Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

The Assessment of Agroforestry Practices in Mukura Sector, Huye District, Southern Rwanda

The Assessment of Agroforestry Practices in Mukura Sector, Huye District, Southern Rwanda Hindawi International Journal of Forestry Research Volume 2023, Article ID 2288114, 10 pages https://doi.org/10.1155/2023/2288114 Research Article The Assessment of Agroforestry Practices in Mukura Sector, Huye District, Southern Rwanda Doreen Mukoobwa , Benitha Zaninka , and Canisius Patrick Mugunga Te Department of Forestry & Nature Conservation, College of Agriculture, Animal Sciences & Veterinary Medicine, University of Rwanda, P.O. Box 117, Huye, Rwanda Correspondence should be addressed to Canisius Patrick Mugunga; mugungacp@gmail.com Received 22 August 2022; Revised 29 November 2022; Accepted 28 March 2023; Published 25 April 2023 Academic Editor: Ahmad A. Omar Copyright © 2023 Doreen Mukoobwa et al. Tis is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Agroforestry has the potential to contribute to the improvement of household livelihood, since its various forms ofer multiple alternatives and opportunities to farmers. Tis study assessed agroforestry practice in Mukura sector, Huye district, Rwanda. A sample of 100 households was selected by stage sampling, randomly choosing four cells and two villages per cell in Mukura Sector. Face-to-face interview was dispensed to household heads, and data were collected on agroforestry practices, on-farm tree species, tree spatial arrangements, tree products, and the adoption rate. Woody species diversity and similarity were determined by using Shannon–Weiner diversity and Sørensen’s indices, respectively. Sixty percent of the farmers practiced agroforestry. Ten woody species were observed to grow on farm, providing varied products of timber, frewood, food and fodder, stakes for climbing beans, and income. Low adoption of agroforestry practice was reported resulting from small land, land tenure, ignorance, unavailability of tree seedlings, and the avoidance of tree-crop competition. On-farm tree diversity was observed to be higher than several other sites in Rwanda. Te diferent cells of Mukura Sector grow the same woody species on the farms as demonstrated by reasonably high indices of similarity. We recommend that eforts be made to reinforce extension services to improve farmers’ awareness on the contribution of agroforestry to their social wellbeing. Ways of making seedlings available for planting should also be explored. people’s livelihoods as also the economic growth is set back 1. Introduction [4, 5]. In accordance with Rwanda’s agroecologies and socio- Agroforestry is the combination of agricultural and forestry economic situation, agroforestry as a strategic way has been technologies to create integrated, diverse, and productive adopted and actively implemented to enhance food security land use systems. It is the land use system in which woody for sustainable livelihood support and landscape restoration. perennials (trees, shrubs, palms, and bamboos) are de- Te systems provide a variety of products and services which liberately used on the same land management unit as ag- are very essential to people [6, 7]. ricultural crops (woody or annual), animals or both, in some Today, agroforestry is an important element in the Bonn form of spatial arrangement or temporal sequence [1, 2]. It is Challenge [8, 9], with the global ambition to restore 150 also defned by [3] as a sustainable land management system million hectares of the world’s deforested and degraded land which constitutes the overall yield of the land, combines the by 2020 and 350 million hectares by 2030 [10, 11]. To production of crops plus tree crops and forest plants and/or contribute to this, a country with very limited land like animals simultaneously or sequentially, on the same unit of Rwanda will not do without intensifying on-farm tree land and applies management practices that are compatible planting. Planting many trees on the farm will not only with the cultural practices of the local population. increase on-farm tree populations but also several benefts Presently, land degradation and natural resource di- obtained from these trees [10]. Agroforestry plays a great sasters are prevailing as environmental problems that afect role in improving present and future food security globally 2 International Journal of Forestry Research as trees have an integral part of food security strategies of constitute a total of eight sample villages (Figure 1). By using rural people for so long [3]. Also, it enhances several key Yamane’s formula and applying 0.1 as the error margin, the environment-related Sustainable Development Goals sample size was taken as 100 respondents. (SDGs) [11]. Agroforestry has long been part of Rwandan farming n � , (1) 􏽨1 + N(α) 􏽩 systems as farmers have always planted trees for food and fruits, timber, fuel, poles, fodder, stakes for climbing beans, where n: sample size, N: population size, and α: the precision and shade for livestock [12]. Tey planted trees for soil sampling error as 10% � 0.1. conservation since they believed agroforestry increases soil Data were collected through face-to-face interview using fertility, retains water, maintains, and improves the sur- a pre-prepared questionnaire. Te sample size was con- rounding as well for medical purposes, and this practice can strained by limited resources but since the variation in occur at a wide range of felds and farms to landscape [6]. agroforestry practice was expected to be small among In addition to the production of food and goods to households in the study site, we assumed that the size of sustain rural livelihoods, tropical landscape management sample would give precise output. Field observations were also contributes to the conservation of biodiversity [13]. also made to evaluate agroforestry practices in the area. On- According to [13], agroforestry preserves, most probably, farm trees were identifed and counted. much more of the (usually forest-bound) biodiversity than Te diversity of tree and shrub species was measured would the conversion of forests to nonforest agricultural using the Shannon–Weiner diversity index (H′). systems. At the same time, there may be an economic beneft in maintaining high biodiversity; hence, many benefcial H � − 􏽘 pi(ln pi), (2) ecological functions in an agricultural system. Experimental i�1 evidence from temperate-region grassland systems sustains this idea since it showed a benefcial efect of biodiversity on where H′ is Shannon–Weiner diversity index, S is the biomass production [14]. richness of species i, pi is the ratio of the number of in- Mukura Sector is located near Huye town and supplies dividuals of a species (n), and the total number of individuals most of its farm produce to the latter. Nearness to the town (N) (or n/N) [20]. plus small land holding per household has led to intensive A similarity index was used to test how similar or dis- agriculture [15] and land consequently; most trees planting similar the diferent cells of Mukura Sector were in terms of in the area is done on-farm in diferent forms of agrofor- on-farm trees. For this purpose, Sørensen’s index [21] was estry. Rarely trees are planted in woodlots and this keeps tree applied as follows: cover in the area to be very low or insignifcant. Like in many 2a (3) areas in the country, agroforestry trees play a signifcant role S � , 2a + b + c in providing wood products for various uses as well as household income by selling tree products [12]. where a � the number of species shared between agroforestry Despite the numerous advantages of agroforestry, little is system types of a given pair of cells in Mukura Sector, b � the known about the contribution of agroforestry to the im- number of species present only in a certain cell, and c � the provement of rural livelihoods for people who practice it for number of species present only in another cell among the a long time [16]. Te value of agroforestry may vary two cells being compared. Since the sector has four cells, six depending on agroecology, socio-economy, and socio- such comparisons were made. cultural status of practitioners [17]. Terefore, the impera- tive aim of this study was to evaluate agroforestry practice in 2.3. Data Analysis. Te Quantum Geographic Information terms of the practice itself, the benefts and its contribution System 3.24.0 was used for map extraction and location of to on-farm diversity as an environmental conservation Mukura Sector and the cells where data were collected. strategy in Mukura sector, Huye district in southern Species and survey data were summarized using Excel. Rwanda. 