, pp. 79–102. In: Huxley, P.A. (Ed) Plant Research and Agroforestry. International Centre for Research in Agroforestry, Nairobi, Kenya.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nair, P.K.R. 1984. Soil Productivity Aspects of Agroforestry. International Centre for Research in Agroforestry, Nairobi, Kenya.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nair, P.K.R. 1990. The Prospects for Agroforestry in the Tropics. Technical Paper No. 131. The World Bank, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nair, P.K.R. 1993. Agroforestry, pp. 9–11. In: McGraw-Hill Yearbook of Science and Technology. McGraw-Hill, New York.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Nair, P.K.R (Ed). 1989. Agroforestry Systems in the Tropics. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nair, P.K.R., Kang, B.T. and Kass, D.C.L. 1995. Nutrient cycling and soil-erosion control in agroforestry systems, pp. 117–138. In: Juo, A.S.R. and Freed, J.D. (Eds) Agriculture and the Environment: Bridging Food Production and the Environmental Protection in Developing Countries. American Society of Agronomy, Madison, WI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nowak, D.J. 1994. Understanding the structure of urban forests. J. For. 92(10): 42–46. Noweg, T.A. and Kurtz, W.B. 1987. Eastern black walnut plantations: An economically viable

    Google Scholar 

  • option for conservation reserve lands within the corn belt. North. J. Appl. For. 4(3): 158–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nye, P.H. and Stephens, D. 1962. Soil fertility, pp. 127–143. In: Wills, J.B. (Ed) Agriculture and Land Use in Ghana. Oxford University Press, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Okigbo, B.N. and Lal, R. 1979. Soil fertility maintenance and conservation for improved agroforestry systems in the lowland humid tropics, pp. 41–77. In: Mongi, H.O. and Huxley, P.A. (Eds) Soils Research in Agroforestry. International Centre for Research in Agroforestry, Nairobi, Kenya.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olofson, H. 1983. Indigenous agroforestry systems. Philipp. Q. Cult. Soc. 2: 149–174. Ong, C.K. 1994. Alley cropping - ecological pie in the sky? Agrofor. Today 6(3): 8–10. Ong, C.K., Corlett, J.E., Singh, R.P. and Black, C.R. 1991. Above-and below-ground interactions in agroforestry systems. For. Ecol. Manage. 45: 45–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Padoch, C. and deJong, W. 1987. Traditional agroforestry practices of native and Ribereno farmers in the lowland Peruvian Amazon, pp. 179–194. In: Gholz, H.L. (Ed) Agroforestry: Realities, Possibilities and Potentials. Martinus Nijhoff, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poffenberger, M. 1990. Joint Management for Forest Lands: Experiences from South Asia. Ford Foundation, New Delhi, India.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prinsley, R. 1990. Agroforestry for Sustainable Production: Economic Implications. Commonwealth Science Council, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raintree, J.B. and Warner, K. 1986. Agroforestry pathways for the intensification of shifting cultivation. Agrofor. Syst. 4: 39–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramirez, A., Sere, C. and Uquillas, J. 1992. An economic analysis of improved agroforestry practices in the Amazonian lowlands of Ecuador. Agrofor. Syst. 17: 65–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Randall, A. 1987. Resource Economics. John Wiley and Sons, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rao, M.R., Sharma, M.M., and Ong, C.K. 1990. A study of the potential of hedgerow intercropping in semiarid India using a two-way systematic design. Agrofor. Syst. 11: 243–258.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rocheleau, D., Weber, F. and Field-Juma, A. 1988. Agroforestry in Dryland Africa. International Centre for Research in Agroforestry, Nairobi, Kenya.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruthenberg, H. 1980. Farming Systems in the Tropics ( third edition ). Oxford University Press, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salisbury, R.F. 1962. From Stone to Steel. Cambridge University Press London. Schoeneman, R.S. and Ries, P.D. 1994. Urban forestry: Managing the forests where we live. J. For. 92 (10): 6–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schultz, R.C., Colletti, J.P. and Faltonson, R.R. (Eds) 1995. Agroforestry opportunities for the United States of America. Agrofor. Syst. 29 (3): 181–331.

