A multistory agroforestry system (GERBA LETA)

Multistorey agroforestry (Ethiopia)

Mitikarsamino Ersha

Description

Multistorey agroforestry is the intentional mixing of trees/shrubs with crops, pastures, and livestock. The practice creates environmental, economic, and social benefits for the end users.

Multistorey agroforestry is the intentional mixing of trees/shrubs with crops and pasture at different levels ("storeys" or heights) and the livestock. The practice creates environmental, economic, and social benefits for the end users. Agroforestry practices provide opportunities to integrate productivity and profitability with environmental stewardship resulting in healthy and sustainable agricultural systems that can be passed on to future generations. Tree litter increases soil organic matter and reduces soil chemical and biological degradation. Tree cover can reduce soil erosion and evaporation from the soil surface. The technology is applied close to the homestead as it demands close follow-up and steady management practices, and that is where tree-crop-livestock integration can be best applied. The farmer whose practice is described here used to be very poor four decades ago. He has planted coffee gradually over the years under shade trees. As a staple perennial food crop, enset was planted also in the mixture. Livestock were also integrated. Eventually, numerous multipurpose tree species, food and fodder crops, and physical structures with productive barriers were integrated into the farming system. As a consequence, a multistorey agroforestry system has been established over years.
The purpose of the technology is to ensure ecological, economic, and social benefits. The rolling landscape of the area necessitates permanent ground cover to reduce the effect of erosive rainfall that degrades the soil. Once established, the technology needs management practices including pruning/stumping of coffee trees, managing other trees, weed control, enrichment planting with coffee and enset, and fertilization of annual and perennial crops. The livelihood of the respondent farmer has been completely changed. He has made a significant accumulation of wealth from producing and sale of tons of unprocessed coffee, avocado fruits and some indigenous bananas. This form of agroforestry creates year-round employment opportunities for proactive farmers. However, subsistence farmers with small parcels give priority entirely to the mono-cropping of cereals and other fast-maturing crops to meet their urgent demand for food. Shortage of land, capital, and a general lack of awareness about the sustainable benefits of the technology are reasons for lack of adoption of the technology.

Location

Location: Shoye kebele (Kebele - lower administrative level), Sidama, Ethiopia

No. of Technology sites analysed: single site

Geo-reference of selected sites
  • 38.43817, 6.77315

Spread of the Technology: applied at specific points/ concentrated on a small area

In a permanently protected area?: No

Date of implementation: 1980; 10-50 years ago

Type of introduction

Classification of the Technology

Main purpose
  • improve production
  • reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
  • conserve ecosystem
  • protect a watershed/ downstream areas – in combination with other Technologies
  • preserve/ improve biodiversity
  • reduce risk of disasters
  • adapt to climate change/ extremes and its impacts
  • mitigate climate change and its impacts
  • create beneficial economic impact
  • create beneficial social impact
Land use
Land use mixed within the same land unit: Yes - Agroforestry

  • Cropland
    • Annual cropping: cereals - maize, Legumes - Haricot beans and other climbing species, Pumpkin and root crops/tuber potato and yam.
    • Perennial (non-woody) cropping: banana/plantain/abaca, fodder crops - grasses, herbs, chili, capsicum, Enset/false banana
    • Tree and shrub cropping: avocado, coffee, shade grown, mango, mangosteen, guava
    Number of growing seasons per year: 2
    Is intercropping practiced? Yes
    Is crop rotation practiced? Yes
Water supply
  • rainfed
  • mixed rainfed-irrigated
  • full irrigation

Purpose related to land degradation
  • prevent land degradation
  • reduce land degradation
  • restore/ rehabilitate severely degraded land
  • adapt to land degradation
  • not applicable
Degradation addressed
  • soil erosion by water - Wt: loss of topsoil/ surface erosion, Wg: gully erosion/ gullying, Wm: mass movements/ landslides
  • chemical soil deterioration - Cn: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content (not caused by erosion), Ca: acidification
  • physical soil deterioration - Pc: compaction, Pw: waterlogging, Ps: subsidence of organic soils, settling of soil
  • biological degradation - Bc: reduction of vegetation cover, Bh: loss of habitats, Bq: quantity/ biomass decline, Bs: quality and species composition/ diversity decline, Bl: loss of soil life, Bp: increase of pests/ diseases, loss of predators
SLM group
  • agroforestry
  • integrated crop-livestock management
  • integrated soil fertility management
SLM measures
  • agronomic measures - A1: Vegetation/ soil cover, A2: Organic matter/ soil fertility
  • vegetative measures - V1: Tree and shrub cover
  • structural measures - S2: Bunds, banks
  • management measures - M1: Change of land use type, M2: Change of management/ intensity level

