Shifting cultivation is often associated with forest clearing, leading to a decline of forest area or deforestation. Negative consequences of deforestation are widely known. Deforestation is one of the major factors of land degradation, loss of biological diversity and endangered species, thereby contributing to global warming. In the literature, shifting cultivation has played a central role in the debate of deforestation. Most studies blame shifting cultivation practices as the main cause of deforestation, but overlook policy-induced incentives that might drive that behavior (Gillis, 1988, Dick, 1991). Even the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED, 1987) suggests that deforestation and other environmental destruction especially in developing countries is positively correlated with poverty and the presence of shifting cultivators. According to the report, those who are poor and hungry will often destroy their immediate environment in order to survive, they will cut down forests, they overuse marginal land, etc. This is clearly a case of “blaming the victim” since the smallholder seems to be the only immediate responsible party for environmental degradation. This argument is trapped in a simple-deterministic paradigm such as Neo-Malthusian or Neo-Marxian paradigm. The Neo-Malthusian paradigm suggests that population growth causes poverty inducing environmental degradation, while Neo-Marxian paradigm postulates that poverty causes population growth resulting in environmental destruction. If blame must be appointed, it is equally, if not more, appropriate to charge the rural land tenure system that allows rich landlords to monopolize the best resources in the region and often to use them wastefully (Arifin, 1993).
Tag: Lowland
Prioritization of tree species for agroforestry systems in the lowland Amazon forests of Peru
An analysis was made of information provided by farmers about products and services of tree species, and the preferred tree species for agroforestry systems in the Yurimaguas, Pucallpa and Iquitos areas of Peru. The methodology of the study was based on a process developed by the International Centre for Research in Agroforestry (ICRAF) and the International Service for National Agricultural Research (ISNAR), with modifications to adapt it to the study area. Farmers selected 58 species in Yurimaguas, 62 in Pucallpa and 100 in Iquitos; the selections included 41 plant families. Considering the number of species preferred by farmers and the number of people surveyed, farmers in the Yurimaguas area appeared to have greater knowledge about trees than farmers in the other 2 areas. Some 23 priory species in 17 families were selected for the development of agroforestry systems for this tropical humid lowland zone. The priority products of these 23 species are wood, energy and food. The highest-priority species for genetic improvement research for agroforestry systems are Bactris gasipaes, Cedrelinga catenaeformis, Inga edulis, Calycophyllum spruceanum and Guazuma crinita.
Sustainable land preparation for farmer-managed lowland agriculture in Indonesia
In almost all forms of agriculture and farming practice, land clearing is the initial step. In Indonesia, in general, the most cost effective means of clearing land is through the use of fire. However, this use of fire often results in uncontrolled outbreaks, particularly in lowland areas especially and during prolonged dry seasons. In recent years, these uncontrolled fire outbreaks have had a catastrophic environmental, social and economic impact. The Indonesian government has expressed a strong commitment to controlling these outbreaks, as demonstrated by a broad set of laws, regulations, decrees, guidelines, and directives to control and manage land and forest fire. However, despite these measures, the occurrence of widespread, high-intensity fire outbreaks is still unacceptably high. This study assessed land-clearing techniques associated with a low risk of fire outbreaks, comparing the costs associated with a range of these techniques. It then analyzed intervention options that would involve the adoption of these techniques by farmers. These low-risk techniques included: (i) zero-burning practices involving traditional machinery and farmer groups; (ii) zero-burning involving modern machinery and partnerships with government agencies/private enterprises; (iii) controlled burning; and (iv) the chemical removal of biomass using herbicides. The study finds that the costs for all four of these options are higher than with land-clearing techniques that use fire alone. However, it also showed that the cost implications for farmers could be mitigated by taking a more holistic view of farming practices as a system, rather than focusing only on land-clearing practices in isolation. It found that when land-clearing practices that involve low risks of fire outbreak are combined with good agricultural practices (GAP), farmers could still achieve higher levels of profitability and productivity than under a business as usual (BAU) scenario. The study produced scenarios involving BAU practices; land clearing without fire and with BAU practices; and land clearing without fire and with good agricultural practices (GAP) for four agricultural commodities (oil palm, cocoa, rubber, and paddy). It found that the return on land (NPV) in the case of the scenario involving land clearing without fire and with GAP was still higher than under the BAU scenario, except in the case of rubber, with which the NPV was higher in the scenario with modern machinery and GAP. The study concludes that a systems approach is necessary to effectively control fire outbreaks. Government programs should be designed and implemented on the basis of this systems approach with the involvement of a wide range of stakeholders, including through partnerships with the private sector operators, to effectively control the risk of fire outbreaks while at the same time supporting farmers’ livelihoods by ensuring that they are enabled to generate higher levels of productivity and profitability from their land.