3. Results 2. Materials and Methods In this research we found out that the sex ratio of household 2.1. Site Description. Mukura sector is located in Huye respondents engaged in agroforestry was 52% men and 48% District, Southern Province, Rwanda (latitude: 2 39′37″S women (Figure 2) and most of all respondents were engaged and longitude: 29 44′48″E) [18]. Mukura sector covers an in agriculture. About 40% of the respondents were aged area of 28.14 km , having a population census of 20,191 between 30 and 40 years. Tose in the age class 40–50 were (2012) with 717.5/km population density (2012) [18, 19]. 28% while the third largest class was 20–30 years with 18%. Te remaining 16% was in the old age (50–70 years) 2.2. Field Data Collection. For data collection, four cells, (Figure 3). namely, Rango A, Bukomeye, Buvumo, and Icyeru of In Mukura Sector, 62% of the population acquired land Mukura Sector were selected at random. From each of the through inheritance, 30% purchased it and only 7% rented four cells, two villages were chosen also at random to the land on which they carryout agricultural practices International Journal of Forestry Research 3 29.703°E 29.734°E 29.766°E 0.901°S 1.351°S 1.802°S 2.649°S 2.252°S 2.703°S W E 2.680°S Households distribution Sampled villages Visited cells 0 1.75 3.5 km Kivu Lake Huye district Province_Boundary 29.703°E 29.734°E 29.766°E Figure 1: Location of the four cells where data were collected in Mukura Sector, Huye District, southern Rwanda. diversifcation as the main benefts obtained. Tey also in- tercrop diferent agroforestry tree species with crops on their farmlands for soil fertility improvement and for pro- visioning of food, fodder, and poles, as well as for income diversifcation (Figure 8). While some farmers practice agroforestry as their main agricultural occupation, others do not integrate crops with trees but rather separate them. Te interaction of trees with crops in Mukura Sector was found to be positive where it increased productivity and enhanced soil fertility. Te proportion of respondents reporting negative tree efects on Male (%) crop was very small (Figure 9). Te low rate of adoption of Female (%) agroforestry practice was attributed to the lack of seedlings, Figure 2: Te gender participation of the respondents in agro- inadequate extension services, and the lack of land forestry in Mukura Sector, Huye district, Rwanda. (Figure 10). (Figure 4). Ten on-farm woody species were identifed in 3.1. On-Farm Woody Species Diversity. Ten woody species Mukura Sector (Figure 5). It was evident that farmers were identifed across the four cells of Mukura Sector and practice agroforestry and use diferent technologies such as most of them were present in all cells except Cymphomandra boundary planting, home garden, scattered trees on farm, betacea, Leucaena diversifolia, and Persea americana. and woodlot for diferent purposes (Figure 6). Cymphomamdra betacea was missing in Buvumo and Cyeru It was observed that 60% of the farmers in Mukura cells; L. diversifolia in Buvumo; and P. american in Rango A, Sector intercropped food crops with agroforestry trees Buvumo, and Bukomeye Cells (Table 1). (Figure 7). Farmers who practiced agroforestry reported Te diversity of ten on-farm woody species identifed a number of products and services that they get from ag- in the four cells of Mukura Sector is shown in Table 2. roforestry (Figure 8). Of those practicing agroforestry, fve Using the Shannon index formula, it was observed that main benefts were identifed in the study area. In Buko- Grevillea robusta had the highest diversity in Rango A cell, meye, respondents identifed food and fruits and income Mukura sector, followed by Calliandra calothyrsus, Persea 28.829°E 28.829°E 29.279°E 29.279°E 29.730°E 29.730°E 30.180°E 30.180°E 30.631°E 30.631°E 4 International Journal of Forestry Research 20-30 30-40 40-50 50-60 60-70 70-80 Age class (years) Figure 3: Te age groups of the respondents in Mukura Sector, Huye, southern Rwanda. 18 18 4 3 1 1 Bukomeye Buvumo Cyeru Rango A Inherited Purchase Rent Figure 4: Te land ownership of the respondents in the four cells of Mukura Sector, Huye District, Rwanda. americana, and Mangifera indica consecutively. Carica of respondents were male and 35% were female in Bugarama papaya and Cedrela serrata had equal diversity, followed Sector, south-western Rwanda, whereas 67% and 33% w male by Cymphomandrabetacea and Eucalyptus camaldulensis and of female in Busogo, northern Rwanda, respectively. also with the same diversity in Rango A. Markamia lutea Burnett J.E. [21] reported the same proportion as 75.4 male had the least diversity in Rango A among the agroforestry and 24.6% females in Musebeya area, Nyamagabe district, tree species planted in that Cell (Table 2). southern Rwanda. Te ratio is also less than the national average, reported to be 70.3% male and 29.7% female [23]. Te variability in men-women proportions in Rwanda is not 4. Discussion unexpected since the 1994 genocide against Tutsi afected the community at diferent rates in diferent areas across the Demographic characteristics of the study sites of 52% male country [24]. Diferent communes had diferent intensities of and 48% female is lower than the one observed in other areas genocide and this afected sex ratio diferently [25]. in Rwanda. Tacher et al. [22] havereported that 65 and 35% Proportion of age group International Journal of Forestry Research 5 7 7 6 6 6 44 4 4 4 33 3333 22 2 11 1 Bukomeye Buvumo Cyeru Rango A CC GR CP LD CS MI CB ML EC PA Figure 5: On-farm woody species identifed in Mukura Sector, Huye District, southern Rwanda. Key: the letters denote the following tree species: CC: Calliandra calothyrsus, CP Carica papaya, Cedrela serrata, CB: Cymphomandra betecea, EC: Eucalyptus camaldulensis, GR: Grevillea robusta, LD: Leucaena diversifolia, MI: Mangifera indica, ML: Markhamia lutea and PA: Persea americana. 9 9 7 777 7 6 6 6 5 5 5 Bukomeye Buvumo Cyeru Rango A Home garden Scattered trees Woodlot Boundary planting Figure 6: Agroforestry technologies practiced by farmers in Mukura Sector, Huye District, southern Rwanda. 4.1. Similarity/Dissimilarity of Agroforestry Species in Dif- has been encouraged by the high population growth rates ferent Cells. Tere were no signifcant diferences (p > 0.05) and the nature of policies on land property rights [26]. between Sørensen’s similarity index in the four cells of Te woody species identifed in the diferent agro- Mukura Sector (Figure 11). Te indices were reasonably high ecological systems in Rwanda are varied. Gracia-Barrios, and ranged from 0.670 to 0.880. L. et al. [27] reported nine agroforestry woody species in Te active involvement of the young farmers in agro- Busogo Sector, northern Rwanda and six in Bugarama forestry presents strength. Tis agrees with the literature. Sector, south-western Rwanda. Seven on-farm woody spe- Umuhoza, E. et al. [26] explain that young people tend to cies were identifed across six agroecological zones of adopt new technologies easier and faster than the old. Te Rwanda [17]. Gracia-Barrios, L. et al. [27] reported a more elderly in Rwanda also adopt agroforestry because it sup- diversifes situation in Musebeya Sector, Nyamagabe District with 12 woody species and even a bigger number (14 woody ports livelihoods by providing wood products and income and protects fragile environment to ensure sustainable land spp.) was reported in Mpanga Sector, Kirehe District, productivity [17]. eastern Rwanda [28]. Such variation can be a result of Te observed land ownership pattern is in commensu- combined attributes such as edaphic and weather condi- rate with fndings elsewhere in Rwanda and in other areas tions, farmers’ awareness, which may result from exposure with high population density and consequently small to extension services, and availability of seedlings among landholdings per household. Land fragmentation in Rwanda others. Proportion of onfarm tree spp Spatial arrangement of on- farm trees 6 International Journal of Forestry Research 20 20 Bukomeye Buvumo Cyeru RangoA Agroforestry Crops only Figure 7: Te proportions of farmers practicing agroforestry or not in the four cells of Mukura Sector, Huye District, southern Rwanda. 