Technical drawing

Technical specifications
An adopted technical drawing/specification of the classification of tree-crop arrangement in the multistorey agroforestry system.
Author: Xu J, Mercado A, He J., Dawson I (eds.) (2013); ISBN 978-92-9059-333-1

Establishment and maintenance: activities, inputs and costs

Calculation of inputs and costs
  • Costs are calculated: per Technology area (size and area unit: 4Timad; conversion factor to one hectare: 1 ha = 4 Timad = 1 ha)
  • Currency used for cost calculation: Ethiopian Birr
  • Exchange rate (to USD): 1 USD = 53.12 Ethiopian Birr
  • Average wage cost of hired labour per day: In rural area wage rate vary by type of work: coffee harvest-80 ETB/day, weeding 60 ETB/day. About 70 birr/day, on average.
Most important factors affecting the costs
Economic crisis and the prevailing inflation in the country, and global changes in price of petroleum and other commodities such as chemical fertilizers.
Establishment activities
  1. Land preparation (Timing/ frequency: Before and during Belg (short rain) and Meher (long rain) season.)
  2. Enset and Coffee planting (Timing/ frequency: In Belg and Meher season, respectively.)
  3. Planting beans (annual crops) (Timing/ frequency: In Belg season)
  4. Fodder and other Multipurpose trees planting (Timing/ frequency: In Meher (main rainy season).)
Establishment inputs and costs (per 4Timad)
Specify input Unit Quantity Costs per Unit (Ethiopian Birr) Total costs per input (Ethiopian Birr) % of costs borne by land users
Labour
Land preparation Oxen plow 16.0 200.0 3200.0 100.0
Planting annual crops Oxen plow 4.0 200.0 800.0 100.0
Planting perennial crops PDs 20.0 70.0 1400.0 100.0
Planting fodder crops and trees PDs 5.0 70.0 350.0 100.0
Equipment
Spade Number 1.0 400.0 400.0 100.0
Hoe Number 1.0 600.0 600.0 100.0
Digging fork Number 1.0 500.0 500.0 100.0
Plant material
Coffee seedling number 2500.0 10.0 25000.0 100.0
Enset seedling number 6000.0 5.0 30000.0 100.0
Tree seedling number 1500.0 2.0 3000.0 50.0
Beans seed kg 50.0 42.0 2100.0 100.0
Fertilizers and biocides
NSP fertilizer kg 100.0 44.0 4400.0
Urea fertilizer kg 50.0 44.0 2200.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology 73'950.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD 1'392.13
Maintenance activities
  1. Inputs (Timing/ frequency: Before the onset of short/long rain.)
  2. Management (Timing/ frequency: Throughout the year depending on the management types.)
  3. Farm tools (Timing/ frequency: During off-season.)
Maintenance inputs and costs (per 4Timad)
Specify input Unit Quantity Costs per Unit (Ethiopian Birr) Total costs per input (Ethiopian Birr) % of costs borne by land users
Labour
Enrichment/replacement planting PDs 5.0 70.0 350.0 100.0
Fertilization PDs 40.0 70.0 2800.0 100.0
Weeding PDs 40.0 70.0 2800.0 100.0
Equipment
Hoes number 4.0 600.0 2400.0 100.0
Digging fork number 4.0 500.0 2000.0 100.0
Spade number 4.0 400.0 1600.0 100.0
Plant material
Coffee seedling for replacement number 250.0 10.0 2500.0 100.0
Fertilizers and biocides
NSP kg 100.0 44.0 4400.0
Urea kg 50.0 44.0 2200.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology 21'050.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD 396.27

