Issue

Vol. 6 No. 1 (2022): APRIL

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Cacao-based Agroforestry in Conservation Forest Area: Farmer Participation, Main Commodities and Its Contribution to the Local Production and Economy

https://doi.org/10.24259/fs.v6i1.13991
Murniati Murniati
Centre for Forest Research and Development, Forestry and Environment Research Development and Innovation Agency, Ministry of Environment and Forestry, Republic of Indonesia, Bogor, Indonesia
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4535-4879
Sri Suharti
Centre for Forest Research and Development, Forestry and Environment Research Development and Innovation Agency, Ministry of Environment and Forestry, Republic of Indonesia, Bogor, Indonesia
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4037-5451
Irma Yeny
Centre for Forest Research and Development, Forestry and Environment Research Development and Innovation Agency, Ministry of Environment and Forestry, Republic of Indonesia, Bogor, Indonesia
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3450-7913
Minarningsih Minarningsih
Centre for Forest Research and Development, Forestry and Environment Research Development and Innovation Agency, Ministry of Environment and Forestry, Republic of Indonesia, Bogor, Indonesia
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9327-9666

Corresponding Author(s) : Murniati Murniati

murni3008@yahoo.com

Forest and Society, Vol. 6 No. 1 (2022): APRIL

Abstract

Cacao-based agroforestry systems have been developed in the conservation forest area of Wan Abdul Rachman Grand Forest Park (WAR GFP). Previously, the forest areas were occupied by surrounding needy communities, causing land-use conflict and forest degradation. To resolve these problems, the conservation forest manager developed a conservation partnership program, giving farmers legal access to establish cacao agroforestry systems while improving forest conditions. This research aimed to study the farmers’ participation, main commodities of the cacao-based agroforestry system, and its contribution to the local production and economy. This research was conducted in 2018 and 2019. The field survey was used to characterize the agroforestry system practiced and a series of interviews with two respondent groups, stakeholders concerned with WAR GFP management (nine key informants), and cacao-based agroforestry farmers (61 respondents). The agroforestry systems were dominated by cacao trees mixed with other tree crops and forest trees with an average density of 1,169.3 ± 668.3 trees/ha. Community involvement in the agroforestry development has only reached "Placation" or level 5 of Arnstein's participation ranking, implying they are granted limited opportunities to participate in the agroforestry development. Cacao production was influenced by the cacao tree and the associated tree density. Optimal cacao production as much as 367.4 ± 357.9 kg/ha was achieved at 1,253 trees/ha of total tree density. Besides cocoa, there were 13 primary commodities, where some have contributed more than 40% to district production. Income gained from the agroforestry systems contributes significantly (75.63%) to total farmers’ income. It can fulfill households’ basic needs and has exceeded the poverty line at the national level. The cacao-based agroforestry development has become an alternative to resolve land use conflict in conservation forest areas characterized by land scarcity with a dense population

Keywords

Community participation Farmer income Income contribution Local economy Main commodities Tree crop yield
Murniati, M., Suharti, S., Yeny, I. ., & Minarningsih, M. (2022). Cacao-based Agroforestry in Conservation Forest Area: Farmer Participation, Main Commodities and Its Contribution to the Local Production and Economy. Forest and Society, 6(1), 243-274. https://doi.org/10.24259/fs.v6i1.13991
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX
References
  1. Alfandi, D., Qurniati, R., & Febryano, I. G. (2019). Partisipasi masyarakat dalam pengelolaan mangrove. Jurnal Sylva Lestari, 7(1), 30–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.23960/jsl1730-41
  2. Arnold, J. E. M. (1987). Economic considerations in agroforestry. In H. A. Steppler & P. K. R. Nair (Eds.), Agroforestry: a decade of development (pp. 173–190). Nairobi, Kenya: International Council for Research in Agroforestry.
