Exploring farmers' agrobiodiversity management practices and knowledge in clove agroforests of Madagascar

Abstract

Interactions between farmers and agrobiodiversity are key drivers of agroecosystems sustainability and of the resilience of such systems to perturbations, but research into the human/nature interactions have overlooked some important aspects of agrobiodiversity management. In particular, farmers' ecological knowledge of the spatial organisation of plant diversity remains an open question, although knowledge and practices have major implications for the efficient and sustainable use of natural resources. Our study addresses this question by analysing how farmers spatially organise plant species in agroforests based on their knowledge of species interactions and interactions with the environment. The Analanjirofo region on the north‐east coast of Madagascar provides an interesting context to explore this issue in clove‐based agroforests, as these systems were developed by farmers as a sustainable alternative to the traditional system of shifting rice cultivation. Using an emic approach, that is based on the farmers' perspective, and participatory mapping, we studied plant diversity and its spatial organisation in 17 clove‐based agroforests and in 28 management sub‐units defined by farmers in a village of Vavatenina district. The plant functions and farmers' knowledge of plant interactions with clove tree were recorded in semi‐structured interviews, and the interactions were represented in a cognitive map. Farmers manage more than 50 plant species associated with diverse functions. Analysis of participatory maps identified four main types of species association as a function of the age of the clove trees and the associated plant diversity, and different spatial organisation patterns as a function of the topography and the surrounding species. Analysis of farmers' knowledge provided valuable insights into spatial organisation practices, how farmers perceive the adaptation of plant species to biophysical heterogeneity of the environment and whether they can be associated with other species. Our findings and methods pave the way for further interdisciplinary research on farmers/nature interactions to support the development of agrobiodiversity‐based systems taking into account farmer and scientific knowledge and practices, especially in the tropics where the expansion of cash crops in input‐intensive and mono‐cropping systems has driven major disruptions to smallholder agriculture.

Agrobiodiversity-Oriented Food Systems between Public Policies and Private Action: A Socio-Ecological Model for Sustainable Territorial Development

“…Achieving resilient and sustainable agrobiodiversity-oriented food systems depends on increased levels of social learning and cognition about agrobiodiversity assets, involving both public and private stakeholders, and consequent improved collective action to structure adequate multi-actor governance and hybrid management mechanisms [27,54,55,57,62,64]. These processes can be seen within the frame of a quality valorization virtuous circle of endangered landraces and related traditions, considering the integration of relevant public policies and strategies of private actors [65,66].…”

“…To improve the validity and applicability of such findings, current research on agrobiodiversity increasingly places value on the contribution of holistic approaches [30,57,77], particularly socio-ecological theories and conceptual frameworks [2,[78][79][80][81][82][83][84].…”

“…The intent of the debate on these topics is to foster interdisciplinary action, research and participatory methodologies towards the development of sustainable and multifunctional agrobiodiversity-based systems [54][55][56]. The debate also aims at favoring the design of new conceptual frameworks in order to characterize and analyze underlying human and natural factors, related interactions and generated outcomes [57].…”

Indigenous farmers’ perceptions of problems in the rice field agroecosystems in the upper Baram, Malaysia

“…On a smaller scale, farmers perceive ecological and agronomic processes in spatial sub-units within landscape elements that are addressed by the practices they apply [ 45 ]. These spatial sub-units or microzones are patches of homogeneous characteristics perceived and articulated by farmers [ 45 , 46 ].…”

“…On a smaller scale, farmers perceive ecological and agronomic processes in spatial sub-units within landscape elements that are addressed by the practices they apply [ 45 ]. These spatial sub-units or microzones are patches of homogeneous characteristics perceived and articulated by farmers [ 45 , 46 ]. For example, Mongolian farmers perceive microhabitats such as vegetation that has higher nutrient needs on marmot burrows or weeds along fences or around manure heaps [ 47 ], while the Tsimane’ divide their landscape sub-units based on the dominance of plant species [ 16 ].…”