Agroforestry can reduce trade-offs between economic and ecological benefits, but only when uncertainties are considered

Abstract

Persistent uncertainty about the economic implications of agroforestry presents a major barrier to adoption. Despite this, most research to date ignores the impact of uncertainty on land allocation decisions, with studies commonly relying on simplistic scenarios involving a dichotomous choice between switching entirely to agroforestry or retaining the status quo system. For a more realistic decision problem, we explore partial adoption choices by analysing how the performance of landscape portfolios under combined ecological and economic uncertainty changes when managers can incorporate two agroforestry alternatives (silvopasture and alley cropping) alongside existing land-use options. Drawing on published data from smallholders in Panama, we use robust optimisation to allocate fractions of land area across six agroforestry and non-agroforestry land uses under a range of possible futures. We visualise trade-offs between uncertain ecological and economic benefits using robust Pareto frontiers. We find that neglecting uncertainty reduces the attractiveness of agroforestry. Instead, agroforestry becomes increasingly competitive as uncertainty grows, and incorporating it into landscape portfolios can mitigate trade-offs between ecological and economic objectives when the future is uncertain. We conclude by outlining a research agenda for a more holistic approach to agroforestry economics under global change.