IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v10y2021i3p278-d513024.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Building Agroforestry Policy Bottom-Up: Knowledge of Czech Farmers on Trees in Farmland

Author

Listed:
  • Jana Krčmářová

    (Institute of Ethnology, Czech Academy of Sciences, Na Florenci 3, 110 00 Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Lukáš Kala

    (The Institute of Botany of the Czech Academy of Sciences, Czech Academy of Sciences, Lidická 971, 602 00 Brno, Czech Republic)

  • Alica Brendzová

    (Institute of Ethnology, Czech Academy of Sciences, Na Florenci 3, 110 00 Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Tomáš Chabada

    (Department of Environmental Studies, Faculty pf Social Studies, Masaryk University, Joštova 218/10, 602 00 Brno, Czech Republic)

Abstract

Czech agriculture is dealing with the consequences of climate change. Agroforestry cultures are being discursively reintroduced for better adaptability and resilience, with the first practical explorations seen in the field. Scholars have been working with farmers and regional stakeholders to establish a baseline for making agroforestry policy viable and sustainable. In a research effort that lasted three years, a large group of Czech farmers was interviewed via questionnaire surveys, standardized focus groups and in-depth personal interviews regarding their knowledge of agroforestry systems, their willingness to participate in these systems, and their concerns and expectations therewith. The information obtained helped the researchers gain better understanding of issues related to implementation of these systems. It was found that although trees are present on Czech farms and farmers appreciate their aesthetic and ecological landscape functions, knowledge about possible local synergies with crops and animals is lacking. This local knowledge gap, together with lack of market opportunities for the output of agroforestry systems and undeveloped administrative processes, have been identified as the greatest obstacles to the establishment of agroforestry systems. The researchers argue that the discovered cognitive and technological “lock-in” of the farmers may represent a risk to climate change adaptability and resilience. For the development of complex and localised land use (e.g., agroforestry) in such a context, the researchers suggest participative on-farm research, which would broaden the local knowledge base related to ecology and entrepreneurship.

