Upload
lamhanh
View
222
Download
3
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Smallholder teak systems on java, Indonesia: income for families, timber for industry
Presentation at: IUFRO Small‐scale Forestry Conference24‐27 September 2012 – Amherst, Massachusetts
James M Roshetko, Agus Astho, Dede Rohadi, Nurin Widyani, Gerhard S. Manurung, Anies Fauzi, and Purnomo Sumardamto
Improving Economic Outcomes for Smallholders Growing Teak in Agroforestry System in Indonesia Project (ACIAR FST/2005/177)
Presentation• History of teak in Indonesia• Teak in Java• Research site and methods• Smallholder teak systems • Farmer demonstration trials • Extension efforts and impacts • Recommendations
History of Teak in IndonesiaNative to India, Myanmar, Laos and Thailand • teak introduced to Indonesia (Hindu missionaries)‐ 2nd century
• teak ship building in Java ‐ 10th century • teak plantations started ‐ 13th century • Dutch esta. intensive plantations ‐ 19th century • Perum Perhutani (state forestry industry) ‐ 1963 • smallholder teak plantation common ‐ 1960s
Source: Simatupang (2000) and Simon (2000). Third Regional Seminar on Teak. Potential and Opportunities in Marketing and Trade of Plantation Teak: Challenges for the New Millennium. Yogyakarta, Indonesia.
Teak Industry & Potential in JavaBackgroundJava focus of Indonesia teak industry. In Jepara alone +15,000 teak factories., employ 170,000 people and create products valued at Rp 12 trillion/year (US$1.2 billion). As plantation production decline, opportunities arise for smallholders. About 1.5 million families on Java grow teak on 444,000 ha, mostly degraded land. Smallholder are an important source of teak, but ....
Impediments to smallholder teak production (silviculture link):• Low quality timber due to poor silviculture• Lack of capital to invest in teak planting• Inability to wait duration of a teak rotation before needing returns • Limited access to market information/linkages• High transaction costs for timber merchants (passed on to farmers)• Unfavourable policies
*
*
**
*
**
Gunungkidul District, Yogyakarta Population: ‐ 685,000
Area: ‐ 148,500 ha‐ Forest 9% ‐ Tree farm 18%
Topography:‐ hilly, half over 15% slopes
Elevation: ‐ 100 to 700 m
Annual rainfall: ‐ 1500 to 2500 mm
Conditions of Smallholder Teak SystemsResearch MethodsHousehold Survey 274 families, 1024 land parcels, 276 haTeak garden inventory –227 tree gardens, 47.1 haFocal Group Discussions 60 Farmers Market Appraisal 227 farmers, 11 traders, 7 mill owners
Farmers cultivate multiple parcels (ave 3.9),multiple types, teak 50% of systems, 12% of income, managed for ‘needs’
‘Tebang butuh’
Tegalan – upland system found 1‐1.5 km from home, trees & annual crops intercropped Pekarangan – near house, trees & annual crops intercroppedKitren – upland system found 1‐1.5 km from home, timber plantations (monoculture)Riceland / border– trees at wide spacing
Systems
Hierarchical Cluster Analysis Based on structure and management tegalan & pekarangan nearly same.
Landuse System
% of systems
Ave size (ha) % of total land
Trees/ (ha) Speciessystem
Tegalan 50.6 0.47 66.5 1072 8Pekarangan 23.8 0.24 14.7 1177 13Kitren 9.1 0.31 8.5 1532 5Riceland 8.5 0.31 7.8 138 7
55.90%
11.30%
7.40%
5.80%
4.00%2.40%
1.40%1.20% 1.10%
0.90%
0.80%
0.70%
0.50%
0.10%
6.50%
Trees
Jati
Mahoni
Lamtoro
Akasia
Tayuman
Gleresede
Melinjo
Turi
Johar
Kelapa
Mangga
Jambu mete
Sonokeling
47.20%
14.00%
4.50%7.80%
15.30%1.50%
0.20% 0.90%0.50%0.10%0.10%
0.20%
1.10%
3.50%2.90%
Regeneration
Jati
Mahoni
Lamtoro
Akasia
Tayuman
Gleresede
Melinjo
Turi
Teak is ‐ 56% of trees ‐ 47% of regeneration
Intercropping• 82% farmers intercrop• 42% land parcels cropped/year• 69% intercropped land ‐ tegalan• 11% kitren intercropped (mainly
during establishment)• 73% of farmers fertilizer/weed,
but only with intercropping• Crops: cassava, peanuts, rice,
soybeans, vegetables, otherscorn, kidney beans, bananas, etc
Peanuts24%
Soybeans8%
Longbeans3%Cassava
27%
Rice18%
Other20%
Farmer Silviculture• Regeneration: 72% wildlings,
30% local seedling, 20% coppice, 12% superior quality seedlings
• Pruning: 65% farmers, 55% trees – fuelwood, 10‐15 cm stub
• Thinning: 57% thinning (but really harvesting)
• Coppice: no thinning • No management for improving
production /growth
Poor silviculture practices! Farmers teak systems … overstock,
slow growing, low quality, low productivity
Tebang butuh (harvest to meet needs) – health, education, ceremonies, cash flow …
Market/Marketing
Age(year)
DBH(cm)
Price for farmer(US$/standing tree)
Log volume afterprocessing (m3)
Log price totraders (US$)
10 12 – 18 3 – 6 0.045 - 0.189 3 – 2515 13 – 31 5 – 30 0.060 - 0.515 6 – 12320 21 – 45 10 – 265 0.307 - 1.061 57 – 28425 29 – 49 20 – 296 0.320 - 1.321 54 – 329