  3. Arnstein, S. R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Planning Association, 35(4), 216–224. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944366908977225
  4. Astuti, T., & Simarmata, M. M. T. (2020). Participation and community motivation to protect the Forest Park of Bukit Barisan. International Research Journal of Management, IT and Social Sciences, 7(5), 78–88. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.21744/irjmis.v7n5.973
  5. Badan Pusat Statistik. (2019). Berita Resmi Statistik: Profil Kemiskinan di Indonesia September 2018. Jakarta, Indonesia: Badan Pusat Statistik.
  6. Badan Pusat Statistik Kabupaten Pesawaran. (2019). Produk domestik regional bruto Kabupaten Pesawaran menurut pengeluaran 2014 - 2018. Kabupaten Pesawaran: Badan Pusat Statistik Kabupaten Pesawaran.
  7. Barokah, U., Rahayu, W., & Sundari, M. T. (2014). Analisis biaya dan pendapatan usahatani padi di Kabupaten Karanganyar. Agric Jurnal Ilmu Pertanian, 26(1), 12–19. https://doi.org/10.24246/agric.2014.v26.i1.p12-19
  8. Berlan, A., & Berges, A. (2013). Cocoa production in the Dominican Republic: Sustainability, challenges and opportunities. Report of findings commissioned by Green & Black’s. Menchester, Inggris.
  9. Bowler, D. E., Buyung-ali, L. M., Healey, J. R., Jones, J. P. G., Knight, T. M., & Pullin, A. S. (2012). Does community forest management provide global environmental benefits and improve local welfare ? Frontiers in Ecology and The Environment, 10(1), 29–36. https://doi.org/10.1890/110040
  10. BPS-Statistics of Lampung Province. (2019). Lampung Province in Figures 2019. Lampung, Indonesia: BPS-Statistics of Lampung Province.
  11. BPS-Statistics of Pesawaran Regency. (2018). Pesawaran Regency in figures 2018. Pesawaran, Lampung, Indonesia: BPS Kabupaten Pesawaran.
  12. BPS-Statistics of Pesawaran Regency. (2020). Pesawaran Regency in figures 2020. Pesawaran, Lampung, Indonesia: BPS-Statistics of Pesawaran Regency.
  13. Braga, D. P. P., Domene, F., & Gandara, F. B. (2018). Shade trees composition and diversity in cacao agroforestry systems of southern Para, Brazilian Amazon. Agroforestry Systems, 93(4), 1409–1421. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-018-0250-6
  14. Cerda, R. H., Deheuvels, O., Calvache, D., Niehaus, L., Saenz, Y., Kent, J., … Somarriba, E. (2014). Contribution of cocoa agroforestry systems to family income and domestic consumption : looking toward intensification. Agroforestry Systems, 88(6), 957–981. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-014-9691-8
  15. Chakraborty, M., Haider, M. Z., & Rahaman, M. M. (2015). Socio-economic impact of cropland agroforestry : Evidence from Jessore District of Bangladesh. International Journal of Research in Agricultural and Forestry, 2(1), 11–20.
  16. Chomitz, K. M. (2007). At loggerheads? Agricultural expansion, poverty reduction, and environment in the tropical forests; A World Bank policy research report. Washington DC.
  17. Cleaver, F. (1999). Paradoxes of participation: questioning participatory approaches to development. Journal of International Development, 11, 597–612.
  18. Daeli, W., Tauhid, K., Maharani, C., Moeliono, M., & Bong, I. W. (2017). Dari partisipasi ke inklusi: Pembelajaran dari desain dan pelaksanaan proyek pembangunan di Kapuas hulu, Kalimantan Barat. Info Brief CIFOR, (164), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.17528/cifor/006336
  19. Deheuvels, O., Xavier, G., Grimaldo, R., Quiroga, S., Decker, M., Rolando, F., … Somarriba, E. (2014). Biodiversity is affected by changes in management intensity of cocoa-based agroforests. Agroforestry Systems, 88(6), 1081–1099. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-014-9710-9
  20. Desmiwati, D., Veriasa, T. O., Aminah, A., Safitri, A. D., Agus, K., Hendarto, … Sari, D. R. (2021). Contribution of agroforestry systems to farmer income in state forest areas : A case study of Parungpanjang, Indonesia. Forest and Society, 5(1), 109–119. http://dx.doi.org/10.24259/fs.v5i1.11223
  21. Direktorat Jenderal Perkebunan (2017). Ringkasan tinjauan penetapan batas luas penggunaan lahan pada usaha perkebunan. Jakarta, Indonesia: Direktorat Jenderal Perkebunan, Kementerian Pertanian.