Suggested Citation

  • Jana Krčmářová & Lukáš Kala & Alica Brendzová & Tomáš Chabada, 2021. "Building Agroforestry Policy Bottom-Up: Knowledge of Czech Farmers on Trees in Farmland," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-18, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:3:p:278-:d:513024
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/3/278/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/3/278/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Line Louah & Marjolein Visser & Alice Blaimont & Charles De Cannière, 2017. "Barriers to the development of temperate agroforestry as an example of agroecological innovation: Mainly a matter of cognitive lock-in?," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/258841, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    2. Craig R. Elevitch & D. Niki Mazaroli & Diane Ragone, 2018. "Agroforestry Standards for Regenerative Agriculture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-21, September.
    3. Nazmul Huq & Antje Bruns & Lars Ribbe & Saleemul Huq, 2017. "Mainstreaming Ecosystem Services Based Climate Change Adaptation (EbA) in Bangladesh: Status, Challenges and Opportunities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-20, June.
    4. Anton Eitzinger & Claudia R. Binder & Markus A. Meyer, 2018. "Risk perception and decision-making: do farmers consider risks from climate change?," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 151(3), pages 507-524, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Min Li & Apurbo Sarkar & Yuge Wang & Ahmed Khairul Hasan & Quanxing Meng, 2022. "Evaluating the Impact of Ecological Property Rights to Trigger Farmers’ Investment Behavior—An Example of Confluence Area of Heihe Reservoir, Shaanxi, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-23, February.
    2. Andis Bārdulis & Jānis Ivanovs & Arta Bārdule & Dagnija Lazdiņa & Dana Purviņa & Aldis Butlers & Andis Lazdiņš, 2022. "Assessment of Agricultural Areas Suitable for Agroforestry in Latvia," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-17, October.
    3. Johannes Litschel & Ferréol Berendt & Hanna Wagner & Simon Heidenreich & David Bauer & Martin Welp & Tobias Cremer, 2023. "Key Actors’ Perspectives on Agroforestry’s Potential in North Eastern Germany," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-19, February.
    4. N. P. Hariram & K. B. Mekha & Vipinraj Suganthan & K. Sudhakar, 2023. "Sustainalism: An Integrated Socio-Economic-Environmental Model to Address Sustainable Development and Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-37, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Pierre Marie Stassart & Maarten Crivits & Julie Hermesse & Louis Tessier & Julie Van Damme & Joost Dessein, 2018. "The Generative Potential of Tensions within Belgian Agroecology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-22, June.
    2. André Eduardo Biscaia Lacerda & Ana Lúcia Hanisch & Evelyn Roberta Nimmo, 2020. "Leveraging Traditional Agroforestry Practices to Support Sustainable and Agrobiodiverse Landscapes in Southern Brazil," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-19, June.
    3. Christophe Béné & Timothy Frankenberger & Tiffany Griffin & Mark Langworthy & Monica Mueller & Stephanie Martin, 2019. "‘Perception matters’: New insights into the subjective dimension of resilience in the context of humanitarian and food security crises," Progress in Development Studies, , vol. 19(3), pages 186-210, July.
    4. Dong Chen & Kangning Xiong & Juan Zhang, 2022. "Progress on the Integrity Protection in the Natural World Heritage Site and Agroforestry Development in the Buffer Zone: An Implications for the World Heritage Karst," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(24), pages 1-18, December.
    5. Julia Jouan & Mireille De Graeuwe & Matthieu Carof & Rim Baccar & Nathalie Bareille & Suzanne Bastian & Delphine Brogna & Giovanni Burgio & Sébastien Couvreur & Michał Cupiał & Benjamin Dumont & Anne-, 2020. "Learning Interdisciplinarity and Systems Approaches in Agroecology: Experience with the Serious Game SEGAE," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-15, May.
    6. Angelica Melone & Leah L. Bremer & Susan E. Crow & Zoe Hastings & Kawika B. Winter & Tamara Ticktin & Yoshimi M. Rii & Maile Wong & Kānekoa Kukea-Shultz & Sheree J. Watson & Clay Trauernicht, 2021. "Assessing Baseline Carbon Stocks for Forest Transitions: A Case Study of Agroforestry Restoration from Hawai?i," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-17, February.
    7. Kelly R. Wilson & Robert L. Myers & Mary K. Hendrickson & Emily A. Heaton, 2022. "Different Stakeholders’ Conceptualizations and Perspectives of Regenerative Agriculture Reveals More Consensus Than Discord," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-14, November.
    8. Achokh, Yuri R., 2020. "Improvement of the economic efficiency of protective forest plantations in the agricultural sector of the Russian Federation," Economic Consultant, Scientific and Educational Initiative LLC, vol. 29(1), pages 39-48.
    9. Koirala, Pankaj & Kotani, Koji & Managi, Shunsuke, 2022. "How do farm size and perceptions matter for farmers’ adaptation responses to climate change in a developing country? Evidence from Nepal," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 188-204.
    10. Weiss, Gerhard & Hansen, Eric & Ludvig, Alice & Nybakk, Erlend & Toppinen, Anne, 2021. "Innovation governance in the forest sector: Reviewing concepts, trends and gaps," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    11. Zahra Ranjbar & Mohammad Chizari & Hasan Sadighi & Homayon Farhadian & Philippe Lebailly & Thomas Dogot & Jorge Armando Ortegón Rojas & Yenny Katherine Parra-Acosta & Hossein Azadi, 2021. "Risk Factors in Various Climates of Wheat Production in Western Iran: Experts’ Opinions," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-17, December.
    12. Qiangsheng Hu & Xiaorong He & Hongbing Zhu & Peihong Yang, 2023. "Understanding Residents’ Intention to Adapt to Climate Change in Urban Destinations—A Case Study of Chang-Zhu-Tan Urban Agglomeration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-16, August.
    13. repec:caa:jnlage:v:preprint:id:281-2023-agricecon is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Junqiao Ma & Wenfeng Zhou & Shili Guo & Xin Deng & Jiahao Song & Dingde Xu, 2022. "The influence of peer effects on farmers’ response to climate change: evidence from Sichuan Province, China," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 175(1), pages 1-23, November.
    15. Keiti Kondi & Stefanija Veljanoska, 2023. "Internal Migration as a Response to Soil Degradation: Evidence from Malawi," LIDAM Discussion Papers IRES 2023004, Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales (IRES).
    16. Margaret Ndapewa Angula & Immaculate Mogotsi & Selma Lendelvo & Karl Mutani Aribeb & Aina-Maria Iteta & Jessica P. R. Thorn, 2021. "Strengthening Gender Responsiveness of the Green Climate Fund Ecosystem-Based Adaptation Programme in Namibia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-16, September.
    17. Botero, Hernan & Barnes, Andrew P. & Perez, Lisset & Rios, David & Ramirez-Villegas, Julian, 2021. "The determinants of common bean variety selection and diversification in Colombia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    18. Borremans, L. & Marchand, F. & Visser, M. & Wauters, E., 2018. "Nurturing agroforestry systems in Flanders: Analysis from an agricultural innovation systems perspective," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 205-219.
    19. Yudha Kristanto & Suria Tarigan & Tania June & Bambang Sulistyantara & Pini Wijayanti, 2024. "Indirect use value of improved soil health as natural capital that supports essential ecosystem services: A case study of cacao agroforestry," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 70(3), pages 137-154.
    20. R. S. Clements & S. K. Birthisel & A. Daigneault & E. Gallandt & D. Johnson & T. Wentworth & M. T. Niles, 2021. "Climate change in the context of whole-farming systems: opportunities for improved outreach," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 166(3), pages 1-20, June.
    21. Elisa Giampietri & Samuele Trestini, 2023. "Pro-Environmental Viticulture: Status Quo and Perspectives from Prosecco Winegrowers in Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-12, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:3:p:278-:d:513024. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.