Natural environment

Average annual rainfall
  • < 250 mm
  • 251-500 mm
  • 501-750 mm
  • 751-1,000 mm
  • 1,001-1,500 mm
  • 1,501-2,000 mm
  • 2,001-3,000 mm
  • 3,001-4,000 mm
  • > 4,000 mm
Agro-climatic zone
  • humid
  • sub-humid
  • semi-arid
  • arid
Specifications on climate
The area receive adequate rainfall.
Name of the meteorological station: Awassa Meteorology center
The climate is virtually consistent except during the season of El Nino and cyclical shortage that happens once in years.
Slope
  • flat (0-2%)
  • gentle (3-5%)
  • moderate (6-10%)
  • rolling (11-15%)
  • hilly (16-30%)
  • steep (31-60%)
  • very steep (>60%)
Landforms
  • plateau/plains
  • ridges
  • mountain slopes
  • hill slopes
  • footslopes
  • valley floors
Altitude
  • 0-100 m a.s.l.
  • 101-500 m a.s.l.
  • 501-1,000 m a.s.l.
  • 1,001-1,500 m a.s.l.
  • 1,501-2,000 m a.s.l.
  • 2,001-2,500 m a.s.l.
  • 2,501-3,000 m a.s.l.
  • 3,001-4,000 m a.s.l.
  • > 4,000 m a.s.l.
Technology is applied in
  • convex situations
  • concave situations
  • not relevant
Soil depth
  • very shallow (0-20 cm)
  • shallow (21-50 cm)
  • moderately deep (51-80 cm)
  • deep (81-120 cm)
  • very deep (> 120 cm)
Soil texture (topsoil)
  • coarse/ light (sandy)
  • medium (loamy, silty)
  • fine/ heavy (clay)
Soil texture (> 20 cm below surface)
  • coarse/ light (sandy)
  • medium (loamy, silty)
  • fine/ heavy (clay)
Topsoil organic matter content
  • high (>3%)
  • medium (1-3%)
  • low (<1%)
Groundwater table
  • on surface
  • < 5 m
  • 5-50 m
  • > 50 m
Availability of surface water
  • excess
  • good
  • medium
  • poor/ none
Water quality (untreated)
  • good drinking water
  • poor drinking water (treatment required)
  • for agricultural use only (irrigation)
  • unusable
Water quality refers to: ground water
Is salinity a problem?
  • Yes
  • No

Occurrence of flooding
  • Yes
  • No
Species diversity
  • high
  • medium
  • low
Habitat diversity
  • high
  • medium
  • low

Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Market orientation
  • subsistence (self-supply)
  • mixed (subsistence/ commercial)
  • commercial/ market
Off-farm income
  • less than 10% of all income
  • 10-50% of all income
  • > 50% of all income
Relative level of wealth
  • very poor
  • poor
  • average
  • rich
  • very rich
Level of mechanization
  • manual work
  • animal traction
  • mechanized/ motorized
Sedentary or nomadic
  • Sedentary
  • Semi-nomadic
  • Nomadic
Individuals or groups
  • individual/ household
  • groups/ community
  • cooperative
  • employee (company, government)
Gender
  • women
  • men
Age
  • children
  • youth
  • middle-aged
  • elderly
Area used per household
  • < 0.5 ha
  • 0.5-1 ha
  • 1-2 ha
  • 2-5 ha
  • 5-15 ha
  • 15-50 ha
  • 50-100 ha
  • 100-500 ha
  • 500-1,000 ha
  • 1,000-10,000 ha
  • > 10,000 ha
Scale
  • small-scale
  • medium-scale
  • large-scale
Land ownership
  • state
  • company
  • communal/ village
  • group
  • individual, not titled
  • individual, titled
Land use rights
  • open access (unorganized)
  • communal (organized)
  • leased
  • individual
Water use rights
  • open access (unorganized)
  • communal (organized)
  • leased
  • individual
Access to services and infrastructure
health

poor
x
good
education

poor
x
good
technical assistance

poor
x
good
employment (e.g. off-farm)

poor
x
good
markets

poor
x
good
energy

poor
x
good
roads and transport

poor
x
good
drinking water and sanitation

poor
x
good
financial services

poor
x
good
Comments

Tap water is accessible some distance away. The deep well the farmer has is not clean for drinking by the household but for cattle and cleaning goods and clothes.

Impacts

Socio-economic impacts
Crop production
decreased
x
increased


It is difficult to guess the increment by weight of perennial crops such as Enset. Of course, the performance is much better in the agroforestry system with intensive management and application of organic fertilizers. The integration also ameliorates the microclimate of the area and makes the situation ideal for the crops.

crop quality
decreased
x
increased


In the agroforestry system, a combination of livestock manure, tree litter, and a mixed cropping system contributes to soil fertility and soil health which improves crop quality.

fodder quality
decreased
x
increased


Increased with improved soil fertility and soil healthy.

animal production
decreased
x
increased


Livestock access to feed during the dry spell when communal grazing land is denuded of grass. Furthermore, agroforestry promotes a cut-and-carry feeding system that strengthens reliance on one's feed reserves at disposal. This goes with the intensification of livestock production.

risk of production failure
increased
x
decreased


The practices rather improve the resilience of the crop as it creates an ambient environment.

product diversity
decreased
x
increased


The integration increase product diversity.

production area (new land under cultivation/ use)
decreased
x
increased

land management
hindered
x
simplified

energy generation (e.g. hydro, bio)
decreased
x
increased


Cattle manure is used for the production of heat and light energy through the application of biogas technology.

