Suchergebnisse

Agroforestry systems (AFS), presented by their supporters as systems able to reconcile multiple social and ecological functions, are potentially interesting for a diversity of sectoral policies such as forestry, environment or water policies. They are presently in a process of being institutionalized in Europe through the development of specific policy instruments. In this context, we investigated the policyscape of agroforestry, meaning the articulation between multiple policies impacting a diversity of AFS in two Mediterranean protected landscapes: the Ventoux biosphere reserve and the Verdon regional nature park. We conducted in depth interviews with 50 practitioners and institutional representatives from diverse policies directly concerned by AFS. We found that if some AFS such as silvopastures are highly intersectoral and concerned by a large diversity of instruments, others such as alley-cropping systems are confined in the agricultural sector (Figure 1). Presently, systems such as grazed pastures are largely ignored by policies. Our results indicated that instruments specific to agroforestry represent a minority in relation to the diversity of sectoral instruments impacting AFS at a landscape scale. Regarding this agroforestry policyscape, we discuss opportunities for agroforestry development with issues of policies coordination, lack of instruments or of involvment from environmental or land-use planning policies for certain types of AFS.

While global change is challenging our models of development, integrated approaches such as agroecology, multifunctional forest management or integrated conservation are ways to promote land-sharing. Among the diversity of agro-ecological practices that intend to reach both food production and environmental issues, agroforestry systems (AFS) have the specificity to integrate woody vegetation, crops and/or livestock on the same area of land. Here we identified the different types of AFS and social-ecological processes that explain their dynamics in two Mediterranean protected areas: Ventoux biosphere reserve and Verdon regional nature park. These two territories are characterized by a typical Mediterranean landscape gradient, from areas impacted by urbanization and industrialization of agriculture, to abandoned marginal lands. We conducted 50 semi-directive interviews with stakeholders concerned by AFS. We focused on: i) the main AFS present in the protected areas as well as their dynamics and; ii) the stakeholders, institutional arrangements and policies involved for each type of AFS. We identified two contrasted but inter-connected dynamics along the landscape gradient: i) in intensely used agricultural landscapes, AFS are promoted by environmental stakeholders to support more complex landscapes and soil, water and biodiversity preservation; and ii) in marginal mountainous areas, the main AFS, silvopasture, is affected by multiple issues such as fire prevention, forestry production and maintenance of open environments. In both cases, ongoing social-ecological changes (wolf resettlement, increased droughts, political changes…) call into question the arrangements implemented by stakeholders, inducing new coordination challenges.

Open Access Publishing ; International audience ; Despite a long history of confrontation between forest agencies and forest people, "indigenous" or "local" practices are increasingly considered as a viable alternative of forest management. This paper is a synthesis derived from various long-term research programs carried out by the authors in Southeast Asia and Africa on forests managed by farmers. These researches looked at local practices and underlying science, including their social, political, and symbolic dimensions. They also addressed evolutionary trends and driving forces, as well as potential and limits for forest conservation and development, mitigation of deforestation, biodiversity conservation, and poverty alleviation in a context of global environmental, political, and social change.We discuss how forest management by local communities, contrary to the unified models of professional forest management, exhibits a high historical and geographical diversity. The analysis we draw from the various examples we studied reveals several invariants, which allows proposing the unifying paradigm of "domestic forest." The first universal feature concerns the local managers themselves, who are, in their vast majority, farmers. Management practices range from local interventions in the forest ecosystem, to more intensive types of forest culture, and ultimately to permanent forest plantation. But in all cases, forest management is closely integrated with agriculture. The second universal feature concerns the conceptual continuity of planted forests with the natural forest, in matters of vegetation's structure and composition as well as economic traits and ecosystem services. The resulting forest is uneven-aged, composed of several strata, harboring a large diversity of species, and producing a wide range of products, with timber seldom being the dominant one.The term "domestic forest" aims at highlighting the close relationship the domestication process establishes between a specific human group, including its ...