  22. Duguma, B., Gockowski, J., & Bakala, J. (2001). Smallholder cacao (Theobroma cacao Linn .) cultivation in agroforestry systems of West and Central Africa : challenges and opportunities. Agroforestry System, 51, 177–188.
  23. Essouma, F. M., Isabelle, M., Mala, W. A., Levang, P., Ambang, Z., Boyogueno, A. D. B., … Carriere, S. M. (2020). Cocoa-based agroforestry system dynamics and trends in the Akongo subregion of central Cameroon Franc. Agroforestry Systems, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-020-00510-9
  24. Handoko, H., & Darmawan, A. (2015). Perubahan tutupan hutan di Taman Hutan Raya Wan Abdul Rachman (TAHURA WAR). Jurnal Sylva Lestari, 3(2), 43–52. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.23960/jsl2343-52
  25. Hanif, M. A., Roy, R. M., Bari, M. S., Ray, P. C., Rahman, M. S., & Hasan, M. F. (2018). Livelihood improvements through agroforestry: Evidence from Northern Bangladesh. Small-Scale Forestry, 17(4), 505–522. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11842-018-9400-y
  26. He, S., Yang, L., & Min, Q. (2020). Community participation in nature conservation : The Chinese experience and its implication to National Park Management. Sustainability, 12(4760), 17. Retrieved from www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability
  27. Humas Provinsi Lampung. (2017). UMP Lampung tahun 2018 sebesar Rp 2.074.673,27.
  28. Irshad, M., Khan, A., Inoue, M., Ashraf, M., & Sher, H. (2011). Identifying factors affecting agroforestry system in Swat, Pakistan. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 6(11), 2586–2593. https://doi.org/10.5897/AJAR11.485
  29. Jagoret, P., Kwesseu, J., Messie, C., Michael-Dounias, I., & Malezieux, E. (2014). Farmers ’ assessment of the use value of agrobiodiversity in complex cocoa agroforestry systems in central Cameroon. Agroforestry System, 88(6), 983–1000. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-014-9698-1
  30. Jumiyati, S., Arsyad, M., Rajindra, Pulubuhu, D. A. T., & Hadid, A. (2018). Cocoa based agroforestry : An economic perspective in resource scarcity conflict era. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 6 p. https://doi.org/doi :10.1088/1755-1315/157/1/012009
  31. Kalaba, K. F., Chirwa, P., Syampungani, S., & Ajayi, C. O. (2010). Contribution of agroforestry to biodiversity and livelihoods improvement in rural communities of Southern African regions. In Tropical Rainforests and Agroforests under Global Change (pp. 461–462). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-00493-3
  32. Kalonga, S. K., Kulindwa, K. A., & Mshale, B. I. (2015). Equity in distribution of proceeds from forest products from Certified Community-Based Forest Management in Kilwa District, Tanzania. Small-Scale Forestry, 14(1), 73–89. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11842-014-9274-6
  33. Kaplale, R. (2011). Analisis tingkat usahatani kakao (Theobroma cacao L) Studi kasus di Desa Latu Kecamatan Amalatu. Jurnal Ilmiah Agribisnis dan Perikanan, 4(2), 60–68. https://doi.org/10.29239/j.agrikan.4.2.60-68
  34. Lewis, L. K., & Russ, T. L. (2012). Soliciting and using input during organizational change initiatives: What are practitioners doing. Management Communication Quarterly, 26(2), 267–294. https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318911431804
  35. Mahmood, M. I., & Zubair, M. (2020). Farmer’s perception of and factors influencing agroforestry practices in the Indus River Basin, Pakistan. Small-Scale Forestry, 19(1):107-122. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11842-020-09434-9
  36. Mak, B. K. L., Cheung, L. T. O., & Hui, D. L. H. (2017). Community participation in the decision-making process for sustainable tourism development in Rural Areas of Hong Kong , China. Sustainability, 9(1695), 13. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9101695
  37. Minarningsih & Murniati. (2020). Complex agroforestry system in Wan Abdul Rachman Grand Forest Park: composition and characteristics of food-producing plants. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 14p. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/533/1/012018
  38. Ministry of Agriculture. (2019a). Tree crop estate statistic of Indonesia 2018-2020: Cocoa. Jakarta, Indonesia: Directorate General of Estates, Ministry of Agriculture.
