J. For. Sci., 2015, 61(11):478-484 | DOI: 10.17221/30/2015-JFS

Socioeconomic evaluation of agroforestry systems (Case study: Northern Iran)Original Paper

M. Mohebi Bijarpas, T. Rostami Shahraji, S. Mohammadi Limaei
Department of Forestry, Natural Resources Faculty, University of Guilan, Sowmeh Sara, Iran

The aim of this research was to investigate the socioeconomic values of different land use in the agroforestry system. Questionnaires were used to collect social and economic data in two villages at Guilan province, northern Iran. Internal Rate of Return (IRR) and Profitability Index (PI) were used for cost-benefit analysis. Net Present Value (NPV) of different farming systems was determined. ANOVA test was used to compare the outcomes of different land use. The results indicated that there is a significant relationship between literacy and variety of land use in two villages. Results of IRR and PI indices show that these indices were higher in poplar plantation than in the other land use (paddy and tea field, horticulture and vegetable). Results of ANOVA test showed that there is a significant difference between net incomes from different farming systems in Tamchal village. Furthermore, the ANOVA test showed that there is no significant difference between net incomes from different farming systems in Narenj Bon Paeen village. The results showed that farmers tend to participate in training and promoting classes associated with the maximum use of land. Chi-squared test was used in order to determine the effect of participation in training and promoting classes on multiple uses of land, land use change, sericulture, and apiculture. The results of Chi-squared test showed that there is a significant and positive relationship between people's participation rates and the multiple use of land. In overall, results showed that traditional agroforestry systems provide a higher income than monoculture in the study area.

Keywords: internal rate of return (IRR); profitability index (PI)

Published: November 30, 2015  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Mohebi Bijarpas M, Rostami Shahraji T, Mohammadi Limaei S. Socioeconomic evaluation of agroforestry systems (Case study: Northern Iran). J. For. Sci. 2015;61(11):478-484. doi: 10.17221/30/2015-JFS.
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. Amacher G.S., Ollikainen M., Koskela E. (2009): Economics of Forest Resources. Cambridge, MIT Press: 424.
    2. Anonymous (2000): Research Mahvyzan (Plantation Companies Plains of Shafaroud). Guilan, Shafaroud Forest Company: 53.
    3. Barbieri C., Valdivia C. (2010): Recreation and agroforestry: Examining new dimensions of multifunctionality in family farms. Journal of Rural Studies, 26: 465-473. Go to original source...
    4. Barasa R.D. (2001): The Influence of Technology Characteristics and Social-economic Factors on Adaption of Agroforestry Technologies: The Case of Southern Malawi. [Master Theses.] University of Malawi: 127.
    5. Gruenewald H. (2006): Anbau schnell wachsender Gehoelze fuerdie energetische Verwertung in einem Alley-CroppingSystem auf Kippsubsrtaten des Lausitzer Braunkohlereviers. Cottbuser Schriften zu Bodenschutz und Rekultivierung: 28.
    6. Jianbo Lu (2006): Energy balance and economic benefits of two agroforestry systems in northern and southern China. Agriculture Ecosystems and Environment, 116: 255-262. Go to original source...
    7. Kang B.T., Wilson G.F., Lawson T.L. (1984): Alley Cropping: A Stable Alternative to Shifting Cultivation. Ottawa, International Institute of Tropical Agriculture: 22.
    8. Keča L. (2010): Assessment of cost-efficiency for wood production in poplar plantations in Ravan Srem, based on internal rate of return. Bulletin of the Faculty of Forestry, 102: 25-40. Go to original source...
    9. Krstansky J.J., Henderson G.S., Garrett H.E. (1997): An Evaluation of the Use of Agroforestry Practices to Reduce Soil Erosion on Missouri Soils. Final Report MDNR 90-3. Columbia, University of Missouri: 276.
    10. Lundgren B.O., Raintree J.B. (1982): Sustained agroforestry. In: Nestel B. (ed.): Agricultural Research for Development: Potentials and Challenges in Asia. Hague, International Service for National Agricultural Research: 37-49.
    11. Misra K.K., Rai P.N., Jaiswal H.R. (1996): Efect of spacing and plant density on the growth of poplar (Populus deltoids Bartr. Ex Marsh). Indian Forester, 122: 65-68.
    12. Mohammadi Limaei S. (2010): Prediction of poplar timber prices in the Guilan. In: 10th Scientific Research Conference. Guilan, May 18-20, 2009: 2. (in Persian)
    13. Mohammadi Limaei S., Rostami Shahraji T., Deldari A. (2012): Profitability comparison of poplar plantation with populous deltoids clone 69/55 in comparison with paddy field (Case study: Ziabar district in Guilan province). Iranian Journal of Forest and Poplar Resaerch, 19: 586-596. (in Persian)
    14. Mohandesi Namin S., Yakhkeshi A., Fallah A. and Matinkhah S.H. (2009): Agroforestry and its role in the social economic development of the city of Esfahan. In: Proceedings of the 8th Meeting of the Regional Conference Series Vision of the Islamic Republic of Iran in 2025?. Islamic Azad University of Shahrekord, March 14-16, 2009: 1-36. (in Persian)
    15. Molua E.L. (2005): The economics of tropical agroforestry systems: the case of agroforestry farms in Cameroon. Forest Policy and Economics, 7: 199-211. Go to original source...
    16. Rafi B.M. (1993): Knowledge, Attitude and Adaption of Farm Forestry Practices among the Participant and Non-Participant Farmes in Shimago District. [MSc Thesis.] Banglore, University of Agricultural Sciences: 80.
    17. Ranasinghe O., Mayhead G.J. (1990): The effect of intercropping populous RAP with beans. Forestry, 63: 271-277. Go to original source...
    18. Robins L., Mclntyre K., Woodhill J. (1996): Farm Forestry in Australia: Integrating Commercial and Conservation Benefits. Canberra, Greening Australia: 54.
    19. Thangata P.H., Alavalapaf J.R.R. (2003). Agroforestry adoption of in southern Malawi: the case of mixed intercropping of Gliricidia sepium and maize. Journal of Agroforestry Systems, 78: 57-77. Go to original source...
    20. Tonts M., Campbell C., Black A. (2001): Socio-Economic Impacts of Farm Forestry. Kingston, Rural Industries Reserches and Development Corporation: 85.
    21. Sherafatmand H., Homayooni far M., Mehrabi bashar abadi M., Baghestani A. (2008): The rate of return on investment, agricultural subdivision in Iran. Journal of Agriculture and Natural Resources, 16: 1-13. (in Persian)
    22. Soltani G.H.R. (2003): Determination of rate of return internal in agriculture part. Agricultural Economic and Development, 12: 19-40.
    23. Satyasai K.J.S. (2009): Application of modified internal rate of return method for watershed evaluation. Agricultural Economics Research Review, 22: 401-406.
    24. Yakhkeshi A. (2007): Integrated management with the participation of local people in the North Caspian forests. Tehran, Mirmah Press: 103.
    25. Amacher G., Ollikainen M., Koskela E.A. (2009): Economics of Forest Resources. London, MIT Press: 393.

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY NC 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content