Evidence for the impacts of agroforestry on agricultural productivity, ecosystem services, and human well-being in high-income countries: a systematic map protocol

Springer Science and Business Media LLC - Tập 7 Số 1
Sarah E. Brown1, Daniel C. Miller1, Pablo J. Ordoñez2, Kathy Baylis2
1Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Sciences, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, 1102 S. Goodwin Ave, Urbana, IL 61801, USA
2Department of Agricultural and Consumer Economics, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, 1301 W Gregory Dr, Urbana, IL, 61801, USA

Tóm tắt

Abstract Background Agroforestry bridges the gap that often separates agriculture and forestry by building integrated systems that address both environmental and socio-economic objectives. Agroforestry can improve the resiliency of agricultural systems and mitigate the impacts of climate change. Existing research suggests that integrating trees on farms can prevent environmental degradation, improve agricultural productivity, increase carbon sequestration, generate cleaner water, and support healthy soil and healthy ecosystems while providing stable incomes and other benefits to human welfare. Although these claims are becoming more widely accepted as the body of agroforestry research increases, systematic understanding of the evidence supporting them remains lacking for high-income countries. This systematic map will address this research need by providing a tool for identifying and visualizing the existing evidence demonstrating the impacts of agroforestry practices and interventions on agricultural productivity, ecosystem services, and human well-being. The results will be useful for informing policy decisions and future research by making the evidence easily accessible and highlighting the gaps in knowledge as well as areas with enough evidence to conduct systematic reviews. Methods This systematic map will identify, collect, display, and describe available evidence on the impacts of agroforestry on agricultural productivity, ecosystem services, and human well-being in high-income countries. The search strategy will cover 5 primary databases and 24 organizational websites using a pre-defined search string designed to capture studies relating agroforestry practices and interventions to outcomes in high-income countries. The searches will all be conducted in English. We will screen the identified studies for inclusion or exclusion in stages, first on title and abstract and then on full-text. We will collect data from studies included at the full-text stage to form the map and associated database. For inclusion, the study in question must assess the impacts of the deliberate promotion and/or actual integration of woody perennials (trees, shrubs, palms, bamboos, etc.) on the same land management unit as agricultural crops and/or animals.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Smith J, Pearce BD, Wolfe MS. Reconciling productivity with protection of the environment: is temperate agroforestry the answer? Renew Agric Food Syst. 2012;28:80–92.

Jose S, Gold MA, Garrett HE. The future of temperate agroforestry in the United States. In: Nair PKR, Garrity D, editors. Agroforestry—the future of global land use. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands; 2012. p. 217–45.

Waldron A, Garrity D, Malhi Y, Girardin C, Miller DC, Seddon N. Agroforestry can enhance food security while meeting other sustainable development goals. Trop Conserv Sci. 2017;10:1–6.

Garrity DP. Agroforestry and the achievement of the millennium development goals. Agrofor Syst. 2004;61:5–17.

Jose S. Agroforestry for ecosystem services and environmental benefits: an overview. Agrofor Syst. 2009;76:1–10.

Jose S, Bardhan S. Agroforestry for biomass production and carbon sequestration: an overview. Agrofor Syst. 2012;86:105–11.

Fagerholm N, Torralba M, Burgess PJ, Plieninger T. A systematic map of ecosystem services assessments around European agroforestry. Ecol Ind. 2016;62:47–65.

Wilson M, Lovell S. Agroforestry—the next step in sustainable and resilient agriculture. Sustainability. 2016;8:574.

Holzmueller EJ, Jose S. Biomass production for biofuels using agroforestry: potential for the North Central Region of the United States. Agrofor Syst. 2012;85:305–14.

Tsonkova P, Böhm C, Quinkenstein A, Freese D. Ecological benefits provided by alley cropping systems for production of woody biomass in the temperate region: a review. Agrofor Syst. 2012;85:133–52.

Udawatta RP, Jose S. Agroforestry strategies to sequester carbon in temperate North America. Agrofor Syst. 2012;86:225–42.

Buck LE. Agroforestry policy issues and research directions in the US and less developed countries: insights and challenges from recent experience. Agrofor Syst. 1995;30:57–73.

Lassoie JP, Buck LE, Current D. The development of agroforestry as an integrated land use management strategy. In: Gene Garrett HE, editor. North American agroforestry: an integrated science and practice. 2nd ed. Washington: American Society of Agronomy; 2009. p. 1–24.

Lovell ST, Dupraz C, Gold M, Jose S, Revord R, Stanek E, Wolz KJ. Temperate agroforestry research: considering multifunctional woody polycultures and the design of long-term field trials. Agrofor Syst. 2018;92:1397–415.

Miller DC, Ordonez PJ, Baylis K, Hughes K, Rana P. Protocol for an evidence and gap map. The impacts of agroforestry on agricultural productivity, ecosystem services, and human well-being in low- and middle-income countries: an evidence and gap map. In: Campbell collaboration; 2017.

