Introduction

The infinite possibilities inherent in farm forestry, and the wide variation in farmers' needs, resources and aspirations mean that there are no 'best-bet' species, spatial arrangements or management 'recipes' suited to more than a few growers within a region. This suggests that rather than promoting particular options, the objective of farm forestry extension should be to enable farmers and other stakeholders to play an active role in the development of options that best meet their own interests and resources.

Most definitions of farm forestry focus on what the forests look like or their purpose. This has led to widespread acceptance of the notion that farm forestry is part of a continuum from large-scale monoculture plantations down to small-scale plantings. From this perspective it is easy to lose sight of what makes farm forestry unique and the need to develop specially targeted research and extension programs for this sector (Alexandra and Hall 1998). Our working definition of farm forestry emphasises the decision maker rather than the outcome: Farm forestry is the commitment of resources by farmers, alone or in partnerships, to the establishment or management of forests on their land. What clearly distinguishes a 'farm forest' or 'agroforest' from a corporate, industrial or government forest is not scale, it is ownership. Not just ownership of the land or the trees, but ownership of the decision whether or not to carry out the project, and how. Farm forestry and agroforestry are therefore about choice: farmers choosing to commit their resources to the development and management of forests for, amongst other things, commercial return.

Background

The following summarizes three and a half decades of extension in soil and water conservation and land husbandry strategies. The most important aspect of our 35-year process of learning about land husbandry around the world has been the follow-up studies and visits made one to fifteen years after the aide programs departed. We have repeatedly visited areas where programs previously worked to observe what aspects were sustained by the farmers on their own (Bunch and Lopez, Silsoe). These visits have been very instructive and sometimes sobering.

Land husbandry and soil conservation

The evolution in terminology in the area of land husbandry and soil conservation reflects how attitudes have changed about the problems of erosion, crop production, and farmer assistance programs. At first, we talked of soil conservation, pure and simple. When we realized that the water we saved was having more impact on yields than the soil we saved, terminology changed to, "soil and water conservation."  In the early 1980's, it became clear that land husbandry had to achieve more than just stop the erosion. Productivity was not going to increase much, nor farmers become very motivated, if what little topsoil was left was not also improved. So the terminology became, "soil restoration" and "soil recuperation."  Later, a movement in Africa began enlarging the concept once again by calling it "land husbandry," including everything a farmer does that conserves or improves the soil (Shaxson). We prefer the term "land husbandry," but do not use it very much because of one fatal flawit does not translate very well into many other languages.

Introduction

Traditionally, Amazonian Indians have been thought of as merely exploiters of their environments - not as conservers, manipulators and managers of natural resources (e.g. Meggers 1996). Researchers are finding, however, that presumed 'natural' ecological systems may, in fact, be products of human manipulation (Alcorn 1981, 1989; Anderson and Posey 1985; Balée 1989a, 1997; Balée and Gély 1989; Clement 1989; Denevan and Padoch 1988; Frickel 1959; Roosevelt 1994; Sponsel 1995; Sponsel, Headland and Bailey 1996; and others). Likewise, old agricultural fallows reflect genetic selection and human enhanced species diversity (Anderson 1990; Balée 1989b; Denevan and Padoch 1988; Irvine 1989; Redford and Padoch 1992).

The Kayapó Indians of the Middle Xingu Valley, Brazil, provide a good example of how scientific assumptions of 'natural' landscapes have hidden the complexity and potential of local management practices to modify ecosystems. The modern Kayapó population is still under 5,000, but pre-contact populations were many times larger and presumably had even greater impacts on the vast region they exploited (Posey 1994). They live in an ecologically diverse region that comprises nearly 4 million hectares of reserva indigena in the states of Para and Mato Grosso. Ethnohistorical research with the Kayapó Indians shows that contact with European diseases came via trade routes and preceded face-to-face contact with colonizers. Epidemics led to intra-group fighting, fission and dispersal of sub-groups which carried with them seeds and cuttings to propagate their foods, medicines and other resources (Posey 1987).

Before the advent of industrialization and the cash economy, bamboo played a significant role in the self-sustaining economies in many nations that are now grouped together as developing countries (it still does in some remote parts of these countries yet untouched by modern economics). This is hardly surprising, considering that bamboo is the fastest growing and most useful plant in the world. Research has proven bamboo's engineering and mechanical qualities, and its aesthetics have never been in question. It is hoped that this article will induce those interested in development and technological issues to take a fresh and closer look at bamboo, particularly its usefulness as a tool socio-economic development.

Introduction

Bamboo has enormous potential for alleviating many problems - both environmental and social - facing the world today. The increasing rate of tropical deforestation makes the search for alternative natural resources important. The characteristics of bamboo make it a promising solution for the environmental and social consequences of tropical deforestation. Its biological characteristics make it an effective tool for preventing soil erosion and reducing carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere. Additionally, its qualities of strength, light weight and flexibility make it a viable alternative to tropical timbers that typically supply the furniture and building materials industries. Last, many bamboo species have rapid growth capabilities enabling harvests within a few years of establishment. Therefore, bamboo is an attractive economic investment that can be utilized in many different manners.

Introduction

Many growers, especially new ones, are inclined to start production without giving a second thought to the business of marketing. Good marketing is an absolute must for a successful agricultural enterprise. Some would even argue that it ranks higher in importance than production itselfespecially for farmers planning to diversify. After all, what good is a product if one cannot sell it consistently for a profit?

Diversification out of commodity crops may mean becoming familiar with, or even creating, new marketing systems. Existing marketing channels very often do not accommodate the new producer wellespecially the small producer.

Some farmers may use direct marketing for particular products while simultaneously participating in traditional markets. No two growers are the same, and the reader will have to determine through trial and error what works best.

Introduction

"It is a humbling fact for grass pasture experts to realize that probably more animals feed on shrubs and trees, or on associations in which trees and shrubs play an important part, than on true grass-legume pastures."

CAB Publication No. 10 (1947)

Much has been written on the role of forage tree legumes. The literature abounds with reports, scholarly papers, conference proceedings, and books which describe traditional uses of indigenous species and new opportunities with exotic species. Tree legumes offer many benefits. Apart from their value as feed for livestock, tree legumes are recognised for their multi-purpose contributions to the productivity of farming systems, to the welfare of people and to the protection of the environment. But it is the flexibility of their uses that makes them especially significant; they can be found on farms ranging from small-holder subsistence to large-scale commercial.

The most well known species, Leucaena leucocephala (leucaena), was once referred to as the miracle tree. This label did great damage to perceptions of the value of leucaena, especially after the movement of the psyllid insect around the world. Following this event, great hardship was suffered by those who depended on this species for their livelihood. Its limitations are now more clearly understood (Shelton and Jones 1995) and have led to a worldwide study of alternative species; both those currently in use, as well as new, but not yet domesticated species.