The world is warming rapidly, soils are disappearing massively, and cheap solutions exist (and no, they're not Teslas - sorry, Elon). So, why aren't being deployed at scale?
8. World Bank World Development Indicators
South Asia
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
KgperHectare
Sub-Saharan Africa
Latin America
East Asia
Cereal yields by region, 1960-2005
29. Drought protection of trees
Forestry:
most roots close to surface
Agroforestry:
most roots at depth
Root density: meters of rootlets /m3 of soil Root density: meters of rootlets /m3 of soil
Depth(cm)
Depth(cm)
33. “The additive maize/cowpea intercropping option
after cotton or maize resulted in an average overall
LER of 1.47, no maize grain penalty, and 1.38 t ha−1
more cowpea fodder production compared with
sole maize.”
34. LER = 1.4 + 0.5 = 1.9• Monoculture teak is not
fertilized (not worth it).
• Maize is always fertilized
• Intercropping maize and
teak (with best spacing +
pruning + thinning) can get
LER values up to 2.0.
Teak & Maize
35. Densidade:
UD1: 81 pl/hectare
UD2 e Conv: 99 plantas/hectare
*
*
98%
125%
27%
14%
71%
149%
99%
49%
0,0
2,0
4,0
6,0
8,0
10,0
12,0
14,0
2011 2012 2013 2014
SAF Biodiverso UD1 SAF Biodiverso UD3
ProduçãodoDendê(ton/hectare)
PROJETO SAF DENDÊ
Produtividade de Dendê
Resultado esperado
t/ha(FFB)
Year 4 (2011) Year 5 (2012) Year 6 (2013) Year 7 (2014)
Castellani et al 2014, Internal Report
Oil palm agroforestry
Plot 1 (81 pl/ha)
)
Oil palm agroforestry
Plot 2 (99 pl/ha)
Monocrop oil palm*
(considering 99 pl/ha)
*Average yields at the same age in the same region according to Perez et al. 2007
Viabilidade de extração de óleo de dendê no Estado do Pará. Viçosa, UFV. 2007.
http://portal.mda.gov.br/portal/saf/arquivos/view/biodisel/18_-_Dende.pdf
Oil palm agroforestry
36. 13
Farmer plot management Sampling
Frequency
Mean
(Kg/Ha)
Standard
error
Maize without fertiliser 36 1322 220.33
Maize with fertiliser 213 1736 118.95
Maize with fertiliser trees 72 3053 359.8
Maize with fertiliser trees & fertiliser 135 3071 264.31
2009/2010 season; data from 6 Malawian districts
Mwalwanda, A.B., O. Ajayi, F.K. Akinnifesi, T. Beedy, Sileshi G, and G. Chiundu 2010
Malawi agroforestry
44. Some Major Regreening Successes
• Niger: 7,000,000 Ha
• Mali: 500,000 Ha
• Senegal: 200,000 Ha
• Ethiopia: > 1,000,000 Ha
• Ghana, Kenya, Rwanda – X0,000 Ha each
• Several hundred hectares in Somaliland
45. Cost of land restoration with FMNR
Place & Binam (2013):
• In Niger the actual expenditure on the scaling-up of
FMNR has been well below $20 per hectare of
adoption.”
• Project costs of farmer-managed natural regeneration
outscaling in the Maradi Region of were US$14/ha.
• The annual recurrent labor costs per hectare by farm
households to manage the FMNR were also quite low.
46. African Union
Second Africa Drylands Declaration
"RECOMMEND AND PROPOSE that the drylands development
community, through the African Union, and all collaborating and
supporting organizations, commit seriously to achieving the goal
of enabling EVERY farm family and EVERY village across the
drylands of Africa to be practicing Farmer-Managed Natural
Regeneration and Assisted Natural Regeneration by the year
2025."
48. FAO, State of Food and Agriculture 2014
Selected yields by farm size
Smallest ¼ of all farms
Largest ¼ of all farms
49. Small farms are the bedrock of
development.
“Asia’s post-war miracle economies emerged by
following a recipe with just three ingredients: land
reform; export-led, state-backed manufacturing; and
financial repression.
The process began with the ousting of the landlords.
Feudal estates were broken up and divided among
small farmers, who also received cheap credit and
valuable advice.
Smallholder farming requires “grotesque” amounts
of labour. But that is a good thing, because countries
as poor as Taiwan or South Korea were in the 1950s
have labour—and only labour—in abundance."
-- The Economist, July 2013
The same applies to today's LDCs.
52. Ag and LULUCF emissions: huge
IPCC AR4 GHG emissions by sector in 2004 [Figure 1.3b].
5) Including agricultural waste burning and
savannah burning (non-CO2). CO2 emissions
and/or removals from agricultural soils are
not estimated in this database.
6) Data include CO2 emissions from
deforestation, CO2 emissions from decay
(decomposition) of above-ground biomass
that remains after logging and deforestation,
and CO2 from peat fires and decay of drained
peat soils. Chapter 9 reports emissions from
deforestation only.