8 8 7 777 55 5 5 5 5 5 4 44 4 4 Bukomeye Buvumo Cyeru Rango A Fodder & foliage Stakes for climbing beans Food and fruits Timber and poles Income diversification Figure 8: Te benefts of agroforestry reported by farmers in Mukura Sector, Huye District, southern Rwanda. Te observed low adoption rate of agroforestry practice Te four on-farm tree spatial arrangements and the benefts observed in this study are common in all agro- is not unexpected since with small or hired land holdings, ecological zones with slight diferences in some places [17]. growing long-term crops such as trees may hardly be pri- A range of products and services provided by on-farm trees oritized. It has been reported that the adoption of agro- reported here are also reported in other agroecological zones forestry is positively correlated with land size [31–33]. A of the country and elsewhere [22, 27]. Trees in crop felds positive relationship between secure tenure and tree planting work as insurance in case of sudden crop failure or to on-farm has been reported [34]. Additionally, land renting support crops against environmental hazards and also to has been observed to discourage eforts to tree planting like provide extra income [29]. Terefore, agroforestry is largely any other long-term projects [35]. Also, insufcient tech- evolved with sustainability concerns, resiliency, and nical knowhow for agroforestry implementation may ac- diversity [30]. count for the low adoption [36]. Exposure to extension Proportion of farming type Proportions of benefits of agroforestry International Journal of Forestry Research 7 8 8 000 000 Bukomeye Buvumo Cyeru Rango A Competition for nutrients Increase productivity Decrease productivity Soil fertility improvement Figure 9: Efects of tree-crop interactions reported by farmers in Mukura sector, Huye District, southern Rwanda. 11 11 10 10 88 88 6 6 33 3 Bukomeye Buvumo Cyeru Rango A Shortage of seedlings Limited extension services Land shortage Stealing seedlings Figure 10: Te challenges farmers face in practicing agroforestry in Mukura sector, Huye District, southern Rwanda. Table 1: Presence or absence of ten on-farm woody species identifed in the four cells of Mukura Sector, Huye District, southern Rwanda. Cell Species Rango A Bukomeye Buvumo Cyeru ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ Calliandra calothyrsus ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ Carica papaya ∗ ∗ ∗ Cedrela serrata — ∗ ∗ Cyphomandra betacea — — ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ Eucalyptus camaldulensis ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ Grevillea robusta ∗ ∗ ∗ Leucaena diversifolia — ∗ ∗ Mangifera indica — — ∗ ∗ Markhamia lutea — — Persea americana — — — And and—denote presence or absence, respectively, of a particular species in a given cell. Proportion of challenges in practicing Proportions of tree crop-interaction agroforestry 8 International Journal of Forestry Research Table 2: Te diversity of agroforestry tree species in the four cells of Mukura Sector, Huye District, southern Rwanda. Cell Tree species Average Bukomeye Buvumo Cyeru Rango A Calliandra calothyrsus 0.660 0.680 0.650 0.690 Carica papaya 0.700 0.590 0.660 0.610 Cedrala serrata 0.620 0.530 0.001 0.410 Cyphoomandra betacea 0.200 0.001 0.001 0.260 Eucalyptus camaldulensis 0.420 0.170 0.510 0.540 Grevillea robusta 0.540 0.510 0.510 0.590 Leucaena diversifolia 0.420 0.001 0.460 0.260 Mangifera indica 0.001 0.410 0.001 0.410 Markhamia lutea 0.001 0.680 0.001 0.190 Persea americana 0.001 0.001 0.680 0.001 Shannon-Weiner index (H′) 3.570 3.590 3.480 3.980 3.660 0.88 0.88 0.9 0.77 0.8 0.71 0.67 0.67 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 Rango A vs Rango A vs Rango A vs Buvumo vs Buvumo vs Bukomeye Buvumo Bukomeye Cyeru Bukomeye Cyeru vs Cyeru Figure 11: Sorensen’s similarity indices obtained through comparisons of on-farm woody plants found in four cells in Mukura Sector, Huye District, southern Rwanda. agents has been reported to lead to higher adoption aimed at increasing trees’ benefcial efects can sometimes rates [37]. also enhance trees’ competitiveness; (iii) the interplay be- Te efect of intercropping trees with annual crops, as tween positive and negative efects of trees change- has been demonstrated in this study, presents varied per- sometimes signifcantly. ceptions by diferent farmers, and is usually a complex Te observed on-farm tree diversity between cells of phenomenon. Trees being big plants occupy large space Mukura Sector in this study is higher than that observed in thereby competing with crops for space. Owing to their big some other sites in Rwanda. Uwera et al. (in press) reported crowns and far reaching lateral roots compete for light and a Shannon–Weiner diversity index of 1.2 in Bugarama, soil water and nutrients to reduce crop yield when trees and south-western Rwanda and 1.33 in Busogo, northern Rwanda. Basing on environmental conditions, the study site crops are grown in close proximity [38, 39]. On the other hand, trees may demonstrate a facilitative role thereby in- is potentially in between the other two sites and one would crease yields of the crops intergrown with them or grown expect the index to be about the average of the other sites next to them. Examples may include those reported in Kenya although it presented a higher diversity index value. As seen by [40] and Uganda by [41]. above however, on-farm tree planting is a complex, un- Waldron, A. et al. [42] and [43]explain the interspecifc predictable practice varying depending on many factors interaction and facilitation between plants, how these in- including the environment or agroecology [42], socio- teract under diferent environmental resource conditions economic and socio-cultural aspects [44], and others. and how this impose trade-ofs, biophysical limitations, and management requirements in tree-crop mixtures. Tey state 5. Conclusion that, in introducing trees in croplands to promote low-input sustainable agroforestry systems is a challenging un- It was observed that agroforestry in Mukura Sector is dertaking due the following reasons: (i) trees provide useful practiced by about 60% of the farmers, others being con- products for smallholders and strongly facilitate crops but strained by the small land size, land tenure, ignorance, can also exert stronger competitive efects; (ii) practices unavailability of tree seedlings, and the avoidance of tree Sorensen's similarity index International Journal of Forestry Research 9 high - income countries: a systematic map protocol,” Envi- competition. With proper advice, the worries on the efects ronmental Evidence, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 24–16, 2018. of tree efects on crops may not hold since certain tree [6] C. Bucagu, B. Vanlauwe, M. T. Van Wijk, and K. E. Giller, species facilitate crop production and small land holdings “Assessing farmers’ interest in agroforestry in two contrasting may not be an issue. Agroforestry practice is important in agro-ecological zones of Rwanda,” Agroforestry Systems, intensively cultivated cropping systems to keep soil carbon vol. 87, no. 1, pp. 141–158, 2012. high to ensure sustainability. [7] D. R. Mukankomeje, “practical tools on agroforestry rwanda Ten woody species were observed to grow on farm, environment,” Rwanda Environment Management Authority providing varied products such as timber, frewood, food Government OF Rwanda, vol. 6, 2010. and fodder, and stakes for climbing beans plus income. On- [8] S. R. McLain, Lawry, M. R. Guariguata, and J. Reed, “Toward farm tree diversity was observed to be higher than several a tenure-responsive approach to forest landscape restoration: other sites in Rwanda. Te diversity of woody plants in a proposed tenure diagnostic for assessing restoration op- diferent cells of Mukura Sector did not vary signifcantly as portunities,” Land Use Policy, vol. 104, Article ID 103748. demonstrated by reasonably high indices of similarity [9] M. Verdone and A. Seidl, “Time, space, place and the Bonn between cells. challenge global forest restoration target,” Restoration Ecol- We recommend that eforts be made to reinforce ex- ogy, vol. 25, no. 6, pp. 903–911, 2017. tension services to improve farmers’ awareness on the [10] IUCN, “Te bonn challenge: catalysing leadership in latin america,” IUCN Forest Brief, vol. 14, p. 2, 2017. contribution of agroforestry on their social wellbeing. Ways [11] C. D. Biggelaar and M. A. Gold, “Development of utility and of making seedlings available for planting should also be location indices for classifying agroforestry species: the case of explored. Rwanda,” Agroforestry Systems, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 229–246, Data Availability [12] L. Norgrove and J. Beck, “Biodiversity function and resilience in tropical agroforestry systems including shifting cultiva- All the data used to support the fndings of this study are tion,” Curr. Forestry Rep, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 62–80, 2016. included in this article. [13] D. Tilman, P. B. Reich, J. Knops, D. Wedin, T. Mielke, and C. Lehman, “Diversity and productivity in a long-term Conflicts of Interest grassland