    Google Scholar 

  • Southgate, D. 1988. The Economics of Land Degradation in the Third World. Environmental Department Working Paper No. 2. The World Bank, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stayer, C. 1989. Shortened bush fallow rotations with relay-cropped Inga edulis and Desmodium ovalifolium in wet central Amazonian Peru. Agrofor. Syst. 8: 173–196.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, G.M., Huke, S.M. and Fox, J.M. (Eds) 1992. Financial and Economic Analyses of Agroforestry Systems: Proceedings of a Workshop. Nitrogen-Fixing Tree Association, Paia, Hawaii.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sumberg, J.E., Maclntire, J., Okali, C. and Atta-Krah, A.N. 1987. Economic analysis of alley farming with small ruminants. Int. Livest. Cent. Afr. Bull. 28: 2–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Szott, L.T. and Kass, D.C.L. 1993. Fertilizers in agroforestry systems. Agrofor. Syst. 23: 177194.

    Google Scholar 

  • Szott L.T., Fernandes, E.C.M. and Sanchez, P.A. 1991. Soil-plant interactions in agroforestry systems. For. Ecol. Manage. 45: 127–152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tejwani, K.G. 1987. Agroforestry practices and research in India, pp. 109–136. In: Gholz, H.L. (Ed) Agroforestry: Realities, Possibilities and Potentials. Dordrecht, Martinus Nijhoff, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tejwani, K.G. 1994. Agroforestry in India. Oxford and IBH Publishing, New Delhi. Thomson, J.T. and Coulibaly, C. 1995. Common property forest management systems in Mali: Resistance and vitality under pressure. Unasylva 180 46: 16–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tones, F. 1983. Potential contribution of leucaena hedgerows intercropped with maize to the production of organic nitrogen and fuelwood in the lowland tropics. Agrofor. Syst. 1: 323–345.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tschinkel, H. 1987. Tree planting by small farmers in upland watersheds: Experience in Central America. Int. Tree Crops J. 4 (4): 249–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Unruh, J.D. 1990. Iterative increase of economic tree species in managed swidden-fallows of the Amazon. Agrofor. Syst. 11: 175–197.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vergara, N.T. and MacDicken, K.G. 1990. Extension and agroforestry technology delivery to farmers, pp. 354–373. In: MacDicken, K.G. and Vergara, N.T. (Eds) Agroforestry: Classification and Management. John Wiley and Sons, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Maydell, H.J. 1986. Trees and Shrubs of the Sahel: Their Characteristics and Uses. Gesellschaft fur Technische Zusammenarbeit, Eschborn, Germany.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Maydell, H.J. 1987. Agroforestry in the dry zones of Africa: Past, present and future, pp. 89–116. In: Steppler, H.A. and Nair, P.K.R. (Eds) Agroforestry: A Decade of Development. International Centre for Research in Agroforestry, Nairobi, Kenya.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warui, C.M. 1980. Research on agroforestry at the coast, Kenya, pp. 361–366. In: Buck, L. (Ed) Proceedings of the Kenya National Seminar on Agroforestry. International Centre for Research in Agroforestry, Nairobi, Kenya.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson, G.A. 1983. Development of mixed tree and food crop systems in the humid tropics:A response to population pressure and deforestation. Exp. Agri. 19: 311–332.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weinstock, J.A. 1983. Rattan: A complement to swidden agriculture. Econ. Bot. 37(1): 58–68. Wijewardene, R. and Waidyanatha, P. 1984. Conservation Farming. Department of Agricul-ture, Peredeniya, Sri Lanka; Commonwealth Secretariat, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, P.A. and Gordon, A.M. 1991. The potential of intercropping as an alternative land use system, pp. 166–175. In: Garrett, H.E. (Ed) Proceedings of the Second Conference on Agroforestry in North America. University of Missouri, Columbia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, A. 1989. Agroforestry for Soil Conservation. CAB International, Wallingford, United Kingdom.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhaohua, Z., Mantang, C., Shiji, W. and Youxu, J (Eds) 1991. Agroforestry Systems in China. Chinese Academy of Forestry, Beijing, China; International Development Research Centre, Ottawa, Canada.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1999 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Long, A.J., Nair, P.K.R. (1999). Trees outside forests: agro-, community, and urban forestry. In: Boyle, J.R., Winjum, J.K., Kavanagh, K., Jensen, E.C. (eds) Planted Forests: Contributions to the Quest for Sustainable Societies. Forestry Sciences, vol 56. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-2689-4_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-2689-4_12

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-90-481-5135-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-017-2689-4

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics