Agroforestry's Influence on the Development of Australian Rural Areas

This essay explores the significant impact of agroforestry practices on rural development in Australia, highlighting the socio-economic improvements experienced by rural communities through these methods. It examines the role of agroforestry in mitigating issues like deforestation and the shortage of chemical inputs, while also increasing productivity and household security. The essay discusses conditions for the thriving promotion of agroforestry, including physical and socio-economic factors, and delves into the economic benefits of agroforestry practices in Western Australian rural communities, such as the use of fodder trees and shrubs to enhance milk production and crop supply. Furthermore, it addresses the environmental services provided by agroforestry, including windbreaks and carbon trading projects, and touches upon the sustainability of these practices. The analysis also covers Australia's history of agroforestry research and the contribution of commercial agroforestry to the national forest resources.

Running head: AGROFORESTRY AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT
AGROFORESTRY AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author note:

AGROFORESTRY AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT
Introduction
In Australia, it comes into view that the term ‘agroforestry’ is comprehended in various
ways. For example, it has been used in order to signify land usage that is characterised by
productive trees over a pasture. However, in realism, this is one of the forms of agroforestry. In
recent times, more extensive explanations have arisen whereby agroforestry is regarded as
synonymous with ‘trees-on-farms’ whereas, in some instances, it is perceived as generalized
rural forestation (Gordon, Newman & Coleman, 2018). The term ‘agroforestry’ regardless of
certain confusion over its precise meaning and complexities in translation to other languages is
being used to illustrate the growth of trees with agricultural harvests and livestock on similar
pieces of land (Dawson et al., 2014). However, Bhatt et al., (2017) noted that forestry, as well as
agriculture, had been existent for centuries in simple societies. These simple societies had been
perceived as universal vocation wherein the farmer, hunter or woodsmen were distinguished by
similar identities. While Gordon, Newman and Coleman, (2018) recognized agroforestry as a
considerably advanced field of organized scientific activity that signified agroforestry as an
ancient land use form of practice. The following essay will explore the significant impact of
various agroforestry practices on rural development in Australia. In addition to this the paper will
highlight on the socio-economic improvements of rural communities by the method of
agroforestry.
Body
Role of Agroforestry
Agroforestry is referred to the set of land-usage practices including the purposeful
combination of trees, agricultural harvest or animals on the same land management unit in some
form of spatial organization or temporal sequence. Swamy and Tewari, (2017) noted that

AGROFORESTRY AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT
cultivating trees in amalgamation with crops, harvests and livestock is an ancient practice.
However several factors have contributed to the rising interest in agroforestry since the 1970s
such as the deterioration of the economic situation in various parts of the developing world and
along with increased tropical deforestation and scarcity of land due to population pressures
(Dawson et al., 2014). Primary agroforestry practices involve improved fallows and growing
annual agricultural harvests at the establishment of a forestry plantation that is known as
taungya. The importance of agroforestry has been typically attributed to the competence of
mitigating specific general issues for rural land usage in several developing countries while
applying these production systems (Sharma et al., 2016). The problems are associated with
deforestation, shortage of chemical inputs and tree produces. Recently awareness has grown over
the potentials which agroforestry can provide in order to increase the level of productivity and
further raise the level of rural household security and offer regional environmental gains.
Conditions for the Thriving Promotion of Agroforestry
Swamy and Tewari, (2017) in recent years have observed a heightened increase in
adopting and supporting agroforestry technologies among smallholder cultivators in Western
Australia (WA). People thrive within a physical environment whereby physical factors related to
soil type, climatic conditions of vegetation and topography all impact agroforestry. However,
socio-economic issues tend to concern the human environment within which people live and act.
Furthermore, Sharma et al., (2016) analysed that the selection criteria for farmers’
implementation of agroforestry practices rely on the range of environmental and socio-economic
prerequisites which are associated with the successful cultivation of lasting harvests and trees.
According to Harrison et al., (2016) the climatic conditions that correspond with increase are
vital for trees to grow. Secondly, the soil types, in particular, the deep ones provide a high level

