Rapid Agrobiodiversity Appraisal (RABA) - Are you looking for one ...

30
Rapid Agrobiodiversity Appraisal (RABA)
in the Context of Environmental Service Rewards
THREAT:
Rapid
deforestation
and
conversion,
especially close
to roads.
Financial
benefit as the
main motivator
in conversion
THREAT:
Rubber
agroforest is
not a
competitively
efficient system
As deforestation continues, the jungle rubber agroforests are becoming increasingly important as
reservoirs of forest diversity. These agroforests now provide some of the forest 'services' valued in
natural forests. However, these agroforests are also under pressure for conversion to monoculture
plantations. There is often a lack of immediate benefit flowing from biodiversity conservation and
other environmental services. This makes immediate private benefits in terms of financial gains
from a land-use management a more pressing consideration than those of environmental services.
Consequently, more monoculture plantations are being developed in Bungo District.
Therefore, a new approach of providing rewards for environmental service of (agro-)biodiversity
conservation in rubber agroforest systems can be seen being an alternative means by which the
opportunity costs from alternative land uses can be offset.
In comparison, in one tapping day one person taps about 300 trees. In an old rubber agroforest (RAF)
there are 100200 tappable trees per hectare, so a farmer needs 2-3 ha. In a rubber plantation, there
are about 500 trees per hectare, thus there are more than enough trees for a person to tap in a
single hectare. Additionally, the yields per hectare could be 3 times higher (Wibawa personal
communication) or if expressed in net present value, the system is about two times more profitable
than old RAF (Budidarsono et al. 2001). Oil palm plantation offers better profitability but higher
establishment cost.
Box 6. The economy of rubber agroforest
Jambi is the third largest rubber-producing province in Indonesia, after North Sumatra and South Sumatra. In
Jambi, around 97% of natural rubber comes from smallholder farmers tapping rubber gardens (called kebun karet)
smaller than 5 ha. Economically, Gouyon (1999) notes that the jungle rubber system contributes up to 80% of its
farmers' livelihoods, while the remaining 20% comes from other sources of income. Similarly, Wibawa et al. (2000)
state that rubber farmers in the province of Jambi receive on average 70% of their household income from rubber.
The economics of rubber agroforestry depend on land scarcity and land price. Per day of labour, the returns are
comparable with more intensive plantations, per hectare of land yields are low. Economic analysis by
ha-1
Budidarsono et al. (2001) indicates negative values for returns to land (approximately Rp 340 000 or similar to
ha-1
USD 350 ), although at social prices there are indications that the systems are potentially profitable. The
calculated internal rate of return (IRR) indicates that traditional rubber systems are not profitable, with annual
discount rates over 16%. This reflects the unfavourable condition of these systems for smallholder rubber farmers,
as the productivity of rubber agroforest is very low, at only one-third to half of production in clonal plantations.
Case Study 1: Rubber agroforests in Bungo (Jambi, Indonesia)