A presentation by Terry Sunderland and team on 3 December 2016 at the second annual meeting of the FLARE (Forests and Livelihoods: Assessment, Research, and Engagement) network, Edinburgh.

1. Agrarian change in tropical forests:
A change for the better?
Terry Sunderland & team
FLARE, Edinburgh
3rd December 2016

2.  Agricultural expansion remains
major driver of deforestation
 Transformation of natural systems
has resulted in significant
environmental degradation
 Global food system is in crisis
(Global Nutrition Report 2016)
 Belief that biodiversity conservation
and agriculture cannot co-exist
 Ca.60% of world’s food originates
from diverse small-holder farming
systems in complex landscapes
 Agro-ecological approaches being
advocated (e.g. IPBES 2016)
 Need strong evidence-based for
implementation
Context

3. Agrarian Change Project: Research goals
 An integrated landscape approach
to explore the livelihood and
dietary implications of land-use
change and agrarian change
processes in six multi-functional
landscapes.
 Provide insights into how globally
conceived land-use strategies
(e.g. land sharing/land sparing
trajectories) manifest locally and
how they are embedded into local
histories, culture, and political
and market dynamics.

4. Natural vegetation ‘Secondary’ vegetation Agricultural land
Agrarian change in tropical landscapes
Agricultural modification
Treecover
Photo credits: CIFOR

5. Land sharing
Photo credits: CIFOR
Agrarian change in tropical landscapes
Treecover
Natural
vegetation
‘Secondary’
vegetation
Agricultural
land
Land sparing

6. Study Sites

7. FOREST (CONTROL) ZONE 1 ZONE 3ZONE 2
Agricultural modification (simplification and intensification of commodities)
Treecover
Experimental Design
A landscape-level approach, with a nested 3-level hierarchical design:
1. A landscape exhibiting changing land use practices and agrarian change
2. Three land use ‘zones’ in each landscape, a gradient of agricultural modification
3. Villages or settlements within each zone
1
2
3

8. Photo credits: CIFOR
Experimental Design
FOREST (CONTROL) ZONE 1 ZONE 3ZONE 2
Agricultural modification (simplification and intensification of commodities)
Treecover
Subsistence farming,
high dependency on
forest products
A landscape-level approach, with a nested 3-level hierarchical design:
1. A landscape exhibiting changing land use practices and agrarian change
2. Three land use ‘zones’ in each landscape, a gradient of agricultural modification
3. Villages or settlements within each zone
1
2
3

9. Photo credits: CIFOR
Experimental Design
FOREST (CONTROL) ZONE 1 ZONE 3ZONE 2
Agricultural modification (simplification and intensification of commodities)
Treecover
E.g. Subsistence farming, high
dependency on forest resources
E.g. Rubber agroforestry
system
Subsistence farming,
high dependency on
forest products
Extensive coffee
agroforesty
A landscape-level approach, with a nested 3-level hierarchical design:
1. A landscape exhibiting changing land use practices and agrarian change
2. Three land use ‘zones’ in each landscape, a gradient of agricultural modification
3. Villages or settlements within each zone
1
2
3

10. A landscape-level approach, with a nested 3-level hierarchical design:
1. A landscape exhibiting changing land use practices and agrarian change
2. Three land use ‘zones’ in each landscape, a gradient of agricultural modification
3. Villages or settlements within each zone
Experimental Design
FOREST (CONTROL) ZONE 1 ZONE 3ZONE 2
Agricultural modification (simplification and intensification of commodities)
Treecover
E.g. Subsistence farming, high
dependency on forest resources
E.g. Rubber agroforestry
system E.g. Oil palm
monoculture
Subsistence farming,
high dependency on
forest products
Extensive coffee
agroforesty
Intensive oil palm
monoculture
1
2
3

11. Field Methods
In each zone the following methods are used:
Household
Surveys
Focus Group
Discussions
Key Informant
Interviews
Farm
Productivity
Surveys
Biodiversity
Surveys
Yield
measurements
Farm inputs (e.g.
fertilizer, labour)
Production
targets
Resource flow
mapping
Wealth
ranking
Food / cash
calendars
Nutrition
assessments
Ecosystem
service mapping
Community
perceptions
Tree plots
Bird point
counts
Invertebrate
trapping
METHODS
BiodiversityRelative poverty
Nutrition
Food securityEcosystem
services
Livelihoods
Agricultural
production
RESPONSES

12. Study site: Kapuas Hulu, Kalimantan, Indonesia
Primary forest
Rubber agroforestry
Oil palm plantation
Oil palm concession

13. Study site: Kapuas Hulu, Kalimantan, Indonesia
Primary forest
Rubber agroforestry
Oil palm plantation
Oil palm concession

14. Study site: Kapuas Hulu, Kalimantan, Indonesia
Primary forest
Rubber agroforestry
Oil palm plantation
Oil palm concession