30.9%
53. Exported
carbon
(t/ha/yr)
Carbon
restituted to soil
(t/ha/yr)
2
2
4
4
6
6
0
"Modern" agriculure
(1 crop a year)
7 tC/ha/yr
Intermediate cover crops
(2-3 crops a year)
12.5 tC/ha/yr Intermediate cover crops +
agroforestry
16.5 tC/ha/yr
Food production
Soil restitution (fertility)
Biofuels
(fuelwood, anaerobic
digestion…)
Storage in biomass
(timber)
de construction…)
Carbon, fertility... and climate
54. European agroforestry’s
potential amounts to
1/3rd of European Union
emissions!
Huge mitigation potential
EU-28 total emissions (excl. LULUCF), mln T CO2-eq.
Source: European Environmental Agency
Aertsens et al. estimate:
1400 mln T/year
68. Trees, forests and water: cool insights for a hot world. Ellison et al. (2017)
Surface
temperature
distribution in
a mixed
landscape with
forest.
At broader scales: Contributions to water cycles and bioclimates
Hesslerová et al., 2013.
69. Mitigation? Adaptation?
Improved carbon
sink management
[M] Minimized
deforestation and
forest degradation
[M]
Improved adaptive
capacity of the society
[A]
Diminished release
of GHG to the
Atmosphere [M]
Improved
livelihood [A]
Sustainable
forest
management [M]
Reduced loss of
soil carbon stock
[M]
Enhances carbon
sinks [M]
Afforestation and
reforestation [M]
Biodiversity
conservation [A]
Agroforestry
[M] [A]
Soil and water
conservation [A]
Better landscape
management [M] [A]
Improved
agricultural
productivity [A]
Enhanced ecosystem
services and goods
availability [A]
75. Natural
Forest
4.1 billion ha
Crop
Land
1.5 billion ha
Pasture &
Rangelands
3.4 billion ha
Wetlands
1.3 billion ha
Deserts
1.9 billion ha
Planted
forests
We organise like this… … but the world looks like this.
Our institutions can’t handle complexity very well.
83. Which leads to
Agroecology
marketing budget
Agroecology
research budget
Agroecology
Political influence
Agrobusiness
marketing
Agrobusiness
research Agrobusiness
influence
This is how we normally picture a perfect field: a dense mass of deep green healthy plants. But we know that this picture is only accurate for a few months of every year.
Second, for almost as many months, its ground is bare. If the wind blows, it looks like this.
And if a rainstom comes, water erosion takes over.
Aberdeen, South Africa – 4x more livestock on the left
Pata Negra pigs in a spanish Dehesa system
Oil palm agroforestry in Brazil
Walnut and what agroforestry in France
One of the world’s largest agroforestry systems: reindeer in the northern taiga. The animals’ dejections fertiise the trees, whose protection helps fodder grow.
Crop roots are limited to shallow soil horizons. That’s why they need a lot of manure or inorganic fertilizer: deeper nutrients are inaccessible to them.
Tree roots pump up nutrients from much deeper soil horizons (tens of meters, depending on species).These make up leaves and twigs which, when they fall to the soil surface, mineralize and release their nutrients for the crops.
Trees act as rain-catching devices, funneling water down their branches, trunks and roots below the surface, where it becomes available to crops. Trees thus protect crops from dry spells.
Likewise, crops protect trees from drought. In a forest, at left, most tree rootlets are close to the surface.
In an agroforest, on the right, they are forced by the crop roots to expand much lower down.
When a drought strikes, most forest rootlets are dessicated. The tree stops growing. But most agroforestry rootlets, being deeper, are fine. The trees keep growing.
A large farmer needs to homogenize. That reduces labour costs, but brings downsides. This wheat field, in later summer, is wasting 100% of the sunlight and the rainwater falling on it since photosynthesis has stopped.
In this wheat field, by contrast, there is still some photosynthesis going on – and it will continue until late October.
32
Courtesy Meine van Noordwijk
In their review of Climate Smart Agriculture (defined by the FAO as “agriculture that sustainably increases productivity, enhances resilience (adaptation), reduces/removes GHGs (mitigation) where possible, and enhances achievement of national food security and development goals”), these institutions catalogued the major agricultural interventions suggested. As this chart shows, for Africa’s major crop, the best interventions always involve the use of trees.
This farmer knows every plant of her plot and can act accordingly, pruning, feeding or watering as needed. Per unit area, her farm beats what the most advanced rich world farmers can achieve, because her LER is so much higher. That is why this system has maintained very high population densities for centuries.
This is how we normally picture a perfect field: a dense mass of deep green healthy plants. But we know that this picture is only accurate for a few months of every year.
To date 21 countries have signed onto AFR100, committing 63.3m ha.