experiment,” Science, vol. 294, no. 5543, pp. 843– 845, 2001. Te authors declare that there are no known conficts of [14] C. Bizimana, W. L. Nieuwoudt, and S. R. D. Ferrer, “Farm size, interest to the best of their knowledge. land fragmentation and economic efciency in southern Rwanda,” Agrekon, vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 244–262, 2004. Acknowledgments [15] E. Ndalama and E. Missanjo, “Agroforestry contribution to the improvement of rural community livelihoods in balaka , Tis work was conducted primarily as student fnal year Malawi,” Forestry and Horticulture, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 5–11, research project of the frst two authors. Te authors would like to thank the Government of Rwanda for granting [16] M. Iiyama, A. Mukuralinda, J. D. Ndayambaje et al., “Tree- bursary to the candidates and the University of Rwanda for Based ecosystem approaches ( TBEAs ) as multi-functional training the candidates and supporting this study in par- land management strategies — evidence from Rwanda,” Sustainability, vol. 10, no. 5, p. 1360, 2018. ticular. Te authors are indebted to thanking all the local [17] National Institute of Statistics of Rwanda (NISR), Fourth leaders and farmers in the study area who provided their Population and Housing Census, Rwanda, 2012, Ministry of time and information that was sought to implement this Finance and Economic Planning, Kigali, Rwanda, 2012. study. Te study was indirectly funded by the Government [18] K. D. Salami, R. B. Shuaibu, V. A. J. Adekunle, and of Rwanda by providing scholarship to the frst two authors. J. D. Ogunsola, “Comparative analysis of density, diversity and similarity of forest tree species in three selected states of References northern Nigeria,” Journalof Research For Wild.& Environ- ment, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 111–124, 2021. [1] FAO and ICRAF, Agroforestry and Tenure, Forestry Working [19] T. Sørensen, “A method of establishing groups of equal Paper No. 8, Rome, 2019. amplitude in plant sociology based on similarity of species [2] A. Tiwari, S. K. Verma, and O. P. Rao, “Efect of fertilizers on content,” Biol. Skr.., K. danske Vidensk. Selsk, vol. 5, no. 4, curcuma longa L. (Turmeric) growth under agri-silvi-horti pp. 1–34, 1948. system in sodic soil,” Industria Farmac´eutica, vol. 141, no. 2, [20] P. Kiyani, J. Andoh, Y. Lee, and D. K. Lee, “Benefts and pp. 183–188, 2015. challenges of agroforestry adoption: a case of Musebeya [3] B. Abdulhamid, E. Abubakar, and S. Dawaki, “An assessment sector, Nyamagabe District in southern province of Rwanda,” of potential contributions of agroforestry to food security in Forest Science and Technology, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 174–180, Katsina, Sudan Savannah Area, Nigeria,” Current Life Sci- ences, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 39–46, 2017. [21] J. E. Burnet, “Gender balance and the meanings of women in [4] C. K. Ong and B. M. Swallow, “Water productivity in forestry governance in post-genocide Rwanda,” African Afairs, and agroforestry,” Limits and Opportunities for Improvement, vol. 107, no. 428, pp. 361–386, 2008. vol. 1, pp. 217–228, 2003. [5] S. E. Brown, D. C. Miller, P. J. Ordonez, and K. Baylis, [22] T. Tacher, D. R. Lee, and J. W. Schelhas, “Farmers’ partic- ipation in reforestation incentives programme in Costra “Evidence for the impacts of agroforestry on agricultural productivity , ecosystem services , and human well - being in Rica,” Agroforestry Systems, vol. 35, pp. 269–286, 1997. 10 International Journal of Forestry Research [23] G. La Mattina, “When all the good men are gone: sex ratio and with crops in the highlands of Uganda,” Agroforestry Systems, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 185–203, 1994. domestic violence in post-genocide rwanda,” 2012, https:// www.bu.edu/econ/fles/2012/11/dp223.pdf. [40] J. Bayala, J. Sanou, Z. Teklehaimanot et al., “Advances in knowledge of processes in soil–tree–crop interactions in [24] B. Nkamleu and M. Manyong, “Factors afecting the adoption of agroforestry practices by farmers in Cameroon,” Small- parkland systems in the West African Sahel: a review,” Ag- riculture, Ecosystems & Environment, vol. 205, pp. 25–35, scale Forest Economics, Management and Policy, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 135–148, 2005. [41] C. K. Ong, R. M. Kho, and S. Radersma, “Ecological in- [25] K. Kraehnert, T. Bruck, ¨ M. Di Maio, and R. Nistico, ` “Te teractions in multispecies agroecosystems,” in Belowground Efects of confict on fertility: evidence from the Genocide in Interactions in Tropical Agroecosystems: Concepts and Models Rwanda,” Demography, vol. 56, no. 3, pp. 935–968, 2019. with Multiple Plant Components, M. Van Noordwijk, [26] E. Umuhoza, C. P. Mugunga, and A. William, “Farmers’ G. Cadisch, and C. K. Ong, Eds., CAB International, Wall- perception and adoption of agroforestry technologies in ingford, UK, 2004. eastern rwanda,” Journal of Ecology and the natural envi- [42] A. Waldron, D. Garrity, Y. Malhi, C. Girardin, D. C. Miller, ronment, vol. 2023, Article ID 5439171, 2023. and N. Seddon, “Agroforestry can enhance food security while [27] L. Garcia-Barrios and C. K. Ong, “Ecological interactions, meeting other sustainable development Goals,” Tropical management lessons and design tools in tropical agroforestry Conservation Science, vol. 10, 2017. systems,” Agroforestry Systems, vol. 61-62, no. 1-3, pp. 221– [43] J. Bayala, J. Sanou, Z. Teklehaimanot, S. Ouedraogo, 236, 2004. A. Kalinganire, and R. Coe, “Advances in knowledge of [28] H. Uwera, C. P. Mugunga, and M. Mukangango, “Assessing processes in soil-tree-crop interactions in parkland systems of agroforestry practices, tree diversity, uses and carbon se- west African Sahel: a review,” Agriculture, Ecosystems & questration potential in two contrasting agro-ecological zones Environment, vol. 205, pp. 25–35, 2015. of Rwanda,” Te Forestist Journal, vol. 73, 2022. [44] E. D. Glover, B. A. Hassan, and M. K. Glover, “Analysis of [29] A. Adesina and J. Chianu, “Determinants of farmers’ adoption socio-economic conditions infuencing adoption of agrofor- of alley farming technology in Nigeria,” Agroforestry Systems, estry practices,” International Journal of Agriculture and vol. 55, no. 2, pp. 99–112, 2002. Forestry, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 178–184, 2013. [30] E. Kuntashula, O. Ajayi, D. Phiri, P. Mafongoya, and S. Franzel, Factors Afecting Farmers’ Decision to Plant Im- proved Fallows: A Study in Four Villages in the Eastern Province of Zambia, Province of Zambia, Lusaka, Zambia, [31] J. Peterson, Ethnographic Decision Trees and Improved Fallows in Eastern Province of Zambia. Gender and Soil Fertility in Africa, Collaborative Research Support Programme (CRSP), Nairobi, Kenya, 1999. [32] M. A. Gahutu and L. Nahayo, “Impact assessment of agro- forestry practices on community socio-economic livelihoods in Rwanda,” International Journal of Environmental and Agriculture Research (IJOEAR), vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 59–71, 2020. [33] ICRAF, Agroforestry, A Decade of Development, Nairobi, Kenya, 1987. [34] G. A. Stainback, M. Masozera, A. Mukuralinda, and P. Dwivedi, “Smallholder agroforestry in Rwanda: a SWO- T-AHP analysis,” Small-Scale Forestry, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 285–300, 2011. [35] B. H. Pandit, K. K. Shrestha, and S. S. Bhattarai, “Sustainable local livelihoods through enhancing agroforestry systems in Nepal,” Journal of Forest and Livelihood, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 47–63, 2014. [36] C. P. Mugunga, K. E. Giller, and G. M. J. Mohren, “Tree-crop interactions in maize-eucalypt woodlot systems in southern Rwanda,” European Journal of Agronomy, vol. 86, pp. 78–86, [37] A. Nsabimana, F. Niyitanga, D. D. Weatherspoon, and A. Naseem, “Land policy and food prices: evidence from a land consolidation program in Rwanda,” Journal of Agri- cultural & Food Industrial Organization, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 63–73, 2021. [38] C. W. Muthuri, C. K. Ong, C. R. Black, V. Ngumi, and B. M. Mati, “Tree and crop productivity in Grevillea, Alnus and Paulownia-based agroforestry system in semi arid Kenya,” Forest Ecology and Management, vol. 212, no. 1-3, pp. 23–39, 2006. [39] J. Okorio, S. Byenkya, N. Wajja, and D. Peden, “Comparative performance of seventeen upperstorey tree species associated http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png International Journal of Forestry Research Hindawi Publishing Corporation

The Assessment of Agroforestry Practices in Mukura Sector, Huye District, Southern Rwanda

Download PDF
