The challenge of HIV/AIDS: Where does agroforestry fit in? - World ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

104World Agroforestry into the FutureAgroforestry can make solid contributionsto resolving the apparent trade-off betweenmaintenance of watershed functions andproductive agriculture, if it addresses theissues in a way that links patch, field, farmand landscape scales.In this brief description of current approachesto agroforestry solutions to watershedproblems, we will consider the followingfour basic steps, and discuss the conceptsand tools required for each:1. Diagnosis of problems at watershedscale.2. Comparing land-use options on the basisof buffering functions.3. Modelling physical degradation andrehabilitation processes in the analysisof trade-offs between profitability andwatershed functions.4. Negotiations between stakeholders ofsolutions on the basis of trade-offs.Diagnosis of problems atwatershed scaleBecause there are many potential solutionsto problems with watershed function, weneed to be clear and specific about whatthe problem is, and this requires a commonperception (criteria and indicators; Figure 1).A list of criteria for the contribution of watershedsto water quantity (the capacity totransmit water, buffer peak flows and releasewater gradually), water quality (reduce sedimentloads and other pollutants and maintainaquatic biodiversity) and integrity of theland surface (control landslides and reduceloss of fertile topsoil through erosion), needsto be combined with criteria that relate tobiodiversity conservation and to the socialand economic welfare of the people livingin watershed areas.The relationship between full (as providedby a forest) and partial (agroforestry) treecover and hydrological functions in termsof the five watershed functions listed inFigure 1 involves different time scales andtrade-offs between total water yield and thedegree of buffering of peak river flows relativeto peak rainfall events. The role of landuse can be analysed in terms of changes inevapotranspiration, linked to the presenceof trees; infiltration, linked to conditions ofthe soil; and the rate of drainage linked tothe drain network in the landscape.van Noordwijk et al. (2003) completed adetailed analysis of both the 4000 km 2 MaeChaem catchment in northern Thailand(mean annual rainfall 1500 mm, populationdensity 20 km –2 ; mean annual river flow20–30 m 3 s –1 ) and the 500 km 2 Way Besaicatchment in Lampung, Indonesia (meanannual rainfall 2500 mm, population density160 km –2 ; mean annual river flow 15–20m 3 s –1 ). Daily rainfall and river flows forthese two watersheds are shown in Figure 2.The two rivers have very different patterns:the largely forested Mae Chaem shows avery strong seasonal pattern, falling nearlydry for a few months of the year; the WayBesai (only 15 percent forest) has approximatelycontinual flow. These differences,Function/criteriaMain indicator1. Transmit water • Q/P=1–(E/P)2. Buffer peak rain events • ? Q abAvg /? P abAvg3. Release gradually • Q slow /P = (P inf –E S+V )/P4. Maintain quality • Qual out /Qual in5. Reduce mass wasting • ? riskof course, primarily relate to the rainfallpattern. They show, however, that commonlyused indicators such as the ratio ofmaximum and minimum flow of the river,Q max/Q mincannot be used to analyse thecondition of watersheds, without regards torainfall.The indicators of Figure 1 are all expressedin dimensionless form, relating river flow(discharge) to rainfall. For the analysis ofthe Mae Chaem and Way Besai situations,a new ‘buffering indicator’ was developed(van Noordwijk et al. 2003) that relates thefrequency distribution of daily river flowto the frequency distribution of point-levelrainfall. It can be used to test perceptionsof increased flooding and peak flows. TheWay Besai data relate to a 23-year periodwhere forest cover was reduced from almost30% to less than 10% in 2002. Themain effect of this land-cover change wasto increase the total water yield as a fractionof total rainfall. The total discharge inthe month with the lowest flow, expressedas a fraction of annual rainfall, showedconsiderable variation between years butdid not change along with total water yield.The buffering indicator was negatively correlatedwith the total water yield, but forScaledependentFigure 1. Indicators for the five criteria. The quantitative properties of river discharge changealong the river course, and lead to scale dependence of three out of the five criteria. Q =river flow; P = precipitation; E S+V= total evapotranspiration minus evaporation of canopyintercepted water; abAvg = sum of all above average values; inf = infiltration.