USDA. USDA agroforestry strategic framework, fiscal year 2011–2016. Washington, D.C.: U. S. Department of Agriculture; 2011.

Leakey RRB. Definition of agroforestry revisited. Agrofor Today. 1996;8:5–7.

Atangana A, Khasa D, Chang S, Degrande A. Definitions and classification of agroforestry systems. In Tropical agroforestry. Dordrecht: Springer; 2014. p. 35–47.

Huxley P, van Houten H. Glossary for agroforestry. Nairobi: World Agroforestry Center (ICRAF); 1997.

USDA. Agroforestry USDA reports to America, fiscal years 2011–2012—comprehensive version. Washington, D.C.: Department of Agriculture; 2013.

Mosquera-Losada MR, Santiago-Freijanes J, Pisanelli A, Rois M, Smith J, Herder M, Moreno G, Malignier N, Mirazo JR, Lamersdorf N, et al. Extent and success of current policy measures to promote agroforestry across Europe. 2016.

Nair PKR, Garrity D. Agroforestry—the future of global land use. 2012.

Garrett HE, Buck L. Agroforestry practice and policy in the United States of America. For Ecol Manag. 1997;91:5–15.

IPES-Food. From uniformity to diversity: a paradigm shift from industrial agriculture to diversified agroecological systems. International Panel of Experts on Sustainable Food Systems; 2016.

Matson PA, Parton WJ, Power AG, Swift MJ. Agricultural intensification and ecosystem properties. Science. 1997;277:504–9.

Tilman D, Cassman KG, Matson PA, Naylor R, Polasky S. Agricultural sustainability and intensive production practices. Nature. 2002;418:671.

Lobao L, Meyer K. The great agricultural transition: crisis, change, and social consequences of twentieth century US farming. Ann Rev Sociol. 2001;27:103–24.

Foley JA, DeFries R, Asner GP, Barford C, Bonan G, Carpenter SR, Chapin FS, Coe MT, Daily GC, Gibbs HK, et al. Global consequences of land use. Science. 2005;309:570–4.

Valdivia C, Barbieri C, Gold MA. Between forestry and farming: policy and environmental implications of the barriers to agroforestry adoption. Can J Agric Econ. 2012;60:155–75.

Jacobson M, Kar S. Extent of agroforestry extension programs in the United States. J Ext. 2013;51:4RIB4.

Mbow C, Van Noordwijk M, Luedeling E, Neufeldt H, Minang PA, Kowero G. Agroforestry solutions to address food security and climate change challenges in Africa. Curr Opin Environ Sustain. 2014;6:61–7.

Sharma N, Bohra B, Pragya N, Ciannella R, Dobie P, Lehmann S. Bioenergy from agroforestry can lead to improved food security, climate change, soil quality, and rural development. Food Energy Secur. 2016;5:165–83.

Garrett HE. North American agroforestry: an integrated science and practice. Washington: American Society of Agronomy; 2009.

World Bank Country and Lending Groups. https://datahelpdesk.worldbank.org/knowledgebase/articles/906519-world-bank-country-and-lending-groups. Accessed 28 June 2018.

Wolz KJ, Lovell ST, Branham BE, Eddy WC, Keeley K, Revord RS, Wander MM, Yang WH, DeLucia EH. Frontiers in alley cropping: transformative solutions for temperate agriculture. Glob Chang Biol. 2018;24:883–94.

Dollinger J, Jose S. Agroforestry for soil health. Agrofor Syst. 2018;92:213–9.

Torralba M, Fagerholm N, Burgess PJ, Moreno G, Plieninger T. Do European agroforestry systems enhance biodiversity and ecosystem services? A meta-analysis. Agric Ecosyst Environ. 2016;230:150–61.

Haddaway NR, Brown C, Eales J, Eggers S, Josefsson J, Kronvang B, Randall NP, Uusi-Kämppä J. The multifunctional roles of vegetated strips around and within agricultural fields. Environ Evid. 2018;7:14.

Ottoy S, Angileri V, Gibert C, Paracchini ML, Pointereau P, Terres J-M, Van Orshoven J, Vranken L, Dicks LV. Impacts of selected ecological focus area options in European farmed landscapes on climate regulation and pollination services: a systematic map protocol. Environ Evid. 2018;7:10.

McKinnon MC, Cheng SH, Dupre S, Edmond J, Garside R, Glew L, Holland MB, Levine E, Masuda YJ, Miller DC, et al. What are the effects of nature conservation on human well-being? A systematic map of empirical evidence from developing countries. Environ Evid. 2016;5:8.

Cheng SH, Ahlroth S, Onder S, Shyamsundar P, Garside R, Kristjanson P, McKinnon MC, Miller DC. What is the evidence for the contribution of forests to poverty alleviation? A systematic map protocol. Environ Evid. 2017;6:10.