  39. Ministry of Agriculture. (2019b). Tree crop estate statistics of Indonesia 2018-2020: Rubber. Jakarta, Indonesia: Directorate General of Estates, Ministry of Agriculture.
  40. Ministry of Agriculture. (2019c). Tree crop estate statistics of Indonesia 2018-2020: Clove. Jakarta, Indonesia: Directorate General of Estates, Ministry of Agriculture.
  41. Ministry of Agriculture. (2019d). Tree crop estate statistik of Indonesia 2018 - 2020: Nutmeg. Jakarta, Indonesia: Directorate General of Estates, Ministry of Agriculture.
  42. Ministry of Environment and Forestry. (2020). The State of Indonesia’s forests 2020. Jakarta, Indonesia: Ministry of Environment and Forestry, Republic of Indonesia. 189 p.
  43. Montenegro, J. D., Varela, E., & Gil, J. M. (2018). Livelihood strategies of cacao producers in Ecuador: Effects of national policies to support cacao farmers and specialty cacao landraces. Journal of Rural Studies, 63, 141–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2018.08.004
  44. Moorman, M. C., Peterson, N., Moore, S. E., & Donoso, P. J. (2013). Stakeholder perspectives on prospects for co-management of an old-growth forest watershed near Valdivia, Chile. Society and Natural Resources, 26(9), 1022–1036. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2012.739676
  45. Mshale, B., Senga, M., & Mwangi, E. (2017). Governing mangroves: Unique challenges for managing Tanzania’s coastal forests. Bogor, Indonesia: CIFOR
  46. Murniati, Yeni, I., Minarningsih, & Sumarhani. (2019). Introducing sustainable agroforestry to encourage implementation of social forestry in Gedong Wani Forest Management Unit , Lampung , Indonesia. Proceeding of International Workshop and Seminar Innovation of Environmental-Friendly Agrcultural Technology Supporting Sustainable Food Self-Suffiency, 789–800. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3345863
  47. Nath, T. K., Jashimuddin, M., & Inoue, M. (2016). Community-Based Forest Management (CBFM) in Bangladesh: A historical bacground. In M. Palo & J. Uusivuori, (Eds.), Community-Based Forest Management (CBFM) in Bangladesh. World Forest XXII, 17-28. https://doi.org/DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-42387-6
  48. Ndalama, E., Thole, G. K., & Missanjo, E. (2015). Agroforestry contribution to the improvement of rural community livelihoods in Balaka, Malawi. International Journal of Forestry and Horticulture, 1(1), 5–11. Retrieved from www.arcjournals.org
  49. Ndayambaje, J. D., Heijman, W. J. M., & Mohren, G. M. J. (2012). Household determinants of tree planting on farms in Rural Rwanda. Small-Scale Foretry, 11, 477–508. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11842-012-9196-0
  50. Niehaus, L. A. (2011). Contribution of cacao (Theobroma cacao) agroforestry systems to the household economy of small-scale producers in Central America: The case of Bocas del Toro, Panama. Norwegian University of Life Science. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/11250/189433
  51. Notaro, M., Gary, C., & Deheuvels, O. (2020). Plant diversity and density in cocoa-based agroforestry systems: how farmers’ income is affected in the Dominican Republic. Agroforestry Systems, 94(3), 1071–1084. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-019-00472-7
  52. Nurlia, A., Martin, E., & Winarno, B. (2015). Pengelolaan kolaboratif kawasan hutan di Tahura WAR. Prosiding Seminar Hasil Penelitian BP2LHK Palembang, (11 August 2015), 229–235. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/323258377
  53. Oke, D. O., & Odebiyi, K. A. (2007). Traditional cocoa-based agroforestry and forest species conservation in Ondo State, Nigeria. Agriculture, Ecosystem and Environment, 122, 305–311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2007.01.022
  54. Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambrige University Press. 280p.