A-07-26 ; International audience ; Despite a long history of confrontation between forest agencies and forest people, "indigenous" or "local" practices are increasingly considered as a viable alternative of forest management. This paper is a synthesis derived from various long-term research programs carried out by the authors in Southeast Asia and Africa on forests managed by farmers. These researches looked at local practices and underlying science, including their social, political, and symbolic dimensions. They also addressed evolutionary trends and driving forces, as well as potential and limits for forest conservation and development, mitigation of deforestation, biodiversity conservation, and poverty alleviation in a context of global environmental, political, and social change. We discuss how forest management by local communities, contrary to the unified models of professional forest management, exhibits a high historical and geographical diversity. The analysis we draw from the various examples we studied reveals several invariants, which allows proposing the unifying paradigm of "domestic forest." The first universal feature concerns the local managers themselves, who are, in their vast majority, farmers. Management practices range from local interventions in the forest ecosystem, to more intensive types of forest culture, and ultimately to permanent forest plantation. But in all cases, forest management is closely integrated with agriculture. The second universal feature concerns the conceptual continuity of planted forests with the natural forest, in matters of vegetation's structure and composition as well as economic traits and ecosystem services. The resulting forest is uneven-aged, composed of several strata, harboring a large diversity of species, and producing a wide range of products, with timber seldom being the dominant one. The term "domestic forest" aims at highlighting the close relationship the domestication process establishes between a specific human group, including its elementary ...

A-07-26 ; International audience ; Despite a long history of confrontation between forest agencies and forest people, "indigenous" or "local" practices are increasingly considered as a viable alternative of forest management. This paper is a synthesis derived from various long-term research programs carried out by the authors in Southeast Asia and Africa on forests managed by farmers. These researches looked at local practices and underlying science, including their social, political, and symbolic dimensions. They also addressed evolutionary trends and driving forces, as well as potential and limits for forest conservation and development, mitigation of deforestation, biodiversity conservation, and poverty alleviation in a context of global environmental, political, and social change. We discuss how forest management by local communities, contrary to the unified models of professional forest management, exhibits a high historical and geographical diversity. The analysis we draw from the various examples we studied reveals several invariants, which allows proposing the unifying paradigm of "domestic forest." The first universal feature concerns the local managers themselves, who are, in their vast majority, farmers. Management practices range from local interventions in the forest ecosystem, to more intensive types of forest culture, and ultimately to permanent forest plantation. But in all cases, forest management is closely integrated with agriculture. The second universal feature concerns the conceptual continuity of planted forests with the natural forest, in matters of vegetation's structure and composition as well as economic traits and ecosystem services. The resulting forest is uneven-aged, composed of several strata, harboring a large diversity of species, and producing a wide range of products, with timber seldom being the dominant one. The term "domestic forest" aims at highlighting the close relationship the domestication process establishes between a specific human group, including its elementary units, the "domestic units," and the forest, transformed and managed to fulfill the needs of that group. The domestic forest paradigm calls for the integration into forest science of a new concept of land management in which production and conservation are compatible, and in which there is no choice to be made between people and nature. It does not aim at contesting the value of conventional forest science, but it proposes domestic forests as a new scientific domain, for the combined benefit of forest science and of forest people. It does not contest the value of conventional forest management models, but pushes towards more equitable relations between forest agencies and farmers managing forest resources on their own lands.