… this astonishing graph from the FAO. They found that no matter which crop or which country you look at, the smallest quartile of farms always outperforms the largest quartile of farms, sometimes by huge amounts.
The reason is simple. Small farmers already use the most advanced precision agriculture tool available:
In poor, labor-abundant economies, not only are small farms more efficient, but because they also account for large shares of the rural poor, small farm development can be a “win-win” proposition for growth and poverty reduction. Asia’s green revolution demonstrated how agricultural growth that reaches large numbers of small farms can transform rural economies and raise enormous numbers of people out of poverty (Rosegrant and Hazell 2000). Recent studies also show that a more egalitarian distribution of land not only leads to higher economic growth but also helps ensure that the growth that is achieved is more beneficial to the poor (World Bank 2007).
Small farms also contribute to greater food security, both through feeding their own families and by supplying local markets with foods that may be less costly and less risky than alternative supplies, particularly in regions facing high transport costs. Because they produce more output per hectare than large farms, they also contribute to greater national food self-sufficiency in land scarce countries.
Small farm households with cash incomes also have more favorable expenditure patterns than large farms for promoting growth of the local nonfarm economy, including rural towns. They spend higher shares of their incremental income on locally produced goods and services, many of which are labor intensive (Mellor 1976; Hazell and Roell 1983). These demand patterns generate additional income and jobs in the local nonfarm economy, and the incomes thus generated and saved can be reinvested in infrastructure and industry
Studwell, an economist, shows that this development pathway is universal: it was followed by Europe, the US, Japan, later by South Korea and Taiwan, and still later by China. Bill Gates had this to say about the book: “I found the book to be quite compelling. Studwell explains economic history in a concise and understandable way. I asked the whole Agriculture team at our foundation to read it because of its especially good insights into the critical role of household farming for economic development”.
I hope to have convinced you of the immense potential of agroforestry. But we’re not done. Another aspect of resource efficiency is how this relates to climate change.
The bad news is that land use in all its guises account for a third of total emissions. And that’s probably an underestimate, since the figure does not include soil organic carbon changes.
But what’s less well known is the sheer scope for mitigation that agroforestry offers. This paper, a couple of years old, estimates the potential in the EU alone to be about 1.4 Gt/year in the growth phase of the trees, or a full third of EU emissions. Of course, that’s not a permanent feature- mature trees capture relatively little carbon – but it offers a twenty-year grace period to decarbonise other sectors.
High input carbon practices: Improved crop varieties, crop rotation, use cover crop, conservation agriculture, better use of manure
Integrated nutrient management: reduction of leaching, improved N use, improved use of fertilizers
Increase availability of water: water management, water harvesting
Improved tillage: less soil disturbance, incorporating crop residues and soil organic matter
Agroforestry: increase above ground biomass and fuel wood, reduce soil erosion, set-aside,
The issue is the subject of much ongoing research.
In adapation, oo, agroforestry offers precious services.
Second, for almost as many months, its ground is bare. If the wind blows, it looks like this.
And if a rainstom comes, water erosion takes over.
On a warming world, the cooling effect of tree shade can also be valuable.
… and, because we are scientists, we have measured the obvious: yes, it is cooler under the trees! In this case, in the Sahel, the difference is crucial to allow crop plants to keep growing in the hottest part of the day. As hotter climates threaten the southern European countries, this effect will become increasingly precious.
We know that livestock with access to shade is about 5 to 8% more productive in either milk or meat
Courtesy Meine van Noordwijk
The good news is that in land use, it’s really hard to do mitigation without adaptation, and vice versa.
There are five reasons for the comparative lack of success of agroforestry to date.
First, humans divide their management of the world into silos. But in the real world, water, nutrients, gases, seeds and animals move between these silos.
Second, cultural issues. This looks like a nice healthy field to us, but science shows it is brittle, demands a lot of expensive inputs, and generates relatively little biomass.
Whereas this complex agroforestry system looks to our eyes to be “primitive” and “underperforming”, despite data showing that its productivity and resilience are much higher while its input needs is much lower.
Third, modernity. The same 20th century mindset that turned thriving, mixed use cities like Birmingham into concrete lansdcapes only fit for cars…
..infected agriculture around the globe. Budding agronomists receive much more instruction about machinery than about agroecosystems. Some never study soils at all, treating it as an inert substrate to which everything needs to be added. That mindset is evident in this Soviet-era poster: despite extolling the prowess of Soviet agricutlure, there is not a single plant to be seen.
That’s not the result of evil intent, but merely that of a lousy business plan. The strength of agroforestry is that farmers can do it themselves and that it is absurdly cheap. That means that, unlike input-intensive agriculture which can sell seeds and inputs to farmers every year, an agroforestry advisor makes little money from each farmer, and then only once.
And that, of course, means that agroforesters advertise much less than agribusiness.
This is how we normally picture a perfect field: a dense mass of deep green healthy plants. But we know that this picture is only accurate for a few months of every year.