water availability for livestock
decreased
x
increased


Agroforestry's contribution to drinking water availability and water quality was not measured and was beyond the scope of respondents to comprehend and address the questions except the merely conceptual reflection. Of course, the technology reduces runoff and recharges the ground water which directly contributes to the availability of surface water for livestock.

expenses on agricultural inputs
increased
x
decreased


Fertilizer supply changed more to organic than chemical fertilizer. The foliage of tree litter and in situ decomposition of organic matter added substantial value to the restoration of soil fertility.

farm income
decreased
x
increased

diversity of income sources
decreased
x
increased

workload
increased
x
decreased


Increased management demand with gradual increase of the integration of tree crops and the overall size of the land is remarked by the farmer.

Socio-cultural impacts
food security/ self-sufficiency
reduced
x
improved


Land users generate reasonable income from the integration of different perennial and annual crops as well as livestock.

health situation
worsened
x
improved

land use/ water rights
worsened
x
improved

SLM/ land degradation knowledge
reduced
x
improved


The technology immensely contributed to SLM by covering the farmland with perennial trees and crops and by incorporating the physical structure into the practice.

Ecological impacts
harvesting/ collection of water (runoff, dew, snow, etc)
reduced
x
improved

surface runoff
increased
x
decreased

excess water drainage
reduced
x
improved

groundwater table/ aquifer
lowered
x
recharge


The groundwater table is estimated to increase as the ground cover promotes the infiltration and vertical movement of the intercepted rain on a gradual basis.

evaporation
increased
x
decreased


As some tree species such as avocados consume large amounts of water for transpiration needs, the degree of evaporation reduction of the practices is counterbalanced by the integration of the high-consumers with low-consumer species. Overall, agroforestry has a positive impact on evaporation reduction.

soil moisture
decreased
x
increased

soil cover
reduced
x
improved

soil loss
increased
x
decreased

soil accumulation
decreased
x
increased

soil compaction
increased
x
reduced

nutrient cycling/ recharge
decreased
x
increased


Nutrient cycling is highly improved because different tree species may penetrate the impervious soil layer and bring the nutrient to the surface via tree litter, fix atmospheric nitrogen, and add to the soil.

soil organic matter/ below ground C
decreased
x
increased


Highly increase, though not measured for this particular farm.

acidity
increased
x
reduced


The cause of soil acidity can be diverse including the soil parent materials. However, agroforestry has positive acidity-reducing factors by improving soil fertility and soil health.

vegetation cover
decreased
x
increased

biomass/ above ground C
decreased
x
increased

plant diversity
decreased
x
increased


Highly increased because of the combination of trees/shrubs with food crops and fodder crops.

invasive alien species
increased
x
reduced

animal diversity
decreased
x
increased

beneficial species (predators, earthworms, pollinators)
decreased
x
increased

habitat diversity
decreased
x
increased

pest/ disease control
decreased
x
increased


Agroforestry hosts the predators and prey and creates balanced food chains that reduce the degrees of pest development.

drought impacts
increased
x
decreased

emission of carbon and greenhouse gases
increased
x
decreased


It is a climate-smart agriculture by its virtue that increase carbon sequestration as a regenerative agriculture.

wind velocity
increased
x
decreased

micro-climate
worsened
x
improved

Off-site impacts
water availability (groundwater, springs)
decreased
x
increased

reliable and stable stream flows in dry season (incl. low flows)
reduced
x
increased

downstream flooding (undesired)
increased
x
reduced

downstream siltation
increased
x
decreased

groundwater/ river pollution
increased
x
reduced


Even if the impact of agroforestry plays a positive reduction role in pollution, the overall impact is compromised by the total farmland covered by a combination of tree crops.

buffering/ filtering capacity (by soil, vegetation, wetlands)
reduced
x
improved


Agroforestry has a filtering capacity of polluted air with dust and adverse temperature such as during dry and hot days.

wind transported sediments
increased
x
reduced


Intercepted by leaves of trees and shrubs.

damage on neighbours' fields
increased
x
reduced

damage on public/ private infrastructure
increased
x
reduced

impact of greenhouse gases
increased
x
reduced


It highly contributes to carbon absorption and storage above and below the ground.