Open Access Publishing ; International audience ; Despite a long history of confrontation between forest agencies and forest people, "indigenous" or "local" practices are increasingly considered as a viable alternative of forest management. This paper is a synthesis derived from various long-term research programs carried out by the authors in Southeast Asia and Africa on forests managed by farmers. These researches looked at local practices and underlying science, including their social, political, and symbolic dimensions. They also addressed evolutionary trends and driving forces, as well as potential and limits for forest conservation and development, mitigation of deforestation, biodiversity conservation, and poverty alleviation in a context of global environmental, political, and social change.We discuss how forest management by local communities, contrary to the unified models of professional forest management, exhibits a high historical and geographical diversity. The analysis we draw from the various examples we studied reveals several invariants, which allows proposing the unifying paradigm of "domestic forest." The first universal feature concerns the local managers themselves, who are, in their vast majority, farmers. Management practices range from local interventions in the forest ecosystem, to more intensive types of forest culture, and ultimately to permanent forest plantation. But in all cases, forest management is closely integrated with agriculture. The second universal feature concerns the conceptual continuity of planted forests with the natural forest, in matters of vegetation's structure and composition as well as economic traits and ecosystem services. The resulting forest is uneven-aged, composed of several strata, harboring a large diversity of species, and producing a wide range of products, with timber seldom being the dominant one.The term "domestic forest" aims at highlighting the close relationship the domestication process establishes between a specific human group, including its elementary units, the "domestic units," and the forest, transformed and managed to fulfill the needs of that group. The domestic forest paradigm calls for the integration into forest science of a new concept of land management in which production and conservation are compatible, and in which there is no choice to be made between people and nature. It does not aim at contesting the value of conventional forest science, but it proposes domestic forests as a new scientific domain, for the combined benefit of forest science and of forest people. It does not contest the value of conventional forest management models, but pushes towards more equitable relations between forest agencies and farmers managing forest resources on their own lands.

Open Access Publishing International audience Despite a long history of confrontation between forest agencies and forest people, "indigenous" or "local" practices are increasingly considered as a viable alternative of forest management. This paper is a synthesis derived from various long-term research programs carried out by the authors in Southeast Asia and Africa on forests managed by farmers. These researches looked at local practices and underlying science, including their social, political, and symbolic dimensions. They also addressed evolutionary trends and driving forces, as well as potential and limits for forest conservation and development, mitigation of deforestation, biodiversity conservation, and poverty alleviation in a context of global environmental, political, and social change.We discuss how forest management by local communities, contrary to the unified models of professional forest management, exhibits a high historical and geographical diversity. The analysis we draw from the various examples we studied reveals several invariants, which allows proposing the unifying paradigm of "domestic forest." The first universal feature concerns the local managers themselves, who are, in their vast majority, farmers. Management practices range from local interventions in the forest ecosystem, to more intensive types of forest culture, and ultimately to permanent forest plantation. But in all cases, forest management is closely integrated with agriculture. The second universal feature concerns the conceptual continuity of planted forests with the natural forest, in matters of vegetation's structure and composition as well as economic traits and ecosystem services. The resulting forest is uneven-aged, composed of several strata, harboring a large diversity of species, and producing a wide range of products, with timber seldom being the dominant one.The term "domestic forest" aims at highlighting the close relationship the domestication process establishes between a specific human group, including its ...

A-07-26 ; International audience ; Despite a long history of confrontation between forest agencies and forest people, "indigenous" or "local" practices are increasingly considered as a viable alternative of forest management. This paper is a synthesis derived from various long-term research programs carried out by the authors in Southeast Asia and Africa on forests managed by farmers. These researches looked at local practices and underlying science, including their social, political, and symbolic dimensions. They also addressed evolutionary trends and driving forces, as well as potential and limits for forest conservation and development, mitigation of deforestation, biodiversity conservation, and poverty alleviation in a context of global environmental, political, and social change. We discuss how forest management by local communities, contrary to the unified models of professional forest management, exhibits a high historical and geographical diversity. The analysis we draw from the various examples we studied reveals several invariants, which allows proposing the unifying paradigm of "domestic forest." The first universal feature concerns the local managers themselves, who are, in their vast majority, farmers. Management practices range from local interventions in the forest ecosystem, to more intensive types of forest culture, and ultimately to permanent forest plantation. But in all cases, forest management is closely integrated with agriculture. The second universal feature concerns the conceptual continuity of planted forests with the natural forest, in matters of vegetation's structure and composition as well as economic traits and ecosystem services. The resulting forest is uneven-aged, composed of several strata, harboring a large diversity of species, and producing a wide range of products, with timber seldom being the dominant one. The term "domestic forest" aims at highlighting the close relationship the domestication process establishes between a specific human group, including its elementary units, the "domestic units," and the forest, transformed and managed to fulfill the needs of that group. The domestic forest paradigm calls for the integration into forest science of a new concept of land management in which production and conservation are compatible, and in which there is no choice to be made between people and nature. It does not aim at contesting the value of conventional forest science, but it proposes domestic forests as a new scientific domain, for the combined benefit of forest science and of forest people. It does not contest the value of conventional forest management models, but pushes towards more equitable relations between forest agencies and farmers managing forest resources on their own lands.