AGROFORESTRY AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT
of potential for the growth of trees. Though the above environmental preconditions by Quandt,
Neufeldt and McCabe, (2018) determined the promotion of agroforestry, it is crucial to
comprehend the definite occurrence of agroforestry practices.
Economic Benefits of Agroforestry Practices in Western Australian Rural Communities
Cultivators and pastoralists have longed been using fodder trees and shrubs in order to
feed their cattle. However, such conventional practices are identified as highly extensive with
cultivators removing branches and permitting their livestock to browse (Sharma et al., 2016).
Efficiently integrating trees into systems whereby they can be harvested close to each other and
successfully reduced intensively can influence the economic benefits of rural communities in
Western Australia. Harrison et al., (2016) claimed that in the northern agricultural region of
Western Australia (WA), farmers grow fodder shrubs such as Calliandra calothyrsus and
Leucaena trichandra in order to feed their stall-fed dairy cattle. Consequentially, these farm-
harvested fodders significantly increase the rate of milk production and further can be substituted
for considerably expensive purchased dairy products by raising the income level of the
cultivators.
Meanwhile, Quandt, Neufeldt and McCabe, (2018) have been of the opinion that a
combination of better quality fodder pastures and trees has facilitated the section of cultivators to
raise their profits from livestock production. Further to this, Lasco et al., (2014) critically
evaluated the combination of Gliricidia sepium also increase crop supply and reduce farm labour
specifically for herding purposes as well as tethering. On the other hand, the author observed that
the harvesters of agricultural regions of WA have been growing tagasaste in their daily farming
and plantation practices which has increased their level of revenues whose cultivation has
formerly been cropped on annual grasses and legumes (Harrison et al., 2016).

AGROFORESTRY AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT
Furthermore, Quandt, Neufeldt and McCabe, (2018) critically evaluated that with the
increased agriculture and concentrated fallowing periods; soil productiveness has emerged as a
crucial problem in wide-ranging farming systems throughout the tropics. Lasco et al., (2014)
noted that in several areas researchers, as well as cultivators, have significantly developed the
shortage of tree cultivation as a critical way of increasing crop yields. At this juncture, another
essential agroforestry practice known as biomass transfer identified by farmers is necessary to
note that has been improving level of soil fertility or productivity (Tscharntke et al., 2015). This
biomass transfer helps in manual transferring of uncultivated manures to matured crops and
results in the increase of vegetable yields and also expands the duration of harvesting seasons.
Environmental services influencing rural development in Australia
Tscharntke et al., (2015) found that research on environmental gains of agroforestry is
considerably less in regards to the studies conducted on factors of economic benefits on rural
development. However available studies by Lasco et al., (2014) shed light on the extensive range
of provisions of environmental benefits which agroforestry practices of fodder and soil
fertilization offer to the farmer communities in Australia which the traditional types of the annual
crop were unable to provide. Windbreaks on the Australian farms are considered as one of the
oldest agroforestry a practice which has led to the plantation of over 45,000 km of windbreaks
safeguarding over 700,000 ha (Tscharntke et al., 2015). Furthermore, several examples of private
organizations have been stated who have been promoting agroforestry practices in exchange for
carbon benefits. Papyrus Australia, one of the renowned developers of world-first technology has
been purposefully promoting agroforestry practices by converting waste trunk of banana palm
into alternatives to forest wood products (Papyrusaustralia.com.au, 2018). These forest wood
products are further to be used in paper, packaging, furniture as well as other industries. These

AGROFORESTRY AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT
agroforestry supporting companies have been using a renewable source which is highly
sustainable and does not result in any destruction of natural or purpose-planted forests. Bi et al.,
(2014) at this juncture, emphasizes the substantial amount of revenues which these companies
contribute to the rural development of Australian farmer populace.
However, the question tends to prevail whether these revenues and returns from
agroforestry will be sufficient for farmers in order to efficiently maintain their agroforestry
practices once carbon expenses have ended (Calviño-Cancela & van Etten, 2018). Furthermore,
in the highlands of Western Australia, cultivators engaged in specific carbon-trading projects
have been growing indigenous species along with hardware species like eucalyptus globules and
software species like radiata pine. Ballesta et al., (2015) claimed that while pine and eucalyptus
have been lucrative for the Australian farmer communities, the slow-growing indigenous species
tend to be unproductive to farmers thus generating negative returns. These factors again trigger
queries regarding the sustainability level of carbon trading tree projects which entails projects
which shows unprofitability in them (Acuna & Strandgard, 2017).
As Australia has an enriched history of agroforestry research, a considerable amount of
R&D has been conducted under the Joint Venture Agroforestry Program (JVAP). Harrison and
Harrison, (2016) critically evaluated that the JVAP programme has been purposed as a
significant collaboration between Rural Industries and Development Council and Wood Products
Australia. Agroforestry research in Australian regions has been considered silent in years since
the publication of JVAP program. However, the practice of Agroforestry has been recognised as
a vital contributor in securing the distribution and supply of National forest resources with
significant recognition in the Australian forest products association 2016 policy paper (Bi et al.,
2014). In addition to this, the program has been a part of the recommendations constituted within