10 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/hindawi-publishing-corporation/the-assessment-of-agroforestry-practices-in-mukura-sector-huye-zzB0kJbdoH

References (43)

Publisher
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
ISSN
1687-9368
eISSN
1687-9376
DOI
10.1155/2023/2288114
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Hindawi International Journal of Forestry Research Volume 2023, Article ID 2288114, 10 pages https://doi.org/10.1155/2023/2288114 Research Article The Assessment of Agroforestry Practices in Mukura Sector, Huye District, Southern Rwanda Doreen Mukoobwa , Benitha Zaninka , and Canisius Patrick Mugunga Te Department of Forestry & Nature Conservation, College of Agriculture, Animal Sciences & Veterinary Medicine, University of Rwanda, P.O. Box 117, Huye, Rwanda Correspondence should be addressed to Canisius Patrick Mugunga; mugungacp@gmail.com Received 22 August 2022; Revised 29 November 2022; Accepted 28 March 2023; Published 25 April 2023 Academic Editor: Ahmad A. Omar Copyright © 2023 Doreen Mukoobwa et al. Tis is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Agroforestry has the potential to contribute to the improvement of household livelihood, since its various forms ofer multiple alternatives and opportunities to farmers. Tis study assessed agroforestry practice in Mukura sector, Huye district, Rwanda. A sample of 100 households was selected by stage sampling, randomly choosing four cells and two villages per cell in Mukura Sector. Face-to-face interview was dispensed to household heads, and data were collected on agroforestry practices, on-farm tree species, tree spatial arrangements, tree products, and the adoption rate. Woody species diversity and similarity were determined by using Shannon–Weiner diversity and Sørensen’s indices, respectively. Sixty percent of the farmers practiced agroforestry. Ten woody species were observed to grow on farm, providing varied products of timber, frewood, food and fodder, stakes for climbing beans, and income. Low adoption of agroforestry practice was reported resulting from small land, land tenure, ignorance, unavailability of tree seedlings, and the avoidance of tree-crop competition. On-farm tree diversity was observed to be higher than several other sites in Rwanda. Te diferent cells of Mukura Sector grow the same woody species on the farms as demonstrated by reasonably high indices of similarity. We recommend that eforts be made to reinforce extension services to improve farmers’ awareness on the contribution of agroforestry to their social wellbeing. Ways of making seedlings available for planting should also be explored. people’s livelihoods as also the economic growth is set back 1. Introduction [4, 5]. In accordance with Rwanda’s agroecologies and socio- Agroforestry is the combination of agricultural and forestry economic situation, agroforestry as a strategic way has been technologies to create integrated, diverse, and productive adopted and actively implemented to enhance food security land use systems. It is the land use system in which woody for sustainable livelihood support and landscape restoration. perennials (trees, shrubs, palms, and bamboos) are de- Te systems provide a variety of products and services which liberately used on the same land management unit as ag- are very essential to people [6, 7]. ricultural crops (woody or annual), animals or both, in some Today, agroforestry is an important element in the Bonn form of spatial arrangement or temporal sequence [1, 2]. It is Challenge [8, 9], with the global ambition to restore 150 also defned by [3] as a sustainable land management system million hectares of the world’s deforested and degraded land which constitutes the overall yield of the land, combines the by 2020 and 350 million hectares by 2030 [10, 11]. To production of crops plus tree crops and forest plants and/or contribute to this, a country with very limited land like animals simultaneously or sequentially, on the same unit of Rwanda will not do without intensifying on-farm tree land and applies management practices that are compatible planting. Planting many trees on the farm will not only with the cultural practices of the local population. increase on-farm tree populations but also several benefts Presently, land degradation and natural resource di- obtained from these trees [10]. Agroforestry plays a great sasters are prevailing as environmental problems that afect role in improving present and future food security globally 2 International Journal of Forestry Research as trees have an integral part of food security strategies of constitute a total of eight sample villages (Figure 1). By using rural people for so long [3]. Also, it enhances several key Yamane’s formula and applying 0.1 as the error margin, the environment-related Sustainable Development Goals sample size was taken as 100 respondents. (SDGs) [11]. Agroforestry has long been part of Rwandan farming n � , (1) 􏽨1 + N(α) 􏽩 systems as farmers have always planted trees for food and fruits, timber, fuel, poles, fodder, stakes for climbing beans, where n: sample size, N: population size, and α: the precision and shade for livestock [12]. Tey planted trees for soil sampling error as 10% � 0.1. conservation since they believed agroforestry increases soil Data were collected through face-to-face interview using fertility, retains water, maintains, and improves the sur- a pre-prepared questionnaire. Te sample size was con- rounding as well for medical purposes, and this practice can strained by limited resources but since the variation in occur at a wide range of felds and farms to landscape [6]. agroforestry practice was expected to be small among In addition to the production of food and goods to households in the study site, we assumed that the size of sustain rural livelihoods, tropical landscape management sample would give precise output. Field observations were also contributes to the conservation of biodiversity [13]. also made to evaluate agroforestry practices in the area. On- According to [13], agroforestry preserves, most probably, farm trees were identifed and counted. much more of the (usually forest-bound) biodiversity than Te diversity of tree and shrub species was measured would the conversion of forests to nonforest agricultural using the Shannon–Weiner diversity index (H′). systems. At the same time, there may be an economic beneft in maintaining high biodiversity; hence, many benefcial H � − 􏽘 pi(ln pi), (2) ecological functions in an agricultural system. Experimental i�1 evidence from temperate-region grassland systems sustains this idea since it showed a benefcial efect of biodiversity on where H′ is Shannon–Weiner diversity index, S is the biomass production [14]. richness of species i, pi is the ratio of the number of in- Mukura Sector is located near Huye town and supplies dividuals of a species (n), and the total number of individuals most of its farm produce to the latter. Nearness to the town (N) (or n/N) [20]. plus small land holding per household has led to intensive A similarity index was used to test how similar or dis- agriculture [15] and land consequently; most trees planting similar the diferent cells of Mukura Sector were in terms of in the area is done on-farm in diferent forms of agrofor- on-farm trees. For this purpose, Sørensen’s index [21] was estry. Rarely trees are planted in woodlots and this keeps tree applied as follows: cover in the area to be very low or insignifcant. Like in many 2a (3) areas in the country, agroforestry trees play a signifcant role S � , 2a + b + c in providing wood products for various uses as well as household income by selling tree products [12]. where a � the number of species shared between agroforestry Despite the numerous advantages of agroforestry, little is system types of a given pair of cells in Mukura Sector, b � the known about the contribution of agroforestry to the im- number of species present only in a certain cell, and c � the provement of rural livelihoods for people who practice it for number of species present only in another cell among the a long time [16]. Te value of agroforestry may vary two cells being compared. Since the sector has four cells, six depending on agroecology, socio-economy, and socio- such comparisons were made. cultural status of practitioners [17]. Terefore, the impera- tive aim of this study was to evaluate agroforestry practice in 2.3. Data Analysis. Te Quantum Geographic Information terms of the practice itself, the benefts and its contribution System 3.24.0 was used for map extraction and location of to on-farm diversity as an environmental conservation Mukura Sector and the cells where data were collected. strategy in Mukura sector, Huye district in southern Species and survey data were summarized using Excel. Rwanda. 