Economic incentives and household perceptions on smallholder timber plantations lessons from case studies in Indonesia

1,788 views
1,618 views

Published on

Dede Rohadi, Maarit Kallio, Haruni Krisnawati and Philip Manalu

Presentation for the conference on
Taking stock of smallholders and community forestry
Montpellier France
March 24-26, 2010

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,788
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
11
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
44
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Photo:CIFOR Slide Library #12148 – Burkina FasoWomen collecting Piliostigma reticulatum pods for animal feed.
  • Photo: CIFOR Slide Library #13531 -- Mapajo tree in Pando, Bolivia
  • Economic incentives and household perceptions on smallholder timber plantations lessons from case studies in Indonesia

    1. 1. Economic incentives and household perceptions on smallholder timber plantations: Lessons from case studies in Indonesia<br />By: <br />Dede Rohadi, Maarit Kallio, Haruni Krisnawati and Philip Manalu<br />
    2. 2. Background<br />The importance of smallholder timber plantations (in particular in Indonesia):<br />High demand on wood and diminished supply of timber from natural forests.<br />Smallholder timber plantations could potentially contribute in timber supply and be as mean of poverty alleviation.<br />Government is intensifying its efforts to support the development of smallholder timber plantations.<br />
    3. 3. Characteristics of various people participation schemes <br />on smallholder timber plantations in Indonesia<br />
    4. 4. Key questions:<br />What are the available economical benefits of timber plantations for smallholders?<br />What are smallholder’s perceptions on these benefits as compared to other income generating activities?<br />What are the challenges for improving economical benefits and smallholders’ livelihoods through timber plantations?<br />What policy interventions are necessary for these challenges to overcome?<br />
    5. 5. Research Methods <br />The case studies: <br />Smallholder teak (Tectona grandis) plantations at Gunungkidul district, Yogyakarta<br />Smallholder kadam (Anthocephalus cadamba) plantations at Tanah Laut district, South Kalimantan<br /><ul><li>The case studies:
    6. 6. Smallholder teak (Tectona grandis) plantations at Gunungkidul district, Yogyakarta
    7. 7. Smallholder kadam (Anthocephalus cadamba) plantations at Tanah Laut district, South Kalimantan
    8. 8. Other land use systems:
    9. 9. Food crops at Gunungkidul
    10. 10. Rubber (Hevea brasiliensis) and oil palm (Elaeis guinensis) plantations at Tanah Laut</li></li></ul><li>Research Methods <br />The case studies: <br />Smallholder teak (Tectona grandis) plantations at Gunungkidul district, Yogyakarta<br />Smallholder kadam (Anthocephalus cadamba) plantations at Tanah Laut district, South Kalimantan<br />Other land use systems:<br /><ul><li>Food crops at Gunungkidul
    11. 11. Rubber (Heveabrasiliensis) and oil palm (Elaeisguinensis) plantations at Tanah Laut</li></li></ul><li>Research Methods <br />The case studies: <br />Smallholder teak (Tectona grandis) plantations at Gunungkidul district, Yogyakarta<br />Smallholder kadam (Anthocephalus cadamba) plantations at Tanah Laut district, South Kalimantan<br />Other land use systems:<br /><ul><li>Food crops at Gunungkidul
    12. 12. Rubber (Heveabrasiliensis) and oil palm (Elaeisguinensis) plantations at Tanah Laut</li></li></ul><li>Research Methods <br />The case studies: <br />Smallholder teak (Tectona grandis) plantations at Gunungkidul district, Yogyakarta<br />Smallholder kadam (Anthocephalus cadamba) plantations at Tanah Laut district, South Kalimantan<br />Other land use systems:<br /><ul><li>Food crops at Gunungkidul
    13. 13. Rubber (Heveabrasiliensis) and oil palm (Elaeisguinensis) plantations at Tanah Laut</li></li></ul><li>Research Methods <br />The case studies: <br />Smallholder teak (Tectona grandis) plantations at Gunungkidul district, Yogyakarta<br />Smallholder kadam (Anthocephalus cadamba) plantations at Tanah Laut district, South Kalimantan<br />Other land use systems:<br /><ul><li>Food crops at Gunungkidul
    14. 14. Rubber (Heveabrasiliensis) and oil palm (Elaeisguinensis) plantations at Tanah Laut</li></li></ul><li>Research Methods <br />The case studies: <br />Smallholder teak (Tectona grandis) plantations at Gunungkidul district, Yogyakarta<br />Smallholder kadam (Anthocephalus cadamba) plantations at Tanah Laut district, South Kalimantan<br />Other land use systems:<br /><ul><li>Food crops at Gunungkidul