Garrity DP, Akinnifesi FK, Ajayi OC, Weldesemayat SG, Mowo JG, Kalinganire A, Larwanou M, Bayala J. Evergreen agriculture: a robust approach to sustainable food security in Africa. Food Secur. 2010;2:197–214.

Mosquera-Losada MR, Moreno G, Pardini A, McAdam JH, Papanastasis V, Burgess PJ, Lamersdorf N, Castro M, Liagre F, Rigueiro-Rodríguez A. Past, Present and Future of Agroforestry Systems in Europe. In: Nair PKR, Garrity D, editors. Agroforestry—the future of global land use. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands; 2012. p. 285–312.

Thevathasan NV, Gordon AM, Bradley R, Cogliastro A, Folkard P, Grant R, Kort J, Liggins L, Njenga F, Olivier A, et al. Agroforestry research and development in Canada: the way forward. In: Nair PKR, Garrity D, editors. Agroforestry—the future of global land use. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands; 2012. p. 247–83.

Reid R. Developing farmer and community capacity in agroforestry: is the Australian Master TreeGrower program transferable to other countries? Agrofor Syst. 2016;91:847–65.

Takeuchi K. Rebuilding the relationship between people and nature: the Satoyama initiative. Ecol Res. 2010;25:891–7.

den Herder M, Moreno G, Mosquera-Losada RM, Palma JHN, Sidiropoulou A, Santiago Freijanes JJ, Crous-Duran J, Paulo JA, Tomé M, Pantera A, et al. Current extent and stratification of agroforestry in the European Union. Agric Ecosyst Environ. 2017;241:121–32.

Montambault JR, Alavalapati JRR. Socioeconomic research in agroforestry: a decade in review. Agrofor Syst. 2005;65:151–61.

Jordan N, Warner KD. Towards multifunctional agricultural landscapes for the Upper Midwest Region of the USA. In: Steve Wratten HS, Ross C, Robert C, editors. Ecosystem services in agricultural and urban landscapes. New York: Wiley; 2013. p. 139–56.

Cheng SH, MacLeod K, Ahlroth S, Onder S, Perge E, Shyamsundar P, Rana P, Garside R, Kristjanson P, McKinnon MC, Miller DC. What is the contribution of forests to poverty alleviation? A systematic map of global evidence. Environmental Evidence in review.

Haddaway NR, Brown C, Eggers S, Josefsson J, Kronvang B, Randall N, Uusi-Kämppä J. The multifunctional roles of vegetated strips around and within agricultural fields. A systematic map protocol. Environ Evid. 2016;5:18.

Haddaway NR, Collins AM, Coughlin D, Kirk S. A rapid method to increase transparency and efficiency in web-based searches. Environ Evid. 2017;6:1.

Haddaway NR, Collins AM, Coughlin D, Kirk S, Larsen P, Ins MV, Pautasso M, Noorden R, Khabsa M, Giles C, et al. The role of google scholar in evidence reviews and its applicability to grey literature searching. PLoS ONE. 2015;10:e0138237.

Perkel JM. How scientists use Slack. Nat News. 2017;541:123.

James KL, Randall NP, Haddaway NR. A methodology for systematic mapping in environmental sciences. Environ Evid. 2016;5:7.

Snilstveit B, Stevenson J, Villar PF, Eyers J, Harvey C, Panfil S, Puri J, McKinnon MC. Land-use change and forestry programmes: evidence on the effects on greenhouse gas emissions and food security. In: Evidence gap map report 3. London; 2016.

Cohen J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ Psychol Meas. 1960;20:37–46.

Ferraro PJ. Counterfactual thinking and impact evaluation in environmental policy. New Dir Eval. 2009;2009:75–84.

Waddington H, White H, Snilstveit B, Hombrados JG, Vojtkova M, Davies P, Bhavsar A, Eyers J, Koehlmoos TP, Petticrew M, et al. How to do a good systematic review of effects in international development: a tool kit. J Dev Eff. 2012;4:359–87.

Nair PKR. State-of-the-art of agroforestry research and education. Agrofor Syst. 1993;23:95–119.

The Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES). http://cices.eu. Accessed 28 June 2018.

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Ecosystems and human well-being: synthesis. Washington, DC: Island Press; 2005.

Kumar P. The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity (TEEB) ecological and economic foundations. London, Washington: Earthscan; 2010.

Miller D, Ordonez P, Brown S, Forrest S, Nava N, Hughes K, Baylis K. The impacts of agroforestry on agricultural productivity, ecosystem services, and human well-being in low- and middle-income countries: an evidence gap map. In: 3ie evidence gap map report. London: International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie); (in review).

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Tập 7 Số 1

Thông tin tác giả