AGROFORESTRY AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT
the forest industry Advisory Council strategy in order to expand the productive forest estate.
Ballesta et al., (2015) noted that the diversification of farm revenues through Agroforestry
practices had been identified as a potential approach to raise both profitable as well as the
environmental flexibility of the Australian farming Enterprises. However, the revenues related to
Agroforestry are typically considered to be diminutive, and the prolonged frames involved has
been creating obstacles to the implementation of the farm Forestry systems. Harrison and
Harrison, (2016) further explored that Australia should have a similar benefit in the production
of wood as the fully-grown trees provide substantial land care along with agricultural
productivity revenues. These productivities will also be increasing the number of resources
which will further be dispersed and resulting to transport expenses to be a significant factor in
the viability of any industry dependent on those wood products.
Australian commercial forestry
Acuna and Strandgard, (2017) revealed that in 2015 to 2016 Australia segregated
commercial plantation area that has been estimated to be 1,984,660 hectares out of which
softwood species comprised over 50% of the share. However, in these years, Victoria reportedly
involved the largest total area of plantations that is around 432,000 hectares which are followed
by New South Wales and Western Australia. It is important to note that the substantial
proportion of plantations that is over 75%in Australia in private ownership while the public
ownership accounted a small proportion of around 21 per cent along with a collective plantation
share of only 3.8% (Bi et al., 2014). However, Acuna and Strandgard, (2017) claimed that in
2016 over 97 % of this softwood plantations were managed in order to producer sawlogs for
sawn wood.
Nevertheless softwood logs produced from the thinning operations and low quality parts

AGROFORESTRY AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT
of the stems were used in order to supply the production of engineered wood products and paper
products. On the contrary as per the analysis of Bhardwaj, Navale and Sharma, (2017), around
82 % of the hardwood plantations where manage to produce pulp logs for products such as wood
chips and paper. At this stage, it is essential to observe the role of commercial agroforestry
practices in Australia which have undergone several forms such as plantations on farmland lease
white space tree planting our native forests (Mortelliti, Michael & Lindenmayer, 2015).
Swamy and Tewari, (2017) reveal that the commercial agroforestry in Australia can take
various forms such as alleys, woodlots, farmland along with substantial amount of endeavours
under the collective effort of JVAP which has analysed such potentials. Tscharntke et al., (2015)
examined that farm forestry may be executed by the enterprise or may have the propensity to
involve large plantings under the joint venture arrangements or the leasing of farmland to
forestry companies. These models, however, may concentrate the level of risks and threats to the
farm enterprises as the management of the plantations would be performed externally.
Consequentially, through these models, the cultivators would receive direct yearly financial
revenue based on the lease expense of the land that is 5-9.3% of the land cost (Harrison &
Harrison, 2016).
Conclusion
While direct financial benefits of agroforestry practices have been broadly evaluated,
there has been a considerably lesser number of direct economic analyses of the potential and
capacity of agroforestry practices in Australia. Thus to conclude it can be stated that the
promotion of agroforestry practices has been considered to be crucial as it offers the broad
prospect of increasing level of production and thus elevating the farmers’ earnings. Sustainable
development through effective agroforestry practices can further be attained through a concerned

AGROFORESTRY AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT
endeavour to be proactively and continually promote cultivators’ participation in agroforestry
practices. Thus identifying and dealing with primary factors which tend to determine cultivators’
involvement in agroforestry practices influences wide-ranging agroforestry practices to attain
successful local involvement.