Cost-benefit analysis

Benefits compared with establishment costs
Short-term returns
very negative
x
very positive

Long-term returns
very negative
x
very positive

Benefits compared with maintenance costs
Short-term returns
very negative
x
very positive

Long-term returns
very negative
x
very positive

Climate change

Gradual climate change
annual temperature increase

not well at all
x
very well
seasonal temperature increase

not well at all
x
very well
Season: dry season
annual rainfall decrease

not well at all
x
very well
seasonal rainfall decrease

not well at all
x
very well
Season: wet/ rainy season
Climate-related extremes (disasters)
drought

not well at all
x
very well

Adoption and adaptation

Percentage of land users in the area who have adopted the Technology
  • single cases/ experimental
  • 1-10%
  • 11-50%
  • > 50%
Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many have done so without receiving material incentives?
  • 0-10%
  • 11-50%
  • 51-90%
  • 91-100%
Number of households and/ or area covered
About 30% of resident farmers have adopted the technology. The prevailing farming system necessitate change in the approach, and outshined farmers motivated the others to follow suit.
Has the Technology been modified recently to adapt to changing conditions?
  • Yes
  • No
To which changing conditions?
  • climatic change/ extremes
  • changing markets
  • labour availability (e.g. due to migration)
Raising coffee prices motivated farmers to refocus on the crop which years back discouraged to shift of the coffee farm to eucalyptus plantation.

Conclusions and lessons learnt

Strengths: land user's view
  • Increase production per unit of land and improve livelihoods of family farmers.
  • Reduce land/soil degradation because of permanent soil cover.
  • Ensure sustainable production, reduce risks and improve the biodiversity. Also, increase the family farmers income and their status in the society. It enables them to feel as valuable elite in the community.
Strengths: compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
  • Agroforestry improves total production earned from a farmland and improve the wellbeing of the adopted farmers. Implies, it has substantial economic benefits.
  • It reduces soil erosion and land degradation. Also has immense ecological benefits and improves the microclimate of the surrounding.
  • It reduces risks of crop failure owing to climate variability. Also, boost the biodiversity of trees, crops, and habitat diversity that host various living creature in the biosphere as well pedosphere. This is related to carbon sequestration, emission reduction, proper ecosystem function, and overall ecological contribution.
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: land user's viewhow to overcome
  • Demand intensive management, and there is shortage of labor. Identify and established trees and crops that requires minimum labor for planting, maintenance & propagation.
  • Incompatible tree species to the essence of proper integration in Agroforestry. Select and adopt trees and crops with desirable characteristics to be integrated in the technology and responsive to management practices.
  • Inconsistent product prices for the farm products such as coffee beans and avocado fruits on the local market. Link farmers to free and fair market which is consistent and sustainable.
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: compiler’s or other key resource person’s viewhow to overcome
  • Failure to select tree species with desirable characteristics Trees/shrubs with the following desirable characteristics need to be considered:
    - Deep root system to draw water & nutrients.
    - Easy to propagate, & high biomass producers, palatable, provide more green manure, & high survival percentage.
    - Adaptable to close spacing like in hedgerows.
    - Good sprouting & positive response to pruning.
    - High coppicing and pollarding capacity.
  • Highly dense in some areas and slightly sparse in some part of the farm. Try to maintain the spacing and distribution of suitable species composition.
  • Trees and shrubs less used as livestock feed except during the shortage period Promote feeding the diverse fodder trees to the livestock to ensure their access and benefited from trees/shrubs as well than rely only on grass family.

References

Compiler
  • GERBA LETA
Editors
  • Julia Doldt
  • Noel Templer
  • Kidist Yilma
  • Tabitha Nekesa
  • Ahmadou Gaye
  • Siagbé Golli
Reviewer
  • William Critchley
  • Rima Mekdaschi Studer
  • Sally Bunning
Date of documentation: Jan. 15, 2023
Last update: April 22, 2024
Resource persons
Full description in the WOCAT database
Linked SLM data
Documentation was faciliated by
Institution Project
Key references
  • World Agroforestry Centre. 2008. Annual Report 2007-2008: Agroforestry for food security and healthy ecosystems. Nairobi, Kenya: World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF). ISSN 1995-6851: www.worldagroforestry.org
  • Agroforestry System for Ecological Restoration: How to reconcile conservation and production options for Brazil's Cerrado and Caatinga Biomes. Miccolis, Peneiveirok Marques et al. 2016. ISBN: 978-85-63288-18-9: http://apps.worldagroforestry.org/downloads/Publications/PDFS/B19034.pdf
  • Indigenous Agroforestry Practices and their Implications on Sustainable Land Use and Natural Resources Management: The Case of Wonago Woreda. Sustainable Land Use Forum (SURF), 2006. Research Report No 1, Addis Ababa: www. devinet.org/sluf
Links to relevant information which is available online
This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareaAlike 4.0 International