IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jagris/v12y2022i12p2004-d983635.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Classification of Mountain Silvopastoral Farming Systems in Walnut Forests of Kyrgyzstan: Determining Opportunities for Sustainable Livelihoods

Author

Listed:
  • Azamat Azarov

    (Department of Crop Sciences and Agroforestry, Faculty of Tropical AgriSciences, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Kamýcká 129, 165 00 Praha-Suchdol, Czech Republic
    Mountain Societies Research Institute, University of Central Asia, 138 Toktogul Street, Bishkek 720001, Kyrgyzstan)

  • Zbynek Polesny

    (Department of Crop Sciences and Agroforestry, Faculty of Tropical AgriSciences, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Kamýcká 129, 165 00 Praha-Suchdol, Czech Republic)

  • Dietrich Darr

    (Faculty of Life Sciences, Rhine-Waal University of Applied Sciences, Marie-Curie-Str. 1, 47533 Kleve, Germany)

  • Maksim Kulikov

    (Mountain Societies Research Institute, University of Central Asia, 138 Toktogul Street, Bishkek 720001, Kyrgyzstan)

  • Vladimir Verner

    (Department of Economics and Development, Faculty of Tropical AgriSciences, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Kamýcká 129, 165 21 Praha-Suchdol, Czech Republic)

  • Roy C. Sidle

    (Mountain Societies Research Institute, University of Central Asia, 138 Toktogul Street, Bishkek 720001, Kyrgyzstan)

Abstract

Kyrgyz walnut-fruit forests are unique ecosystems inhabited by silvopastoral farm households that depend on forest resources for their livelihoods. Illegal logging, excessive collection of non-timber forest products (NTFPs), and overgrazing of forest pastures negatively affect forest regeneration and biodiversity, ultimately impacting sustainable livelihoods in the region. Understanding farm heterogeneity is critical to identify targeted interventions that have the potential to improve livelihood sustainability for local populations. This study identifies and elucidates the typology of farms in walnut-fruit forests. Data were collected from 220 farm-households in three villages located within or in the buffer zone of protected areas. Principal component analysis (PCA) and cluster analysis were used to analyze quantitative data and aggregate farms into clusters according to forest resource availability and use, production means, and socioeconomic characteristics. Three distinct silvopastoral farming systems were identified, in which farmers collect and sell NTFPs, but also have: (i) relatively high NTFP income, medium-sized livestock herds, and low off-farm income; (ii) moderate NTFP income, large livestock herds, and high off-farm income; and (iii) low NTFP income, small herds, and moderate off-farm income. Overall, all types of farms showed different livelihood strategies; specific recommendations aimed at increasing sustainability were provided for each type. While both improved forages for livestock and grazing in forests are relevant for all types of farms, in some cases, value-added processing of NTFPs and contributions from off-farm activities such as tourism are necessary for the conservation and sustainable use of forests.

Suggested Citation

  • Azamat Azarov & Zbynek Polesny & Dietrich Darr & Maksim Kulikov & Vladimir Verner & Roy C. Sidle, 2022. "Classification of Mountain Silvopastoral Farming Systems in Walnut Forests of Kyrgyzstan: Determining Opportunities for Sustainable Livelihoods," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-15, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:12:y:2022:i:12:p:2004-:d:983635
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/12/12/2004/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/12/12/2004/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jalilova, Gulnaz & Khadka, Chiranjeewee & Vacik, Harald, 2012. "Developing criteria and indicators for evaluating sustainable forest management: A case study in Kyrgyzstan," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 32-43.
    2. Fisher, Brendan & Christopher, Treg, 2007. "Poverty and biodiversity: Measuring the overlap of human poverty and the biodiversity hotspots," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 93-101, April.
    3. Nadia Schoch & Bernd Steimann & Susan Thieme, 2010. "Migration and animal husbandry: Competing or complementary livelihood strategies. Evidence from Kyrgyzstan," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 34(3), pages 211-221, August.
    4. Tittonell, P. & Muriuki, A. & Shepherd, K.D. & Mugendi, D. & Kaizzi, K.C. & Okeyo, J. & Verchot, L. & Coe, R. & Vanlauwe, B., 2010. "The diversity of rural livelihoods and their influence on soil fertility in agricultural systems of East Africa - A typology of smallholder farms," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 103(2), pages 83-97, February.
    5. Wibke Crewett, 2015. "Street-Level Bureaucrats at Work: A Municipality-Level Institutional Analysis of Community-Based Natural Resource Management Implementation Practice in the Pasture Sector of Kyrgyzstan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-29, March.
    6. Nadia Schoch & Bernd Steimann & Susan Thieme, 2010. "Migration and animal husbandry: Competing or complementary livelihood strategies. Evidence from Kyrgyzstan," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 34, pages 211-221, August.
    7. Dorothy Birungi Namuyiga & Till Stellmacher & Christian Borgemeister & Jeroen C. J. Groot, 2022. "A Typology and Preferences for Pigeon Pea in Smallholder Mixed Farming Systems in Uganda," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-15, August.
    8. Kobrich, C. & Rehman, T. & Khan, M., 2003. "Typification of farming systems for constructing representative farm models: two illustrations of the application of multi-variate analyses in Chile and Pakistan," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 76(1), pages 141-157, April.
    9. Shigaeva, Jyldyz & Darr, Dietrich, 2020. "On the socio-economic importance of natural and planted walnut (Juglans regia L.) forests in the Silk Road countries: A systematic review," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    10. Matthew C. LaFevor, 2022. "Characterizing Agricultural Diversity with Policy-Relevant Farm Typologies in Mexico," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-19, August.
    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. Zhigao Wu & Kangning Xiong & Dayun Zhu & Jie Xiao, 2022. "Revelation of Coupled Ecosystem Quality and Landscape Patterns for Agroforestry Ecosystem Services Sustainability Improvement in the Karst Desertification Control," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-27, December.

