A case study of change in the integrated rubber agroforest landscape of Jambi (Sumatra) Hesti L. Tata1, Laxman Joshi2, Meine van Noordwijk2 1Forest and Nature Conservation R&D Centre, Bogor, Indonesia 2World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF-SEA), Bogor, Indonesia 2nd World Agroforestry Congress, Nairobi, 23-28 August 2009

Presentation Outline What is Rubber Agroforest (RAF)? Biodiversity vs profitability Vegetation diversity Fauna diversity Benefits provided by RAF Integration of function

Rubber Agroforests (RAF) Complex RAF Definition of RAF is based on the criteria of percentage of basal area of Rubber tree to other species and number of species in certain plot sample. (1) Complex RAF consists of 1/3 basal area of rubber and (at least) 8 species in 0.02 ha; (2) simple RAF consists of 2/3 basal area of rubber and (at least) 4 species of rubber; (3) rubber monoculture: all rubber. Rubber monoculture (See poster presentation Joshi et al. “Rubber agroforest: How to define?”) Simple RAF

RAF Establishment 1-3 year >30 year 3-10 year 15-30 year 10-15 year Most agroforest started with swiddens, through sistematic introduction in cleared land, rubber seedlings planted with upland rice and followed by planting crops and fruit trees in the 1-3 year. From the 3rd-10th year, fallow occurs, until rubber start to be tapped. The first tapping occurs in 10-15 years, farmers apply weeding in the circle around the rubber trees. From 15-30 year: low management with selective culling/thinning. In 30 year: complex RAF established. If farmer has enough capital modal, they will open the land for the second cycle, or either applied “sisipan” (gap planting). 3-10 year 15-30 year 10-15 year

(Source: Van Noordwijk , 2009)

Complex RAF Simple RAF Rubber monoculture Source: Wibawa (2007) There is a trade off between profitability and biodiversity. Forest has the highest diversity and oil palm has the lowest diversity. Complex RAF: low capital, low labour; Simple RAF: markets for companion crops, rubber price fluctuation and new clonal techniques; RM: high capital, access to clone, more labour; OP: capital, road access and government program. Concave relationship meets when farmers double their land, while convex relationship is the approximate domain for smallholder farmer with limited access to the land. Source: Wibawa (2007)

Study Site

Landcover change in Bungo district in 1973-2008 Source: Landscape Mosaic Bungo Team (2008)

Vegetation Diversity

Vegetation diversity and tree distribution Land uses Strata Total stem Total species Total family Simpson’s index Forest Seedling 712 283 196 0.98 Sapling 152 122 50 0.99 Tree 55 40 RAF 847 286 113 0.97** 116 42 0.98* 47 28 0.72** Note: The area of plot sample was 0.32 ha for forest and RAF (Source: Tata et al., 2009)

Tree distribution [RAF is like a forest in structure]

Species richness Seedling Sapling Tree Sapling (Source: Tata et al., 2009) [Between sapling and tree stratum, selective culling occurs]

Curve of species accumulation based on management intensity in RAF Forest Without management Extensive management Intensive management Without Extensive Intensive Rasnovi (2006)

Similarity index of Jaccard and Morishita-Horn of sapling between RAF and forest Species Genus Family Jaccard 0.44 0.68 0.84 Morishita-Horn 0.19 0.34 Source: Rasnovi (2006) [RAF is almost similar to forest in family level, but not in species level]

Tree species for livelihood and conservation Selective cutting of sapling and tree in RAF Retain useful trees: fruits, food, fodder, medicine, dye, resin and timber. Aquilaria malaccensis Stratum Relative abundance (%) of species with edible parts in Forest RAF Seedling 14.3 11.7 ns Sapling 18.3 12.9 ns Tree 28.8 64 ** (Source: Tata et al., 2009)

Rarity of species - the IUCN Red List (Tata et al., 2008) IUCN status Forest RAF Uses Critically Endangered (ER) 6 species 3 species Timber Endangered (EN) 1 species Vulnerable (VU) 5 species 2 species Timber, resin, food Lower Risk (LR) 14 species 13 species Timber, food, latex, resin, dye, oil seed, [Farmers maintain diversity in RAF, as long as species recognize to provide valuable products and used for livelihood and cultural purposes] Abundance of species with Lower Risk status in RAF reflects farmers maintain diversity in RAF, as long as species locally recognized to provide valuable products and used for livelihood and cultural purposes.

