International network for natural sciences – research journal
  • mendeley icon
  • linkedin icon
  • google plus icon
  • twitter icon
  • google scholar icon
  • facebook icon

Valuation of solid benefits of a homestead forestry system in the Indus basin, Southern Punjab, Pakistan

By: Muhammad Imran Mahmood, Muhammad Zubair

Key Words: Homestead, Agroforestry, Farm power, Cosmopolite ness, Tangible

J. Bio. Env. Sci. 10(5), 14-24, May 2017.

Abstract

To evaluate the benefits of homestead forestry system to the farmers, a study was conducted in southern Punjab (Pakistan) with the hypothesis that “Homestead Forestry system has tremendous potential to enhance the economy and livelihood of the area under study”. The results showed that the average farm size, for households was 11.80 ha. The subsistence and economic landholding has a sizes of 5.06 ha and 11.80 ha, respectively. The prices of proceeds produced over the year in homestead forestry of study area were US$330.8. The results showed that 0.25 m3 timber was collected annually per farm out of which 0.07 m3 was consumed and the rest was sold. Average revenue generated by selling homestead timber was US $44.0. Revenue produced in subsistence, economic, and above economic farms were US$20.5, US$80.5, and US$95, respectively. The results showed significant association between cosmopoliteness and agroforestry. Majority (65%) of the NAF was positioned in medium cosmopolite category. Agroforestry has positive correlation on the farm income. The comparison of AF versus NAF revealed high farm income to the AF farmers than NAF. The AF farmers with low income (100000) were about 7 (9%) but in NAF they were18 (22%). Similarly, the AF farmers with medium income (100000 – 200000) were 29 (36%) while in NAF it was 34 (42%). Also the farmers with high farm income were high in case of AF which is 44 (55%) than NAF where it is 38 (47%) indicating strong financial earning to the AF farmers than NAF farmers.

| Views 34 |

Valuation of solid benefits of a homestead forestry system in the Indus basin, Southern Punjab, Pakistan

Abebe T. 2005. Diversity in homegarden agroforestry systems of southern Ethiopia.

Acharya KP. 2006. Linking trees on farms with biodiversity conservation in subsistence farming systems in Nepal. Biodiversity & Conservation 15, 631-646.

Alam M. 2011. Tropical homegardens in Bangladesh: Characteristics and sustainability. In “Alternative Farming Systems, Biotechnology, Drought Stress and Ecological Fertilisation”, pp. 245-262. Springer.

Babulo B, Muys B, Nega F, Tollens E, Nyssen J, Deckers J, Mathijs E. 2009. The economic contribution of forest resource use to rural livelihoods in Tigray, Northern Ethiopia. Forest Policy and Economics 11, 109-117.

Christanty L, Abdoellah OS, Marten GG, Iskandar J. 1986. Traditional agroforestry in West Java: The pekarangan (homegarden) and kebun-talun (annual-perennial rotation) cropping systems. Traditional agriculture in Southeast Asia: a human ecology perspective., 132-158.

Douglas JJ. 1981. Supply and demand of forest products and future development strategies, field document no. 2. UNDP/FAO/Planning Commission, Government of Bangladesh project BGD/78/010, Rome Government of Bangladesh (1993) Forestry master plan (environment and land use), Ministry of Environment and Forests, Dhaka Government of Bangladesh (1995) Forest policy of 1994. Bangladesh Gazette, July 6, 1995, 241–244 p.

Deheuvels O, Rousseau GX, Quiroga GS, Franco MD, Cerda R, Mendoza SJV, Somarriba E. 2014. Biodiversity is affected by changes in management intensity of cocoa-based agroforests. Agroforestry Systems 88, 1081-1099.

Fernandes E, Oktingati A, Maghembe J. 1985. The Chagga Home Gardens: A Multi-storeyed Agro-forestry Cropping System on Mt. Kilimanjaro, Northern Tanzania. Household Food Production: Comparative Perspectives 7, 29.

Franzen M, Mulder MB. 2007. Ecological, economic and social perspectives on cocoa production worldwide. Biodiversity and Conservation 16, 3835-3849.

FAO STAT. 2012. Database of Flood, Food and Agriculture organization of the United Nations, Rome Available at:

www.faostat.fao.org

Kumar BM, Nair PR. 2004. The enigma of tropical homegardens. In “New vistas in agroforestry”, 135-152 p. Springer.