• role of farmer limited to producer• standing tree standard unit of sale for farm‐grown teak• no clear quality or volume standards exist • 51% farmers discuss price with neighbors, 31% compare price with multiple traders, 18% are price takers • regardless of approach – farmers receive price ↓ market rate• traders ↑ transac on cost; so offer price ↓ • farmers sell small dbh logs (only 14% harvest by dbh class)
Farmers Thoughts & Needs
Farmers aware need to improve silviculture
• Prefer Mixed Systems :↓ risk; ↑ diverse crops, product & income for home; improve environ.; sustain traditional culture
• Farmers’ Needs: ‐ assistance to improve silviculture management (spacing, thinning, pruning)‐ access to and knowledge of quality germplasm, include nurseries (58%)‐ access to and understanding of market information (51%)‐ possible to expand intercropping need more information (50%) ‐ retain ‘tebang butuh’ improve management, production, income
Farmer Demo Trials (FDTs)
• 6 Locations • FDT Treatments
‐ Thinning: i) control, ii) maximum 40‐45% (target 4x4m – 625 trees/ha)‐ Pruning: i) control; ii) 50% total height; & iii) 60% total height‐ Singling: i) control; & ii) ‘singling’
• Monitoring every 6 months
Results (+ 2 yrs) • Rainy season growth increment ↑,
dry season ↑ but not as much• Pruning 60%‐Thinning: DBH 60% ↑,
height 124% ↑• Single Treatment: Thinning versus No
Thinning: DBH 45% ↑, height 80% ↑• Good results ‐ Challenging On‐Farm
conditions
Venue for Field Days &Trainings (425‐450 farmers) – adoption & innovation
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
Sep08‐May09 May09‐Nov09 Nov09‐May10 May10‐Nov10
Diameter increm
ent (cm
)
NP_NT
NP_T
P50_NT
P50_T
P60_NT
P60_T
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
D_Sep08_May09 D_May09_Nov09 D_Nov09_May10 D_May10_Nov10
Diameter increm
ent (cm
/yera)
Control
Singling
Results‐Rainy season treatments ↑ effect‐ Thinning always good effect ‐ Pruning good for increment, main purpose ↑ quality ‐ Singling concentrate DBH growth on remaining tree (not always significant, 40% ↑
Recommendations (FDTs & Surveys)‐ Use better quality germplasm‐ Thin coppice ‐ Thinning stands to medium stocking (625 trees / ha) ‐ Pruning 60% of total height, do not leave branch stubs
‐ Unthinned coppice tree quality ↓ ‐ Leaving branch stub tree quality ↓
Farmer Extension Activities• 207 farmers & exten. agents
trained in FDT management • 114 farmers & exten. agents
trained with silvicultural manual• Pruning tools distributed to 10
village partners • Indo. manuals widely
distributed • Frequent informal training
ImpactsIndependent assessment by IPB• In project area 70% farmer
↑knowledge , 50% adopt, & 30% disseminate to others
• Outside area 30% farmer ↑knowledge , 20% adopt, & 15% disseminate to others
Recommendations• Smallholders systems are not Industrial Teak Plantations …that is ok• Tebang butuh approach is ok, but … • Farmer should ↑ management, how?‐ better germplasm ‐ coppice management ‐ thinning best option for ↑ production (↑ volume/tree → $/tree & $ to farmers)‐ pruning 60% total height (min. 1 log)for ↑ quality and produc on
• ↑ market position by accessing info • engage in group marke ng to ↓ transaction costs for all parties
• Government and support agencies can facilitate adoption of improved silvicultural and marketing practices
Silvicultural Guidelines –Farmers Field Manual
Contents• Seed Management• Seedling Production • Planting • Plantation Management • Harvesting
Development Process ‐Developed by Team: professionalexperience, second info, project findings‐ Reviewed by Specialists ‐ Field Tested with Farmers / Extension ists‐ English Version 2011 (3rd draft in review)
AA Pramono; MA Fauzi; N Widyani; I Heriansyah; JM Roshetko. 2010. PengelolaanHutan Jati Rakyat: Panduan Lapang UntukPetani. (Management of Community Teak Forests: A Field Manual for Farmers). Bogor, Indonesia: CIFOR; ICRAF, Winrock, FORDA.
Current Practices• Survey of 275 Households • Farm Inventory 227 parcels (47.1 ha) • Pekarangan (22%); Tegalan (51%); Kitren(22%); border plantings (5%) • Teak 56% trees & 47% regeneration; other timber 19% trees and 23% regeneration • Regeneration: 72% wildlings; 30% local seedlings; 20% coppice; 12% improved • Intercropping 82% pekerangan & tegalansoybeans, corn, cassava, peanuts, rice (1‐3 yrs)• Weeding & Fert – only when intercropping • Pruning: 65% (but actually firewood harv.) • Thinning: 43% thinning, but actually harv.• Harvesting: tebang butuh (harvest to fit needs) – emergencies and cash flow
• Farmer systems overstocked, slow growing, low quality, limited management • Farmers aware they need to improve their silviculture. Request assistance from team. • Shared posters at 3 international forums
6 Lokasi FDTs (Demplots)Petani Lokasi Perlakuan/
Replikasiluas/pohon
1 Suwarto Sokoliman I, Karang Mojo
P & P4 reps
500 m2
2 Citro Sokoliman I, Karang Mojo
P & P6 reps
750 m2
3 Budiyono Ngawis, Karang Mojo
P & P6 reps
750 m2
4 Subardi Giripurwa, Purwosari
Singling13 Pasang
26 Pohon
5 Karsukiyo Karangduwet, Paliyan
Singling10 Pasang
20 Pohon
6 Kardi Utomo Ngadiram
Karangduwet, Paliyan
Singling15 Pasang
30 Pohon