3. Results 2. Materials and Methods In this research we found out that the sex ratio of household 2.1. Site Description. Mukura sector is located in Huye respondents engaged in agroforestry was 52% men and 48% District, Southern Province, Rwanda (latitude: 2 39′37″S women (Figure 2) and most of all respondents were engaged and longitude: 29 44′48″E) [18]. Mukura sector covers an in agriculture. About 40% of the respondents were aged area of 28.14 km , having a population census of 20,191 between 30 and 40 years. Tose in the age class 40–50 were (2012) with 717.5/km population density (2012) [18, 19]. 28% while the third largest class was 20–30 years with 18%. Te remaining 16% was in the old age (50–70 years) 2.2. Field Data Collection. For data collection, four cells, (Figure 3). namely, Rango A, Bukomeye, Buvumo, and Icyeru of In Mukura Sector, 62% of the population acquired land Mukura Sector were selected at random. From each of the through inheritance, 30% purchased it and only 7% rented four cells, two villages were chosen also at random to the land on which they carryout agricultural practices International Journal of Forestry Research 3 29.703°E 29.734°E 29.766°E 0.901°S 1.351°S 1.802°S 2.649°S 2.252°S 2.703°S W E 2.680°S Households distribution Sampled villages Visited cells 0 1.75 3.5 km Kivu Lake Huye district Province_Boundary 29.703°E 29.734°E 29.766°E Figure 1: Location of the four cells where data were collected in Mukura Sector, Huye District, southern Rwanda. diversifcation as the main benefts obtained. Tey also in- tercrop diferent agroforestry tree species with crops on their farmlands for soil fertility improvement and for pro- visioning of food, fodder, and poles, as well as for income diversifcation (Figure 8). While some farmers practice agroforestry as their main agricultural occupation, others do not integrate crops with trees but rather separate them. Te interaction of trees with crops in Mukura Sector was found to be positive where it increased productivity and enhanced soil fertility. Te proportion of respondents reporting negative tree efects on Male (%) crop was very small (Figure 9). Te low rate of adoption of Female (%) agroforestry practice was attributed to the lack of seedlings, Figure 2: Te gender participation of the respondents in agro- inadequate extension services, and the lack of land forestry in Mukura Sector, Huye district, Rwanda. (Figure 10). (Figure 4). Ten on-farm woody species were identifed in 3.1. On-Farm Woody Species Diversity. Ten woody species Mukura Sector (Figure 5). It was evident that farmers were identifed across the four cells of Mukura Sector and practice agroforestry and use diferent technologies such as most of them were present in all cells except Cymphomandra boundary planting, home garden, scattered trees on farm, betacea, Leucaena diversifolia, and Persea americana. and woodlot for diferent purposes (Figure 6). Cymphomamdra betacea was missing in Buvumo and Cyeru It was observed that 60% of the farmers in Mukura cells; L. diversifolia in Buvumo; and P. american in Rango A, Sector intercropped food crops with agroforestry trees Buvumo, and Bukomeye Cells (Table 1). (Figure 7). Farmers who practiced agroforestry reported Te diversity of ten on-farm woody species identifed a number of products and services that they get from ag- in the four cells of Mukura Sector is shown in Table 2. roforestry (Figure 8). Of those practicing agroforestry, fve Using the Shannon index formula, it was observed that main benefts were identifed in the study area. In Buko- Grevillea robusta had the highest diversity in Rango A cell, meye, respondents identifed food and fruits and income Mukura sector, followed by Calliandra calothyrsus, Persea 28.829°E 28.829°E 29.279°E 29.279°E 29.730°E 29.730°E 30.180°E 30.180°E 30.631°E 30.631°E 4 International Journal of Forestry Research 20-30 30-40 40-50 50-60 60-70 70-80 Age class (years) Figure 3: Te age groups of the respondents in Mukura Sector, Huye, southern Rwanda. 18 18 4 3 1 1 Bukomeye Buvumo Cyeru Rango A Inherited Purchase Rent Figure 4: Te land ownership of the respondents in the four cells of Mukura Sector, Huye District, Rwanda. americana, and Mangifera indica consecutively. Carica of respondents were male and 35% were female in Bugarama papaya and Cedrela serrata had equal diversity, followed Sector, south-western Rwanda, whereas 67% and 33% w male by Cymphomandrabetacea and Eucalyptus camaldulensis and of female in Busogo, northern Rwanda, respectively. also with the same diversity in Rango A. Markamia lutea Burnett J.E. [21] reported the same proportion as 75.4 male had the least diversity in Rango A among the agroforestry and 24.6% females in Musebeya area, Nyamagabe district, tree species planted in that Cell (Table 2). southern Rwanda. Te ratio is also less than the national average, reported to be 70.3% male and 29.7% female [23]. Te variability in men-women proportions in Rwanda is not 4. Discussion unexpected since the 1994 genocide against Tutsi afected the community at diferent rates in diferent areas across the Demographic characteristics of the study sites of 52% male country [24]. Diferent communes had diferent intensities of and 48% female is lower than the one observed in other areas genocide and this afected sex ratio diferently [25]. in Rwanda. Tacher et al. [22] havereported that 65 and 35% Proportion of age group International Journal of Forestry Research 5 7 7 6 6 6 44 4 4 4 33 3333 22 2 11 1 Bukomeye Buvumo Cyeru Rango A CC GR CP LD CS MI CB ML EC PA Figure 5: On-farm woody species identifed in Mukura Sector, Huye District, southern Rwanda. Key: the letters denote the following tree species: CC: Calliandra calothyrsus, CP Carica papaya, Cedrela serrata, CB: Cymphomandra betecea, EC: Eucalyptus camaldulensis, GR: Grevillea robusta, LD: Leucaena diversifolia, MI: Mangifera indica, ML: Markhamia lutea and PA: Persea americana. 9 9 7 777 7 6 6 6 5 5 5 Bukomeye Buvumo Cyeru Rango A Home garden Scattered trees Woodlot Boundary planting Figure 6: Agroforestry technologies practiced by farmers in Mukura Sector, Huye District, southern Rwanda. 4.1. Similarity/Dissimilarity of Agroforestry Species in Dif- has been encouraged by the high population growth rates ferent Cells. Tere were no signifcant diferences (p > 0.05) and the nature of policies on land property rights [26]. between Sørensen’s similarity index in the four cells of Te woody species identifed in the diferent agro- Mukura Sector (Figure 11). Te indices were reasonably high ecological systems in Rwanda are varied. Gracia-Barrios, and ranged from 0.670 to 0.880. L. et al. [27] reported nine agroforestry woody species in Te active involvement of the young farmers in agro- Busogo Sector, northern Rwanda and six in Bugarama forestry presents strength. Tis agrees with the literature. Sector, south-western Rwanda. Seven on-farm woody spe- Umuhoza, E. et al. [26] explain that young people tend to cies were identifed across six agroecological zones of adopt new technologies easier and faster than the old. Te Rwanda [17]. Gracia-Barrios, L. et al. [27] reported a more elderly in Rwanda also adopt agroforestry because it sup- diversifes situation in Musebeya Sector, Nyamagabe District with 12 woody species and even a bigger number (14 woody ports livelihoods by providing wood products and income and protects fragile environment to ensure sustainable land spp.) was reported in Mpanga Sector, Kirehe District, productivity [17]. eastern Rwanda [28]. Such variation can be a result of Te observed land ownership pattern is in commensu- combined attributes such as edaphic and weather condi- rate with fndings elsewhere in Rwanda and in other areas tions, farmers’ awareness, which may result from exposure with high population density and consequently small to extension services, and availability of seedlings among landholdings per household. Land fragmentation in Rwanda others. Proportion of onfarm tree spp Spatial arrangement of on- farm trees 6 International Journal of Forestry Research 20 20 Bukomeye Buvumo Cyeru RangoA Agroforestry Crops only Figure 7: Te proportions of farmers practicing agroforestry or not in the four cells of Mukura Sector, Huye District, southern Rwanda. 