    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. Azamat Azarov & Roy C. Sidle & Dietrich Darr & Vladimir Verner & Zbynek Polesny, 2024. "A Proposed Typology of Farming Systems for Assessing Sustainable Livelihood Development Pathways in the Tien Shan Mountains of Kyrgyzstan," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-18, January.
    2. So Pyay Thar & Thiagarajah Ramilan & Robert J. Farquharson & Deli Chen, 2021. "Identifying Potential for Decision Support Tools through Farm Systems Typology Analysis Coupled with Participatory Research: A Case for Smallholder Farmers in Myanmar," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-20, June.
    3. Pienaar, Louw & Traub, Lulama, 2015. "Understanding the smallholder farmer in South Africa: Towards a sustainable livelihoods classification," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 212633, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. Fatmir Guri & Ilir Kapaj & Bahri Musabelliu & Maksim Meço & Eneida Topulli & Remzi Keco & Natasha Hodaj & Shpresim Domi & Gentjan Mehmeti & Sergio Gomez y Paloma, 2015. "Characteristics of farming systems in Albania," JRC Research Reports JRC95833, Joint Research Centre.
    5. Kumar, Shalander & Craufurd, Peter & Haileslassie, Amare & Ramilan, Thiagarajah & Rathore, Abhishek & Whitbread, Anthony, 2019. "Farm typology analysis and technology assessment: An application in an arid region of South Asia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    6. Pradeleix, L. & Roux, P. & Bouarfa, S. & Bellon-Maurel, V., 2022. "Multilevel environmental assessment of regional farming activities with Life Cycle Assessment: Tackling data scarcity and farm diversity with Life Cycle Inventories based on Agrarian System Diagnosis," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    7. Chaudhary, Ashok Kumar & Pandit, Ram & Burton, Michael, 2022. "Farmyard manure use and adoption of agricultural mechanization among smallholders in the Mahottari District, Nepal," World Development Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 25(C).
    8. Rupak Goswami & Soumitra Chatterjee & Binoy Prasad, 2014. "Farm types and their economic characterization in complex agro-ecosystems for informed extension intervention: study from coastal West Bengal, India," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 2(1), pages 1-24, December.
    9. Ramilan, T. & Kumar, S. & Haileslassie, Amare & Craufurd, P. & Scrimgeour, F. & Kattarkandi, B. & Whitbread, A., 2022. "Quantifying farm household resilience and the implications of livelihood heterogeneity in the semi-arid tropics of India," Papers published in Journals (Open Access), International Water Management Institute, pages 1-12(4):466.
    10. Netshipale, A.J. & Raidimi, E.N. & Mashiloane, M.L. & de Boer, I.J.M. & Oosting, S.J., 2022. "Farming system diversity and its drivers in land reform farms of the Waterberg District, South Africa," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    11. Upadhaya, Suraj & G. Arbuckle, J. & Schulte, Lisa A., 2023. "Farmer typologies integrating latent and observed characteristics: Insights for soil and water conservation outreach," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    12. Głębocki Benicjusz & Kacprzak Ewa & Kossowski Tomasz, 2019. "Multicriterion Typology of Agriculture: A Spatial Dependence Approach," Quaestiones Geographicae, Sciendo, vol. 38(2), pages 29-49, June.
    13. Mack, Elizabeth A. & Sauls, Laura Aileen & Jokisch, Brad D. & Nolte, Kerstin & Schmook, Birgit & He, Yifan & Radel, Claudia & Allington, Ginger R.H. & Kelley, Lisa C. & Scott, Christian Kelly & Leisz,, 2023. "Remittances and land change: A systematic review," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    14. Asif Rasool & David Abler, 2023. "Heterogeneity in US Farms: A New Clustering by Production Potentials," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-14, January.
    15. Shigaeva, Jyldyz & Darr, Dietrich, 2020. "On the socio-economic importance of natural and planted walnut (Juglans regia L.) forests in the Silk Road countries: A systematic review," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    16. Bisrat Haile Gebrekidan & Thomas Heckelei & Sebastian Rasch, 2020. "Characterizing Farmers and Farming System in Kilombero Valley Floodplain, Tanzania," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-21, August.
    17. Regret Sunge & Calvin Mudzingiri, 2023. "A Systematic Literature Review on Migration and Remittances in Mountainous Regions: Key Takeaways for Phuthaditjhaba, Free State, South Africa," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-25, October.
    18. Zhou, Hong & Yan, Jianzhong & Lei, Kun & Wu, Ya & Sun, Laixiang, 2020. "Labor migration and the decoupling of the crop-livestock system in a rural mountainous area: Evidence from Chongqing, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    19. Falconnier, Gatien N. & Descheemaeker, Katrien & Van Mourik, Thomas A. & Sanogo, Ousmane M. & Giller, Ken E., 2015. "Understanding farm trajectories and development pathways: Two decades of change in southern Mali," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 210-222.
    20. Dean, G. & Rivera-Ferre, M.G. & Rosas-Casals, Marti & Lopez-i-Gelats, F., 2021. "Nature’s contribution to people as a framework for examining socioecological systems: The case of pastoral systems," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).

    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:jagris:v:12:y:2022:i:12:p:2004-:d:983635. 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.