Chapter 12: Watershed functions in productive agricultural landscapes105Way BesaiMae ChaemDaily rainfall (station level) mm day 1DaysADaily rainfall (station level) mm day 1DaysBCDRiver flow m 3 sec –1River flow mm 3 sec –1DaysDaysFigure 2. The records of rainfall (A and B) and river discharge (C and D) of the Way Besai for the 1975–1998 period (A and C), and MaeChaem for the 1988–2000 period (B and D). The thin dark lines trace the maxima and minima of daily values for the observation periods,the solid lighter line indicates the mean daily values (van Noordwijk et al. 2003).the other indicators the trade-off explainedonly a small part of the total variation. Thissuggests that in this catchment area the potentialdownstream benefits of more waterare not associated with negative changes inriver flow during the driest month or withless buffering of peak events.A spatially distributed water balance modeldetermined the current land cover situationas being between natural vegetation offorest on a porous soil, and degraded landwith grassland on a compacted soil. Withoutfine-tuning of the model, an acceptableagreement between the model and actualmeasurements was obtained for the WayBesai (Table 1) and Mae Chaem (Table 2)catchment areas for each of the variousindicators, within the range of forest to degradedlands.This analysis, presented in very condensedform here, suggests that changes in forestcover can modify a number of quantitativecharacteristics of river flow, but that rainfall(and any change in rainfall characteristicsbetween measurement periods) dominatesthe outflows. As rainfall tends to have complexpatterns of variation over time, it is noteasy to tease out a land-use change signalfrom the noisy background. Much of theattribution of change in river flow to landcoverchange in public debate may notsurvive close scrutiny.By comparing the results from the modelwith the measurements taken in the fieldwe can conclude that models that link thespace–time characteristics of rainfall via
Page 4 and 5:
CitationGarrity, D., A. Okono, M. G
Page 6 and 7:
Enhancing Environmental ServicesCha
Page 8 and 9:
viWorld Agroforestry into the Futur
Page 10 and 11:
viiiWorld Agroforestry into the Fut
Page 13 and 14:
Agroforestry and the Future
Page 15 and 16:
Keywords:Millennium Development Goa
Page 17 and 18:
Chapter 1: Science-based agroforest
Page 19 and 20:
Chapter 1: Science-based agroforest
Page 21 and 22:
Trees and Markets
Page 23 and 24:
Keywords:Dacryodes edulis, Irvingia
Page 25 and 26:
Chapter 2: Trees and markets for ag
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Keywords:Perennial tree crops, plan
Page 37 and 38:
Chapter 3: The future of perennial
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47:
Page 50 and 51:
38World Agroforestry into the Futur
Page 52 and 53:
Page 54 and 55:
“Trees influence landscape scaled
Page 56 and 57:
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
Page 65 and 66: Keywords:Agroforestry, improved fal
Page 67 and 68: Chapter 6: Agroforestry innovations
Page 73 and 74: Keywords:Extension, farmer-centred
Page 75 and 76: Chapter 7: Scaling up the impact of
Page 83 and 84: Keywords:Policy, land management, a
Page 85 and 86: Chapter 8: Policies for improved la
Page 91 and 92: Chapter 9Land and People:Working Gr
Page 93: Chapter 9: Land and people81• sca
Page 96 and 97: “Forest conservation is no longer
Page 98 and 99: 86World Agroforestry into the Futur
Page 112 and 113: 100World Agroforestry into the Futu
Page 115: Keywords:Agroforestry, buffering wa
Page 119 and 120: Chapter 12: Watershed functions in
Page 125 and 126: Keywords:Agroforestry, vulnerabilit
Page 127 and 128: Chapter 13: Opportunities for linki
Page 133: Chapter 13: Opportunities for linki
Page 140 and 141: “Agroforestry can and does playa
Page 147 and 148: Keywords:Educational impact, sustai
Page 149 and 150: Chapter 16: Capacity building in ag
Page 151 and 152: Chapter 16: Capacity building in ag
Page 153 and 154: Keywords:Networking, research-exten
Page 155 and 156: Chapter 17: Institutional collabora
Page 157 and 158: Chapter 17: Institutional collabora
Page 159 and 160: Keywords:Capacity building, agrofor
Page 161 and 162: Chapter 18: Building capacity for r
Page 167 and 168:
Keywords:E-learning, agricultural e
Page 169 and 170:
Chapter 19: Can e-learning support
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Chapter 20Strengthening Institution
Page 177:
Chapter 20: Strengthening instituti
Page 180 and 181:
168“The biological characteristic
Page 182 and 183:
170World Agroforestry into the Futu
Page 184 and 185:
Page 186 and 187:
Page 188 and 189:
Page 190 and 191:
Page 192 and 193:
Page 194 and 195:
Page 196 and 197:
Page 198 and 199:
Page 200 and 201:
Page 202 and 203:
Page 205 and 206:
Author ContactsFahmudin Agusisri@in
Page 207 and 208:
Acronyms and AbbreviationsACIARAFTP
Page 210:
CreditsFront cover photo: Karen Rob
Page 213:
World Agroforestry into the Future
show all

The challenge of HIV/AIDS: Where does agroforestry fit in? - World ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?