8 8 7 777 55 5 5 5 5 5 4 44 4 4 Bukomeye Buvumo Cyeru Rango A Fodder & foliage Stakes for climbing beans Food and fruits Timber and poles Income diversification Figure 8: Te benefts of agroforestry reported by farmers in Mukura Sector, Huye District, southern Rwanda. Te observed low adoption rate of agroforestry practice Te four on-farm tree spatial arrangements and the benefts observed in this study are common in all agro- is not unexpected since with small or hired land holdings, ecological zones with slight diferences in some places [17]. growing long-term crops such as trees may hardly be pri- A range of products and services provided by on-farm trees oritized. It has been reported that the adoption of agro- reported here are also reported in other agroecological zones forestry is positively correlated with land size [31–33]. A of the country and elsewhere [22, 27]. Trees in crop felds positive relationship between secure tenure and tree planting work as insurance in case of sudden crop failure or to on-farm has been reported [34]. Additionally, land renting support crops against environmental hazards and also to has been observed to discourage eforts to tree planting like provide extra income [29]. Terefore, agroforestry is largely any other long-term projects [35]. Also, insufcient tech- evolved with sustainability concerns, resiliency, and nical knowhow for agroforestry implementation may ac- diversity [30]. count for the low adoption [36]. Exposure to extension Proportion of farming type Proportions of benefits of agroforestry International Journal of Forestry Research 7 8 8 000 000 Bukomeye Buvumo Cyeru Rango A Competition for nutrients Increase productivity Decrease productivity Soil fertility improvement Figure 9: Efects of tree-crop interactions reported by farmers in Mukura sector, Huye District, southern Rwanda. 11 11 10 10 88 88 6 6 33 3 Bukomeye Buvumo Cyeru Rango A Shortage of seedlings Limited extension services Land shortage Stealing seedlings Figure 10: Te challenges farmers face in practicing agroforestry in Mukura sector, Huye District, southern Rwanda. Table 1: Presence or absence of ten on-farm woody species identifed in the four cells of Mukura Sector, Huye District, southern Rwanda. Cell Species Rango A Bukomeye Buvumo Cyeru ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ Calliandra calothyrsus ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ Carica papaya ∗ ∗ ∗ Cedrela serrata — ∗ ∗ Cyphomandra betacea — — ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ Eucalyptus camaldulensis ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ Grevillea robusta ∗ ∗ ∗ Leucaena diversifolia — ∗ ∗ Mangifera indica — — ∗ ∗ Markhamia lutea — — Persea americana — — — And and—denote presence or absence, respectively, of a particular species in a given cell. Proportion of challenges in practicing Proportions of tree crop-interaction agroforestry 8 International Journal of Forestry Research Table 2: Te diversity of agroforestry tree species in the four cells of Mukura Sector, Huye District, southern Rwanda. Cell Tree species Average Bukomeye Buvumo Cyeru Rango A Calliandra calothyrsus 0.660 0.680 0.650 0.690 Carica papaya 0.700 0.590 0.660 0.610 Cedrala serrata 0.620 0.530 0.001 0.410 Cyphoomandra betacea 0.200 0.001 0.001 0.260 Eucalyptus camaldulensis 0.420 0.170 0.510 0.540 Grevillea robusta 0.540 0.510 0.510 0.590 Leucaena diversifolia 0.420 0.001 0.460 0.260 Mangifera indica 0.001 0.410 0.001 0.410 Markhamia lutea 0.001 0.680 0.001 0.190 Persea americana 0.001 0.001 0.680 0.001 Shannon-Weiner index (H′) 3.570 3.590 3.480 3.980 3.660 0.88 0.88 0.9 0.77 0.8 0.71 0.67 0.67 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 Rango A vs Rango A vs Rango A vs Buvumo vs Buvumo vs Bukomeye Buvumo Bukomeye Cyeru Bukomeye Cyeru vs Cyeru Figure 11: Sorensen’s similarity indices obtained through comparisons of on-farm woody plants found in four cells in Mukura Sector, Huye District, southern Rwanda. agents has been reported to lead to higher adoption aimed at increasing trees’ benefcial efects can sometimes rates [37]. also enhance trees’ competitiveness; (iii) the interplay be- Te efect of intercropping trees with annual crops, as tween positive and negative efects of trees change- has been demonstrated in this study, presents varied per- sometimes signifcantly. ceptions by diferent farmers, and is usually a complex Te observed on-farm tree diversity between cells of phenomenon. Trees being big plants occupy large space Mukura Sector in this study is higher than that observed in thereby competing with crops for space. Owing to their big some other sites in Rwanda. Uwera et al. (in press) reported crowns and far reaching lateral roots compete for light and a Shannon–Weiner diversity index of 1.2 in Bugarama, soil water and nutrients to reduce crop yield when trees and south-western Rwanda and 1.33 in Busogo, northern Rwanda. Basing on environmental conditions, the study site crops are grown in close proximity [38, 39]. On the other hand, trees may demonstrate a facilitative role thereby in- is potentially in between the other two sites and one would crease yields of the crops intergrown with them or grown expect the index to be about the average of the other sites next to them. Examples may include those reported in Kenya although it presented a higher diversity index value. As seen by [40] and Uganda by [41]. above however, on-farm tree planting is a complex, un- Waldron, A. et al. [42] and [43]explain the interspecifc predictable practice varying depending on many factors interaction and facilitation between plants, how these in- including the environment or agroecology [42], socio- teract under diferent environmental resource conditions economic and socio-cultural aspects [44], and others. and how this impose trade-ofs, biophysical limitations, and management requirements in tree-crop mixtures. Tey state 5. Conclusion that, in introducing trees in croplands to promote low-input sustainable agroforestry systems is a challenging un- It was observed that agroforestry in Mukura Sector is dertaking due the following reasons: (i) trees provide useful practiced by about 60% of the farmers, others being con- products for smallholders and strongly facilitate crops but strained by the small land size, land tenure, ignorance, can also exert stronger competitive efects; (ii) practices unavailability of tree seedlings, and the avoidance of tree Sorensen's similarity index International Journal of Forestry Research 9 high - income countries: a systematic map protocol,” Envi- competition. With proper advice, the worries on the efects ronmental Evidence, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 24–16, 2018. of tree efects on crops may not hold since certain tree [6] C. Bucagu, B. Vanlauwe, M. T. Van Wijk, and K. E. Giller, species facilitate crop production and small land holdings “Assessing farmers’ interest in agroforestry in two contrasting may not be an issue. Agroforestry practice is important in agro-ecological zones of Rwanda,” Agroforestry Systems, intensively cultivated cropping systems to keep soil carbon vol. 87, no. 1, pp. 141–158, 2012. high to ensure sustainability. [7] D. R. Mukankomeje, “practical tools on agroforestry rwanda Ten woody species were observed to grow on farm, environment,” Rwanda Environment Management Authority providing varied products such as timber, frewood, food Government OF Rwanda, vol. 6, 2010. and fodder, and stakes for climbing beans plus income. On- [8] S. R. McLain, Lawry, M. R. Guariguata, and J. Reed, “Toward farm tree diversity was observed to be higher than several a tenure-responsive approach to forest landscape restoration: other sites in Rwanda. Te diversity of woody plants in a proposed tenure diagnostic for assessing restoration op- diferent cells of Mukura Sector did not vary signifcantly as portunities,” Land Use Policy, vol. 104, Article ID 103748. demonstrated by reasonably high indices of similarity [9] M. Verdone and A. Seidl, “Time, space, place and the Bonn between cells. challenge global forest restoration target,” Restoration Ecol- We recommend that eforts be made to reinforce ex- ogy, vol. 25, no. 6, pp. 903–911, 2017. tension services to improve farmers’ awareness on the [10] IUCN, “Te bonn challenge: catalysing leadership in latin america,” IUCN Forest Brief, vol. 14, p. 2, 2017. contribution of agroforestry on their social wellbeing. Ways [11] C. D. Biggelaar and M. A. Gold, “Development of utility and of making seedlings available for planting should also be location indices for classifying agroforestry species: the case of explored. Rwanda,” Agroforestry Systems, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 229–246, Data Availability [12] L. Norgrove and J. Beck, “Biodiversity function and resilience in tropical agroforestry systems including shifting cultiva- All the data used to support the fndings of this study are tion,” Curr. Forestry Rep, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 62–80, 2016. included in this article. [13] D. Tilman, P. B. Reich, J. Knops, D. Wedin, T. Mielke, and