  55. Parhusip, S., Suharti, S., Sukandi, T., Amano, M., & Matsumura, N. (2019). Economic analysis of local people’s involvement in Community-Based Forest Management (CBFM) in Desa Ciomas, Indonesia. Japan Society of Forest Planning 25, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.20659/jfp.2019.002
  56. Parrish, J., Reitsma, R., & Greenberg, R. (1998). Cacao as crop and conservation tool. In First Sustainable Workshop on Sustainable Cocoa Growing (20p). Retrieved from http://www.nationalzoo.si.edu/smbc/Research/Cacao/cacao.asp
  57. Pretty, J., & Bharucha, Z. P. (2014). Sustainable intensification in agricultural systems. Annals of Botany., 114(8), 1571–1596. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcu205
  58. Pretty, J., Toulmin, C., & Williams, S. (2011). Sustainable intensification in African agriculture. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, 9(1), 5–24. https://doi.org/10.3763/ijas.2010.0583
  59. Rapsomanikis, G. (2015). The economic lives of smallholder farmers: An analysis based on household data from nine countries. FAO. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.3223.9440, 48p.
  60. Rice, R., & Greenberg, R. (2000). Cacao cultivation and the conservation of biological diversity. AMBIO A Journal of The Human Environment, 29(3), 167–173. https://doi.org/10.1639/0044-7447(2000)029
  61. Ruf, F., & Schroth, G. (2004). Chocolate forests and monocultures: A historical review of cocoa growing and its conflicting role in tropical deforestation and forest conservation. In G. Schroth, G. A. B. da Fonseca, C. A. Harvey, C. Gascon, H. L. Vasconcelos, & A.-M. N. Izac (Eds.), Agroforestry and biodiversity conservation in tropical landscapes (pp. 107–134). Washington, DC, US, Island press: Island Press.
  62. Schroth, G., Harvey, C. A., & Vincent, G. (2004). Complex agroforests: Their structure, diversity, and potential role in landscape conservation. In G. Schroth, G. A. B. da Fonseca, C. A. Harvey, C. Gascon, H. L. Vasconcelos, & A.-M. N. Izac (Eds.), Agroforestry and Biodiversity Conservation in Tropical Landscapes (pp. 227–260). Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/ 40777441%0AAgroforestry
  63. Sikerbol, K. (2016). Participation or pseudo-participation? Change agent challenges in implementing organizational change. Retrieved from https://irc.queensu.ca/participation-or-pseudo-participation-change-agent-challenges-in-implementing-organizational-change/
  64. Sonwa, D. J., Weise, S. F., Schroth, G., Janssens, M. J. J., & Shapiro, H.-Y. (2014). Plant diversity management in cocoa agroforestry systems in West and Central Africa — effects of markets and household needs. Agroforestry Systems, 88(6), 1021–1034. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-014-9714-5
  65. Sugiana, A. M. (2012). Collective action and ecological sensibility for sustainable mangrove governance in Indonesia: Challenges and opportunities. Journal of Political Ecology, 19(1), 184–201. https://doi.org/10.2458/v19i1.21726
  66. Suharti, S. (2001). Increased community participation in forest management through the development of social forestry programmes in Indonesia. In P. J. M. Hillegers & H. H. Iongh (Eds.), The Balance between Biodiversity Conservation andSustainable Use of Tropical Rain Forests (pp. 233–244). The Tropenbos Foundation, Wageningen, the Netherlands.