15. Study site: Kapuas Hulu, Kalimantan, Indonesia
Primary forest
Rubber agroforestry
Oil palm plantation
Oil palm concession

16. Study site: Kapuas Hulu, Kalimantan, Indonesia
Primary forest
Rubber agroforestry
Oil palm plantation
Oil palm concession
Photo credits: Dominic Rowland

17. Photo credits: CIFOR
Initial results…..

18. Predicted Dietary Changes
Two hypotheses:
Alternative Hypothesis :
• Loss of forest access and
traditional agriculture is
adequately compensated for by
increased household income and
better access to markets
• Same or increased dietary
diversity
• Increased consumption of
expensive foods such as meat
and dairy
Forest loss hypothesis:
• Loss of forest access and
traditional agriculture results in
poorer diets
• Dietary diversity decreases
• Consumption of fruits,
vegetables and animal source
foods decreases
• Increased consumption
unhealthy sugars, fats and
processed foods
Increased agrarian change
Increased agrarian change
Dietary Diversity
Fats, sugars, processed foods, ASF
Fruits and vegetables

19. Actual changes in diets
Two different patterns:
Sustained Decrease:
• Decrease in HDDS across zones 1-3 as
agrarian modification increases: e.g.
Indonesia Bangladesh and Ethiopia
• Driven by reduced frequency of
consumption of most food groups
• Suggests income from cash crops and
market access does not fully
compensate for loss of traditional
agriculture and forest access
Sustained Increase:
• Increase in HDDS across zones 1-3 as
agrarian modification increases: e.g.
Cameroon, Burkina Faso & Zambia*
• Driven by increased frequency of
consumption of most food groups
• Suggests income from cash crops and
market access compensates for loss of
traditional agriculture and forest access
Increased agrarian change Increased agrarian change
* Burkina Faso almost follows this pattern with some differences including
Dietary Diversity
Fats, sugars, processed foods, ASF
Fruits and vegetables

20. Implications for diets
• Forest loss and agrarian modification precipitates a rapid nutrition transition
• Classic nutrition transitions often follow an ‘expansion phase’ followed by a
’substitution phase’
• Expansion phase = more food (seen in communities where hunger and
food insecurity was previously a problem)
• Substitution phase = transition to energy rich foods (oils, fats, sugars,
processed carbohydrates, ASF)
• In Cameroon, Burkina Faso and Zambia, there is increased consumption of
all food groups: Suggests that increased income and market access leads to
an expansion phase
• In Indonesia, Bangladesh and Ethiopia, diets are poorer because of reduced
overall consumption of most food groups: Suggests the opposite of an
expansion phase, with loss of forest foods but not being replaced by market
sources
• Agrarian change does not have to lead to poorer diets, but can certainly do
so unless attention is paid to dietary consequences

21. “Areas of swidden/agroforestry, natural forest, timber and
agricultural tree crop plantations were all associated with
more frequent consumption of food groups rich in
micronutrients. The swidden/agroforestry land class was the
landscape associated with more frequent consumption of the
largest number of micronutrient rich food groups. Swidden
cultivation in is often viewed as a backward practice that is an
impediment to food security in Indonesia and destructive of the
environment. If further research corroborates that swidden farming
actually results in better nutrition than the practices that replace it,
Indonesian policy makers may need to reconsider their views on this
land use”. Ickowitz et al., 2016

22. Country-level results: summary
impacts on poverty and livelihoods
 Indonesia: Major dietary transition towards processed foods which
has major impact on nutrition and health status
 Bangladesh: Agroforestry seen as an important livelihoods
strategy but only for those with secure tenure
 Ethiopia: Loss of forest has actually led to increased poverty due
to loss of common grazing land and access to fuelwood
 Cameroon: Annexation of land for oil palm concessions has
resulted in land displacement and encroachment into protected
areas. Threatens future regional food security.
 Zambia: Heavy policy emphasis on agriculture for food security at
expense of forests. Loss of safety-net function
 Burkina Faso: Recurring droughts are increasingly common and
income from forest products (timber, fuelwood and NTFPs) are
important safety-net to purchase food during dry periods.
Continued forest loss will further jeopardise future adaptation
strategies

23. Conclusions
 Across study regions, loss of forest
to agriculture does not necessarily
result in direct livelihoods benefits
 Diets inevitably transition with
access to income and markets, but
not necessarily for the better
 Landscape mosaics are better at
achieving multiple benefits,
including ecosystem services and
biodiversity conservation, so
landscape configuration is important
 Land sparing/sharing paradigm does
not necessarily play out in reality as
it implies some level of “grand
design”
 Contribution of forest products has
been dramatically underestimated
for both diets and income

24. www.landscapes.org
www.cifor.org
@TCHSunderland