Kabir ME, Webb EL. 2009. Household and homegarden characteristics in southwestern Bangladesh. Agroforestry Systems 75, 129-145.

Kehlenbeck K. 2007. Rural Homegardens in Central Sulawesi, Indonesia: An Example for a Sustainable Agro-Ecosystem?

Kessler M, Hertel D, Jungkunst HF, Kluge J, Abrahamczyk S, Bos M, Buchori D, Gerold G, Gradstein SR, Köhler S. 2012. Can joint carbon and biodiversity management in tropical agroforestry landscapes be optimized? PloS one 7, e47192.

Leakey RR, Tchoundjeu Z, Schreckenberg K, Shackleton SE, Shackleton CM. 2005. Agroforestry tree products (AFTPs): targeting poverty reduction and enhanced livelihoods. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability 3, 1-23.

Marsh R. 1998. Building on traditional gardening to improve household food security. Food nutrition and agriculture, 4-14.

Millate-E-Mustafa M, Hall JB, Teklehaimanot

  1. 1996. Structure and floristics of Bangladesh homegardens. Agroforestry Systems 33, 263-280.

Mohan S. 2004. An assessment of the ecological and socioeconomic benefits provided by homegardens: A case study of Kerala, India, University of Florida.

Mohan S, Alavalapati J, Nair P. 2006. Financial analysis of homegardens: A case study from Kerala state, India. In “Tropical Homegardens”, pp. 283-296. Springer.

Nair PR. 1993. “An introduction to agroforestry,” Springer Science & Business Media.

Pagiola S, Bishop J, Von Ritter K. 2004. Assessing the economic value of ecosystem conservation.

Nelson J, Morrison J, Whitson L. 2015. Piloting a blended model for sustainable IL programming. Reference Services Review, 43(1), 137-151.

Peyre A, Guidal A, Wiersum K, Bongers, F. 2006. Dynamics of homegarden structure and function in Kerala, India. Agroforestry Systems 66, 101-115.

Rahman MM, Furukawa Y, Kawata I, Rahman MM, Alam M. 2005. Homestead forest resources and their role in household economy: A Case Study in the villages of Gazipur sadar upazila of central Bangladesh. Small-scale Forest Economics,

Management and Policy 4, 359-376.

Rahman MM. 2006. Management and economics of homestead forests of Bangladesh. PhD Thesis Ehime University, Matsuyama.

Soini E. 2005. Changing livelihoods on the slopes of Mt. Kilimanjaro, Tanzania: Challenges and opportunities in the Chagga homegarden system. Agroforestry Systems 64, 157-167.

Thompson I, Mackey B, McNulty S, Mosseler A. 2010. A synthesis on the biodiversity-resilience relationships in forest ecosystems. The Role of Forest Biodiversity in the Sustainable Use of Ecosystem Goods and Services in Agro-Forestry, Fisheries, and Forestry. Forestry and Forest Products Research Institute, Ibaraki, Japan, 9-19.

Yang Y, Watanabe MLiF, Zhang J, Zhang W, Zhai J. 2006. Factors affecting forest growth and possible effects of climate change in the Taihang Mountains, northern China. Forestry 79, 135-147.

Weerahewa J, Pushpakumara G, Silva P, Daulagala C, Punyawardena R, Premalal S, Miah G, Roy J, Jana S, Marambe B. 2012. Are homegarden ecosystems resilient to climate change? An analysis of the adaptation strategies of homegardeners in Sri Lanka. APN Science Bulletin 2, 22-27.

Muhammad Imran Mahmood, Muhammad Zubair.
Valuation of solid benefits of a homestead forestry system in the Indus basin, Southern Punjab, Pakistan.
J. Bio. Env. Sci. 10(5), 14-24, May 2017.
http://www.innspub.net/jbes/valuation-solid-benefits-homestead-forestry-system-indus-basin-southern-punjab-pakistan/
Copyright © 2017
By Authors and International Network for
Natural Sciences (INNSPUB)
http://innspub.net
brand
innspub logo
english language editing
  • CALL FOR PAPERS
    CALL FOR PAPERS
    Publish Your Article
  • CALL FOR PAPERS
    CALL FOR PAPERS
    Submit Your Article
INNSPUB on FB
Email Update