1. 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, August 2009

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

3. 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

4. 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 years, farmers apply weeding in the circle around the rubber trees. From 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

5. (Source: Van Noordwijk , 2009)

6. 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)

7. Study Site

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

9. Vegetation Diversity

10. 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)

11. Tree distribution
[RAF is like a forest in structure]

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

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

14. 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]

15. 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)

16. 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.

17. 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

18. Fauna Diversity

19. 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)

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

21. 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

22. 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.

23. 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,-

24. 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.

25. 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

26. Thank You