The evidence base on the environmental, economic and social outcomes of agroforestry is patchy—An evidence review map

Abstract

Agroforestry is often seen as a panacea that offers multiple environmental, economic, and social benefits. However, the validity of generalized statements on agroforestry outcomes is doubtful because the evidence base is unclear. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses exist on the topic in addition to many case studies that address specific outcomes of individual agroforestry practices at different sites. However, the overall picture of available scientific evidence on agroforestry outcomes remains opaque due to the wide diversity of existing agroforestry practices, outcome indicators, and spatial locations. To clarify whether and in which areas the research landscape allows conclusions to be drawn about the potential benefits or drawbacks of agroforestry compared to other land uses, an evidence review map was created for the purpose of this study. Based on a systematic literature search and screening, 64 systematic review articles were finally identified that summarize ecological, economic, or social outcomes of at least one agroforestry practice compared to another land use as control. The thematic and spatial coverage of the systematic reviews on agroforestry outcomes is mapped to identify density and research gaps in the evidence base. Moreover, the comprehensibility of the study selection for each identified systematic review is critically assessed. The resulting evidence review map discloses a solid evidence base for environmental outcomes and productivity aspects of individual agrisilvicultural practices, as well as for agroforestry systems when considering an aggregate level. However, the outcomes of individual silvopastoral and agrosilvopastoral practices have been less studied in the literature. A global coverage at the level of individual agroforestry practices is only available for impacts on climate change mitigation. Major research gaps were identified for systematic analysis of social outcomes of all agroforestry types. The results of the evidence mapping highlight further research needs, but also urge for caution in making generalized statements about the benefits of agroforestry.

Reconciling policy instruments with drivers of deforestation and forest degradation: cross-scale analysis of stakeholder perceptions in tropical countries

“…These approaches can be relevant in the current context of transformative change towards climate-resilient socioecological systems and the proliferation of fragmented and degraded forests 2 , 80 . However, we should highlight that this strong preference for reforestation over other policy instruments does not necessarily imply that prioritizing such measures always constitutes sound policy 81 , 82 . This interesting finding could reflect the widely extended narratives of the current international forest agenda promoting reforestation measures, e.g., in the context of the Bonn Challenge.…”

Untitled

“…Moreover, a major economic benefit of agroforestry is its relatively high land equivalent ratio. In other words, the yield of a major crop may be lower in agroforestry than under monoculture, but the overall yield in agroforestry can be higher due to the additional products cultivated (Bowart and Logan 2020; Köthke et al 2022). In case studies in Viet Nam, for example, three different coffee agroforestry combinations resulted in a higher net income per hectare (ha) than monocultural coffee yielded under similar conditions (Figure 1).…”

Unlocking the sustainable livelihoods strategy for forest communities in the southern slope of Mount Slamet, Indonesia

“…Instead, agrosilvopasture allows for coexistence between economic development and ecosystem preservation. This encourages communities to work harmoniously with the forest, and fosters shared responsibility for their wellbeing (Dar et al, 2023;Köthke;Ahimbisibwe;Lippe, 2022).…”