  67. Tetteh, D. A., Asase, A., Ofori-frimpong, K., & Attuquayefio, D. (2018). Effect of cocoa farming intensification on biodiversity and ecosystem properties in Southern Ghana. Journal of Ecology and The Natural Environment, 10(September), 172–181. https://doi.org/10.5897/JENE2017.0673
  68. Thwala, W. D. (2010). Community participation is a necessity for project success : A case study of rural water supply project in Jeppes Reefs , South Africa. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 5(10), 970–979. https://doi.org/10.5897/AJAR09.700
  69. Uphoff, N. (1985). Participatory evaluation of participatory development: A scheme for measuring and monitoring local capacity. Ithaca, New York: Center for International Studies, Cornell University.
  70. Uphoff, N. (1992). Local institutions and participation for sustainable development. Gatekeeper Series No. 31. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.com/stable/resrep01670
  71. UPTD Tahura WAR. (2017). Blok pengelolaan Taman Hutan Raya Wan Abdul Rachman, Provinsi Lampung. Bandar Lampung, Lampung: UPTD Tahura Wan Abdul Rachman.
  72. Vaast, P., & Somarriba, E. (2014). Trade-offs between crop intensification and ecosystem services: The role of agroforestry in cocoa cultivation. Agroforest Systems, 88(6), 947–956. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-014-9762-x
  73. Vebrova, H., Lojka, B., Husband, T. P., Elena, M., Zans, C., Damme, P. Van, … Kalousova, M. (2013). Tree diversity in cacao agroforests in San Alejandro, Peruvian Amazon. Agroforest Systems, 88(6), 1101–1115. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-013-9654-5
  74. Winata, A., & Yuliana, E. (2012). Tingkat partisipasi petani hutan dalam Program Pengelolaan Hutan Bersama Masyarakat (PHBM) Perhutani. MIMBAR, XXVIII(1), 65–76.
  75. World Bank Group. (2018). Piecing together the poverty puzzle; Poverty and sahred prosperity 2018. World Bank Publications.
  76. Wulandari, C., Bintoro, A., Rusita, Santoso, T., Duryat, Kaskoyo, H., … Budiono, P. (2018). Community forestry adoption based on multipurpose tree species diversity towards to sustainable forest management in ICEF of University of Lampung, Indonesia. Biodiversitas, 19(3), 1102–1109. https://doi.org/10.13057/biodiv/d190344
  77. Wulandari, C., Budiono, P., Yuwono, S. B., & Herwani, S. (2014). Adoption of agroforestry patterns and crop systems around Register 19 Forest Park, Lampung Province, Indonesia. Jurnal Manajemen Hutan Tropika, XX(2), 86–93. https://doi.org/10.7226/jtfm.20.2.86
  78. Yeny, I., Murniati, & Octavia, D. (2017). Hubungan karakteristik internal petani dengan keberhasilan pertumbuhan cempaka (Michelia champaca L.) di demplot hutan rakyat. Jurnal Penelitian Hutan Tanaman, 14(1), 35–49. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.20886/jpht.2017.14.1.35-49
  79. Yeny, I., Murniati, & Suharti, S. (2020). Partisipasi masyarakat dalam wilayah pengembangan agroforestry di Kesatuan Pemangkuan Hutan (KPH) Gedong Wani. Jurnal Penelitian Sosial Dan Ekonomi Kehutanan, 17(1), 49–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.20886/jtsek.2020.17.1.49-66
Read More
Author biographies is not available.
Download this PDF file
PDF