C. Lehman, “Diversity and productivity in a long-term Conflicts of Interest grassland experiment,” Science, vol. 294, no. 5543, pp. 843– 845, 2001. Te authors declare that there are no known conficts of [14] C. Bizimana, W. L. Nieuwoudt, and S. R. D. Ferrer, “Farm size, interest to the best of their knowledge. land fragmentation and economic efciency in southern Rwanda,” Agrekon, vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 244–262, 2004. Acknowledgments [15] E. Ndalama and E. Missanjo, “Agroforestry contribution to the improvement of rural community livelihoods in balaka , Tis work was conducted primarily as student fnal year Malawi,” Forestry and Horticulture, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 5–11, research project of the frst two authors. Te authors would like to thank the Government of Rwanda for granting [16] M. Iiyama, A. Mukuralinda, J. D. Ndayambaje et al., “Tree- bursary to the candidates and the University of Rwanda for Based ecosystem approaches ( TBEAs ) as multi-functional training the candidates and supporting this study in par- land management strategies — evidence from Rwanda,” Sustainability, vol. 10, no. 5, p. 1360, 2018. ticular. Te authors are indebted to thanking all the local [17] National Institute of Statistics of Rwanda (NISR), Fourth leaders and farmers in the study area who provided their Population and Housing Census, Rwanda, 2012, Ministry of time and information that was sought to implement this Finance and Economic Planning, Kigali, Rwanda, 2012. study. Te study was indirectly funded by the Government [18] K. D. Salami, R. B. Shuaibu, V. A. J. Adekunle, and of Rwanda by providing scholarship to the frst two authors. J. D. Ogunsola, “Comparative analysis of density, diversity and similarity of forest tree species in three selected states of References northern Nigeria,” Journalof Research For Wild.& Environ- ment, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 111–124, 2021. [1] FAO and ICRAF, Agroforestry and Tenure, Forestry Working [19] T. Sørensen, “A method of establishing groups of equal Paper No. 8, Rome, 2019. amplitude in plant sociology based on similarity of species [2] A. Tiwari, S. K. Verma, and O. P. Rao, “Efect of fertilizers on content,” Biol. Skr.., K. danske Vidensk. Selsk, vol. 5, no. 4, curcuma longa L. (Turmeric) growth under agri-silvi-horti pp. 1–34, 1948. system in sodic soil,” Industria Farmac´eutica, vol. 141, no. 2, [20] P. Kiyani, J. Andoh, Y. Lee, and D. K. Lee, “Benefts and pp. 183–188, 2015. challenges of agroforestry adoption: a case of Musebeya [3] B. Abdulhamid, E. Abubakar, and S. Dawaki, “An assessment sector, Nyamagabe District in southern province of Rwanda,” of potential contributions of agroforestry to food security in Forest Science and Technology, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 174–180, Katsina, Sudan Savannah Area, Nigeria,” Current Life Sci- ences, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 39–46, 2017. [21] J. E. Burnet, “Gender balance and the meanings of women in [4] C. K. Ong and B. M. Swallow, “Water productivity in forestry governance in post-genocide Rwanda,” African Afairs, and agroforestry,” Limits and Opportunities for Improvement, vol. 107, no. 428, pp. 361–386, 2008. vol. 1, pp. 217–228, 2003. [5] S. E. Brown, D. C. Miller, P. J. Ordonez, and K. Baylis, [22] T. Tacher, D. R. Lee, and J. W. Schelhas, “Farmers’ partic- ipation in reforestation incentives programme in Costra “Evidence for the impacts of agroforestry on agricultural productivity , ecosystem services , and human well - being in Rica,” Agroforestry Systems, vol. 35, pp. 269–286, 1997. 10 International Journal of Forestry Research [23] G. La Mattina, “When all the good men are gone: sex ratio and with crops in the highlands of Uganda,” Agroforestry Systems, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 185–203, 1994. domestic violence in post-genocide rwanda,” 2012, https:// www.bu.edu/econ/fles/2012/11/dp223.pdf. [40] J. Bayala, J. Sanou, Z. Teklehaimanot et al., “Advances in knowledge of processes in soil–tree–crop interactions in [24] B. Nkamleu and M. Manyong, “Factors afecting the adoption of agroforestry practices by farmers in Cameroon,” Small- parkland systems in the West African Sahel: a review,” Ag- riculture, Ecosystems & Environment, vol. 205, pp. 25–35, scale Forest Economics, Management and Policy, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 135–148, 2005. [41] C. K. Ong, R. M. Kho, and S. Radersma, “Ecological in- [25] K. Kraehnert, T. Bruck, ¨ M. Di Maio, and R. Nistico, ` “Te teractions in multispecies agroecosystems,” in Belowground Efects of confict on fertility: evidence from the Genocide in Interactions in Tropical Agroecosystems: Concepts and Models Rwanda,” Demography, vol. 56, no. 3, pp. 935–968, 2019. with Multiple Plant Components, M. Van Noordwijk, [26] E. Umuhoza, C. P. Mugunga, and A. William, “Farmers’ G. Cadisch, and C. K. Ong, Eds., CAB International, Wall- perception and adoption of agroforestry technologies in ingford, UK, 2004. eastern rwanda,” Journal of Ecology and the natural envi- [42] A. Waldron, D. Garrity, Y. Malhi, C. Girardin, D. C. Miller, ronment, vol. 2023, Article ID 5439171, 2023. and N. Seddon, “Agroforestry can enhance food security while [27] L. Garcia-Barrios and C. K. Ong, “Ecological interactions, meeting other sustainable development Goals,” Tropical management lessons and design tools in tropical agroforestry Conservation Science, vol. 10, 2017. systems,” Agroforestry Systems, vol. 61-62, no. 1-3, pp. 221– [43] J. Bayala, J. Sanou, Z. Teklehaimanot, S. Ouedraogo, 236, 2004. A. Kalinganire, and R. Coe, “Advances in knowledge of [28] H. Uwera, C. P. Mugunga, and M. Mukangango, “Assessing processes in soil-tree-crop interactions in parkland systems of agroforestry practices, tree diversity, uses and carbon se- west African Sahel: a review,” Agriculture, Ecosystems & questration potential in two contrasting agro-ecological zones Environment, vol. 205, pp. 25–35, 2015. of Rwanda,” Te Forestist Journal, vol. 73, 2022. [44] E. D. Glover, B. A. Hassan, and M. K. Glover, “Analysis of [29] A. Adesina and J. Chianu, “Determinants of farmers’ adoption socio-economic conditions infuencing adoption of agrofor- of alley farming technology in Nigeria,” Agroforestry Systems, estry practices,” International Journal of Agriculture and vol. 55, no. 2, pp. 99–112, 2002. Forestry, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 178–184, 2013. [30] E. Kuntashula, O. Ajayi, D. Phiri, P. Mafongoya, and S. Franzel, Factors Afecting Farmers’ Decision to Plant Im- proved Fallows: A Study in Four Villages in the Eastern Province of Zambia, Province of Zambia, Lusaka, Zambia, [31] J. Peterson, Ethnographic Decision Trees and Improved Fallows in Eastern Province of Zambia. Gender and Soil Fertility in Africa, Collaborative Research Support Programme (CRSP), Nairobi, Kenya, 1999. [32] M. A. Gahutu and L. Nahayo, “Impact assessment of agro- forestry practices on community socio-economic livelihoods in Rwanda,” International Journal of Environmental and Agriculture Research (IJOEAR), vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 59–71, 2020. [33] ICRAF, Agroforestry, A Decade of Development, Nairobi, Kenya, 1987. [34] G. A. Stainback, M. Masozera, A. Mukuralinda, and P. Dwivedi, “Smallholder agroforestry in Rwanda: a SWO- T-AHP analysis,” Small-Scale Forestry, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 285–300, 2011. [35] B. H. Pandit, K. K. Shrestha, and S. S. Bhattarai, “Sustainable local livelihoods through enhancing agroforestry systems in Nepal,” Journal of Forest and Livelihood, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 47–63, 2014. [36] C. P. Mugunga, K. E. Giller, and G. M. J. Mohren, “Tree-crop interactions in maize-eucalypt woodlot systems in southern Rwanda,” European Journal of Agronomy, vol. 86, pp. 78–86, [37] A. Nsabimana, F. Niyitanga, D. D. Weatherspoon, and A. Naseem, “Land policy and food prices: evidence from a land consolidation program in Rwanda,” Journal of Agri- cultural & Food Industrial Organization, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 63–73, 2021. [38] C. W. Muthuri, C. K. Ong, C. R. Black, V. Ngumi, and B. M. Mati, “Tree and crop productivity in Grevillea, Alnus and Paulownia-based agroforestry system in semi arid Kenya,” Forest Ecology and Management, vol. 212, no. 1-3, pp. 23–39, 2006. [39] J. Okorio, S. Byenkya, N. Wajja, and D. Peden, “Comparative performance of seventeen upperstorey tree species associated

Journal

International Journal of Forestry Research – Hindawi Publishing Corporation

Published: Apr 25, 2023

There are no references for this article.