    15. 15. Rubber (Heveabrasiliensis) and oil palm (Elaeisguinensis) plantations at Tanah Laut</li></li></ul><li>Research Methods <br /><ul><li>Data collection and analyses:
    16. 16. Household surveys, In-depth interviews, FGD, Farm inventories
    17. 17. Financial analyses (BCR, NPV), descriptive analyses</li></li></ul><li>Research Methods <br />Some assumptions in the financial analyses:<br />Timber plantations: Tree density is 500 trees/ha, half of the trees is harvested at 15 yrs old. Rotation age 25 yrs.<br />Food crops: Based on real farmers’ practices (5 respondents were compared).<br />Rubber plantations: Tree density is 625 trees/ha. Harvesting starts at age 4 yrs. At the end of rotation (25 yrs) the farm produces 150 m3 of rubber wood. <br />Oil palm plantations: Tree density is 130 trees/ha. Harvesting starts at age 5 yrs.<br />Costs of inputs and revenues are based on the average values derived from the surveys and in-depth interviews.<br />
    18. 18.  [N1]IS there potential income per month for timber?<br />RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS<br />Financial analyses of smallholder timber plantations and other farm based activities<br />
    19. 19.  [N1]IS there potential income per month for timber?<br />RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS<br />Household perceptions on timber plantation activities (Gunungkidul)<br />Teak contributes relatively low in the household income structure<br />
    20. 20.  [N1]IS there potential income per month for timber?<br />RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS<br />Household perceptions on timber plantation activities (Gunungkidul)<br />Households in Gunungkidul allocate in average 10% of their limited area for growing teak<br />
    21. 21.  [N1]IS there potential income per month for timber?<br />RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS<br />Household perceptions on timber plantation activities (Gunungkidul)<br />The main reason for planting teak is for household saving account and safety net<br />
    22. 22.  [N1]IS there potential income per month for timber?<br />RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS<br />Household perceptions on timber plantation activities (Tanah Laut)<br />The main household income comes from off farm activities<br />
    23. 23.  [N1]IS there potential income per month for timber?<br />RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS<br />Household perceptions on timber plantation activities (Tanah Laut)<br />Timber planters allocate significantly for rubber plantations<br />
    24. 24.  [N1]IS there potential income per month for timber?<br />RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS<br />Household perceptions on timber plantation activities (Tanah Laut)<br />Rubber seems the most favorite species for non timber planters<br />
    25. 25.  [N1]IS there potential income per month for timber?<br />RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS<br />Household perceptions on timber plantation activities (Tanah Laut)<br />Timber plantations are generally objected for saving accounts<br />
    26. 26.  [N1]IS there potential income per month for timber?<br />RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS<br />Challenges and policy intervention options<br />Timber plantation is not the best land use option financially<br />Smallholders plant timber mainly for saving accounts and safety net<br />Many of smallholders are challenged by:<br /><ul><li>Limited market information
    27. 27. Low bargaining power
    28. 28. Limited capital to purchase production inputs
    29. 29. Manage their timber plantations based on traditions
    30. 30. Limited land ownership area (in the case of Gunungkidul)</li></li></ul><li> [N1]IS there potential income per month for timber?<br />RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS<br />Challenges and policy intervention options<br />Some intervention options:<br /><ul><li>provide regular extension services of best practices in timber plantation management
    31. 31. provide better market information and assist farmers’ collective action to improve market access and bargaining power
    32. 32. provide micro finance supports through soft loan programs which are carefully designed to meet farmers’ needs
    33. 33. Prevent timber trade regulation that tends to generate high transaction costs
    34. 34. Provide more access to state land (in Gunungkidul)</li></li></ul><li>Thank you for your attention<br />www.cifor.cgiar.org<br />

    ×