2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.agee.2015.06.013
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluating factors influencing heterogeneity in agroforestry adoption and practices within smallholder farms in Rift Valley, Kenya

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

8
28
0
3

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 63 publications
(39 citation statements)
references
References 44 publications
(51 reference statements)
8
28
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…This indicated that certain species are preferred in specific agroforestry systems. The results are in line with Nyaga et al, (2015) who also reported preference for certain species in certain agroforestry systems. Henry et al, (2009) reported higher diversity in homestead and farm land where different trees distributed were proportional, and lower diversity was observed in wood lot and hedge planting.…”
Section: Fig2 Species Density In Different Districts Under Irrigatedsupporting
confidence: 81%
“…This indicated that certain species are preferred in specific agroforestry systems. The results are in line with Nyaga et al, (2015) who also reported preference for certain species in certain agroforestry systems. Henry et al, (2009) reported higher diversity in homestead and farm land where different trees distributed were proportional, and lower diversity was observed in wood lot and hedge planting.…”
Section: Fig2 Species Density In Different Districts Under Irrigatedsupporting
confidence: 81%
“…Thus, in southern Bahia, Brazil, farmers often plant non-native rubber (Hevea brasiliensis) and jackfruit (Artocarpus heterophyllus) trees rather than native timber and fruit trees for shade in their cocoa farms (Schroth et al, 2011); in Costa Rica, Eucalyptus species have become popular as coffee shade (Tavares et al, 1999;Schaller et al, 2003); and in Ghana, cocoa and coffee farmers wishing to diversify into timber production often prefer South American Cedrela odorata or Asian Tectona grandis to native species (Ruf, 2011). Similar preferences for planting exotic tree species on farm land have also been observed in other tropical regions (Dewees, 1995;Elouard et al, 2000;Takaoka, 2008a,b;Ambinakudige and Sathish, 2009;Nath et al, 2011;Kehlenbeck et al, 2011;Tefera et al, 2014;Nyaga et al, 2015;Valencia et al, 2015). In addition to the threat of declining environmental quality and ecosystem services caused by exotic species monocultures, diversity and continuity of the tree canopy may be compromised, thus preventing wildlife migration across agroforests and between nearby forest fragments (Perfecto et al, 1996;Vandermeer and Perfecto, 2007;Schroth et al, 2011).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 61%
“…Farmers worldwide have contributed substantially towards this diversity by planting trees that provide economic value, food security and environmental improvement (Dewees, 1995;Scherr, 1995;Akinnifesi et al, 2006;Takaoka, 2008a;Anglaaere et al, 2011;Kehlenbeck et al, 2011;Goodall et al, 2015;Nyaga et al, 2015). However, a recent globally observed threat to farmland biodiversity is the ongoing transformation of traditional complex agroforests into simpler land use forms dominated by exotic species, which may eventually culminate in unshaded crop monocultures (Siebert, 2002;Peeters et al, 2003;Ruf, 2011;Jha et al, 2014).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…In reality, different agroforestry practices such as various forms of tree planning and indigenous practices such as FMNR co-exist (Nyaga et al 2015). Unfortunately, there have been few empirical studies in Ethiopia or further afield in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) to understand patterns of tree cover in agricultural landscapes as a whole rather than focusing on a single technology.…”
Section: Abstract Characterization á Farmer Managed Natural Regeneratmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Patterns of tree cover on farm in Ethiopia, as elsewhere in SSA, are complex and heterogeneous in terms of (1) mixture of species, (2) utilities derived from these species, (3) management intensity and niches occupied, under (4) specific biophysical and socio-economic circumstances (Nyaga et al 2015). These dimensions correspond to criteria used to classify agroforestry practices: (1) structural, the nature and arrangement of components; (2) functional, the role and output derived from them; (3) socioeconomic, the type of management; and (4) agroecological, the zone where a system exists or is adoptable (Sinclair 1999).…”
Section: Research Questions and Hypothesesmentioning
confidence: 99%