AGROFORESTRY AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT
References
Acuna, M., & Strandgard, M. (2017). Impact of climate change on Australian forest
operations. Australian Forestry, 80(5), 299-308.
Ballesta, P., Mora, F., Contreras-Soto, R. I., Ruiz, E., & Perret, S. (2015). Analysis of the genetic
diversity of Eucalyptus cladocalyx (sugar gum) using ISSR markers. Acta Scientiarum.
Agronomy, 37(2), 133-140.
Bhardwaj, D. R., Navale, M. R., & Sharma, S. (2017). Agroforestry Practices in Temperate
Regions of the World. In Agroforestry (pp. 163-187). Springer, Singapore.
Bhatt, H., Husain, M., Rathore, J. P., & Sah, V. K. (2017). Bioremediation of problematic soils
through Agroforestry practices. Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry, 6(5),
2044-2048.
Bi, H., Parekh, J., Li, Y., Murphy, S., & Lei, Y. (2014). Adverse influences of drought and
temperature extremes on survival of potential tree species for commercial environmental
forestry in the dryland areas on the western slopes of New South Wales,
Australia. Agricultural and forest meteorology, 197, 188-205.
Calviño-Cancela, M., & van Etten, E. J. (2018). Invasive potential of Eucalyptus globulus and
Pinus radiata into native eucalypt forests in Western Australia. Forest Ecology and
Management, 424, 246-258.
Dawson, I. K., Leakey, R., Clement, C. R., Weber, J. C., Cornelius, J. P., Roshetko, J. M., ... &
Jamnadass, R. (2014). The management of tree genetic resources and the livelihoods of
rural communities in the tropics: non-timber forest products, smallholder agroforestry
practices and tree commodity crops. Forest Ecology and Management, 333, 9-21.

AGROFORESTRY AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT
Gordon, A. M., Newman, S. M., & Coleman, B. (Eds.). (2018). Temperate agroforestry systems.
CABI.
Harrison, S., & Harrison, R. (2016). 2. Modelling approaches for mixed-species agroforestry
systems. Promoting sustainable agriculture and agroforestry to replace unproductive
land use in Fiji and Vanuatu, 19.
Harrison, S., Harrison, R., Karim, S., & Sullivan, C. (2016). Non-market values of agroforestry
systems and implications for Pacific island agroforestry. In Promoting sustainable
agriculture and agroforestry to replace unproductive land use in Fiji and Vanuatu (pp.
51-61). Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (ACIAR).
Lasco, R. D., Delfino, R. J. P., Catacutan, D. C., Simelton, E. S., & Wilson, D. M. (2014).
Climate risk adaptation by smallholder farmers: the roles of trees and
agroforestry. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 6, 83-88.
Mortelliti, A., Michael, D. R., & Lindenmayer, D. B. (2015). Contrasting effects of pine
plantations on two skinks: results from a large‐scale ‘natural experiment’in
Australia. Animal conservation, 18(5), 433-441.
Papyrusaustralia.com.au. (2018). Papyrus Australia | Converting Banana Palm into Renewable
Fibre. Retrieved from https://www.papyrusaustralia.com.au/
Quandt, A., Neufeldt, H., & McCabe, J. T. (2018). Building livelihood resilience: what role does
agroforestry play?. Climate and Development, 1-16.
Sharma, N., Bohra, B., Pragya, N., Ciannella, R., Dobie, P., & Lehmann, S. (2016). Bioenergy
from agroforestry can lead to improved food security, climate change, soil quality, and
rural development. Food and Energy Security, 5(3), 165-183.
Swamy, S. L., & Tewari, V. P. (2017). Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies to Climate Change

AGROFORESTRY AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT
Through Agroforestry Practices in the Tropics. In Agroforestry (pp. 725-738). Springer,
Singapore.
Tscharntke, T., Milder, J. C., Schroth, G., Clough, Y., DeClerck, F., Waldron, A., ... & Ghazoul,
J. (2015). Conserving biodiversity through certification of tropical agroforestry crops at
local and landscape scales. Conservation Letters, 8(1), 14-23.