Despite a long history of confrontation between forest agencies and forest people, "indigenous" or "local" practices are increasingly considered as a viable alternative of forest management. This paper is a synthesis derived from various long-term research programs carried out by the authors in Southeast Asia and Africa on forests managed by farmers. These researches looked at local practices and underlying science, including their social, political, and symbolic dimensions. They also addressed evolutionary trends and driving forces, as well as potential and limits for forest conservation and development, mitigation of deforestation, biodiversity conservation, and poverty alleviation in a context of global environmental, political, and social change. We discuss how forest management by local communities, contrary to the unified models of professional forest management, exhibits a high historical and geographical diversity. The analysis we draw from the various examples we studied reveals several invariants, which allows proposing the unifying paradigm of "domestic forest." The first universal feature concerns the local managers themselves, who are, in their vast majority, farmers. Management practices range from local interventions in the forest ecosystem, to more intensive types of forest culture, and ultimately to permanent forest plantation. But in all cases, forest management is closely integrated with agriculture. The second universal feature concerns the conceptual continuity of planted forests with the natural forest, in matters of vegetation's structure and composition as well as economic traits and ecosystem services. The resulting forest is uneven-aged, composed of several strata, harboring a large diversity of species, and producing a wide range of products, with timber seldom being the dominant one. The term "domestic forest" aims at highlighting the close relationship the domestication process establishes between a specific human group, including its elementary units, the "domestic units," and the forest, transformed and managed to fulfill the needs of that group. The domestic forest paradigm calls for the integration into forest science of a new concept of land management in which production and conservation are compatible, and in which there is no choice to be made between people and nature. It does not aim at contesting the value of conventional forest science, but it proposes domestic forests as a new scientific domain, for the combined benefit of forest science and of forest people. It does not contest the value of conventional forest management models, but pushes towards more equitable relations between forest agencies and farmers managing forest resources on their own lands.

"Guinée Forestière" is an administrative region located in the southern part of Guinea (West Africa). It is characterized by agro-ecological conditions suitable for most types of agricultural production typical of the low elevation humid tropics. The population is mainly rural and their livelihood depends on food crops and cash crops, cultivated in various combinations. A combination of high demographic growth rate, economic and political changes, return of displaced people, and a massive but temporary flood of refugees, has led to important land-use changes in the last decades. In terms of sustainable development of the region, one of the most exciting features is the recent dynamic extension of agroforests around most villages. We report here on this extension, that we studied in detail in Nienh (8°59'N;7°54'W, Kobela CRD) which is representative of the agro-ecological and socioeconomic conditions of most villages of "Guinée Forestière". Two main cropping systems were characterized, that both have an important tree components: (1) Coffee-based agroforests, which are the main cash income system, and (2) Elaeis parklands dedicated to rainfed rice and food crops cultivation after slash and burn, combined with 2 to 10 year fallows. The village territory was organized into concentric belts. The coffee-based agroforest makes up the first belt, directly surrounding the village. It may be subdivided into a first ring, with old coffee trees in association with Cola nitida and an upper stratum mixing various primary forest tree species, surrounded by a second ring that corresponds to a recent extension of coffee-based agroforests. This second ring differs by its younger coffee trees and its upper stratum mixing Elaeis guineensis and various heliophilous tree species. Land-use changes were quantified using a GIS analysis to compare aerial pictures from 1979 and a SPOT image from 2003. The agroforest area increased by nearly 70 % in 25 years (868 ha in 2003 versus 513 ha in 1979). This remarkable extension of the agroforest area occurred through the conversion of land under food crops and fallows into agroforests. These dynamics reveal that an increasing integration into the market economy may be achieved while increasing the ecological sustainability of the mixture of cropping systems at the village scale.