Exploring farmer perceptions of agroforestry via multi-objective optimisation: a test application in Eastern Panama

13Citations
Citations of this article
64Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Understanding farmers’ perceptions of and preferences towards agroforestry is essential to identify systems with the greatest likelihood of adoption to inform successful rural development projects. In this study we offer a novel approach for evaluating agroforestry systems from the farmer perspective. The approach couples rapid rural appraisal and normative optimisation techniques to determine favourable land-use compositions for meeting various socio-economic and ecological goals, based on farmers’ empirical knowledge and preferences. We test our approach among smallholder farmers in Eastern Panama, obtaining data from household interviews and using hierarchical cluster analysis to identify farm groups with similar land-use and income characteristics. We found that moderate differences in farmers’ perceptions between these groups altered the type and share of agroforestry included in the optimised land-use portfolios that balance the achievement of 10 pre-selected socio-economic and ecological objectives. Such differences provide valuable information about potential acceptability of agroforestry within each group. For example, we found that farmers who derive most of their farm income from crops may be more willing to adopt silvopasture, whereas farmers who are more economically dependent on cattle may benefit from diversifying their land-use with alley cropping. We discuss the potential of this modelling approach for participatory land-use planning, especially when dealing with small sample sizes and uncertainty in datasets.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Gosling, E., Reith, E., Knoke, T., Gerique, A., & Paul, C. (2020). Exploring farmer perceptions of agroforestry via multi-objective optimisation: a test application in Eastern Panama. Agroforestry Systems, 94(5), 2003–2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-020-00519-0

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free