Resin producing agroforestry in the Krui area of Sumatra in Indonesia is presented as an environmentally friendly, income generating land-use system which contributes to both development and conservation objectives. This paper studies the change in household income portfolios in three communities in the Krui area with the aim of answering five research questions:
- What is the difference in household income composition between 1995 and 2004?
- Are farmers converting mature agroforests to other land uses?
- Are farmers continuing to establish new agroforests?
- How and why do trends differ among various parts of the Krui area?
- What are the implications of the observed trends for the Krui agroforests and the neighbouring national park?
The paper reports that:
- in the period 1995–2004 agroforestry remained the main source of income;
- farmers did not convert mature damar agroforest at any significant scale, and continued to introduce tree seedlings in their STP gardens;
- there are indications that the near future will bring increased levels of conversion of the agroforests, but the authors find no indications that increased levels of conversion would mean a fast transition to specialised plantation management;
- the choice of whether or not to convert mature agroforest is influenced by financial push and pull factors and by the strength of traditions that favour agroforest conservation. The most important factor that may drive conversion is the financial opportunity provided by the timber industry.
The authors conclude that there is scope for agroforest systems to provide an alternative rather than a transition to specialised plantation management. However, as many rural communities are confronted with increasing dependency on cash income for daily needs, the future of complex agroforest systems will depend mainly on their financial competitiveness with land-use alternatives. The paper highlights several lessons from the Krui case, including:
- commercialisation of timber may emerge as an opportunity for agroforest farmers, but may at the same time be the main threat to maintenance of standing agroforests;
- the productivity of agroforest systems may be influenced by both physiological factors and management practices;
- interventions to support complex agroforest systems should start with the identification of local problems and opportunities. Before considering the possibilities of popular blueprint concepts like ‘green niche markets’ and ‘Payments for Environmental Services’, such local problems would need to be addressed.