Dispersal mode of trees Species proportion based on dispersal modes classification encountered in forest, RAF and both forest and RAF (Rasnovi, 2006) Plant species encountered in N Dispersed by wind Dispersed by bird & bat (long distance) Dispersed by mamal (short distance) Self-dispersed (by human or stream water) ……………............. (%) …................................. RAF only 284 6.3 71.1 3.5 4.6 Forest + RAF 405 5.4 73.1 4.2 7.7 Forest only 241 4.9 64.3 14.9 Total 930 RAF: > seeds dispersed by bird and bat (long-distance zoochorus); Forest: > seed self-dispersed (autochorus; or by human or stream water) RAF as corridor and refuge area for animals

Fauna Diversity

Species no. identified in Forest Species no. identified in RAF Studies on fauna diversity in RAF in Jambi: Category Species no. identified in Forest Species no. identified in RAF Source Mammal diversity 10 species (4 in forest only) 37 species; 9 endangered species Calestreme, 2004 (unpublished) Bat diversity 4 species (3 species in forest only) 10 species Prasetyo, 2007; Joshi, et al., 2008 (unpublished) Primate diversity 2 species (1 species in forest only) 6 species Calestreme, 2004; Hariyanto, 2007a (unpublished report) Bird diversity 67 species (33 species in forest only) 167 species; 28 species protected 10 species listed in the CITES Beukema et al., 2007 (Agroforestry System) Dung Beetle diversity 37 species (6 species in forest only) 33 species Hariyanto , 2007b (unpublished)

Species cummulation curve for bird in forest and RAF (Beukema et al Monoculture

1988 and 2005 Connectivity & Forest core areas Rubber agroforests maintain ecological connectivity around core forest areas From the diversity of vegetation and fauna in forest and RAF we know that RAF maintain ecolocal connectivity, as a corridor or stepping stone, around core forest area. Source: Sonya Dewi & Andre Ekadinata

Benefit provided by RAF Tangible benefits: cash income from rubber, fruits and foods, feed, timber, NTFP. Extensive management: low cost, low labour. Intangible benefits: ecosystem services, e.g. water (small-scale hydropower), conservation of endangered species, stepping stone wild animals, landscape beauty.

Total (Thousand of IDR) Table. Estimation of the annual family cash-flow of rubber farmer (Wibawa, 1998) No. Description Total (Thousand of IDR) Proportion (%) A. Income:   Rubber 4,819 (69) Other farm 1,424 (20) Off-farm 768 (11) Sub Total 7,011 (100) B. Expenses: Consumption (mainly food) 4,344 (68) Education 46 (1.0) Others (cloth, social, etc.) 2,028 (31) Sub total 6,418 C. Investment 512 D. Saving 171 Note: 1 USD = IDR 8 500,-

Integration of function at field, farm and landscape Suitable environments for flora and fauna diversity. Role of RAF in plot level to landscape: providing fruits, food and nesting area for fauna. Role of RAF in landscape level to plot level: RAF’s fauna act as pollinator and dispersal agent for vegetation. RAFs provide limited role as conservation area  ‘island’ scope rather than landscape level. Background figure: RAF mostly complement and integrated with other agricultural activities, e.g. paddy fields in Lubuk Beringin.

Conclusion Integration of RAF with other land use  Multi-functionality. Biodiversity conservation depends on RAF management RAF provide considerable benefit for farmer’s livelihood. Ecosystem services of RAF  elaborate collective action, PES scheme and eco-certification of rubber/latex. Eco-Certification rubber: a challenge for Sustainagility of RAF

Thank You