Scholarly article on topic 'Achieving mitigation and adaptation to climate change through sustainable agroforestry practices in Africa'

Achieving mitigation and adaptation to climate change through sustainable agroforestry practices in Africa Academic research paper on "Agriculture, forestry, and fisheries"

Share paper

Abstract of research paper on Agriculture, forestry, and fisheries, author of scientific article — Cheikh Mbow, Pete Smith, David Skole, Lalisa Duguma, Mercedes Bustamante

Agroforestry is one of the most conspicuous land use systems across landscapes and agroecological zones in Africa. With food shortages and increased threats of climate change, interest in agroforestry is gathering for its potential to address various on-farm adaptation needs, and fulfill many roles in AFOLU-related mitigation pathways. Agroforestry provides assets and income from carbon, wood energy, improved soil fertility and enhancement of local climate conditions; it provides ecosystem services and reduces human impacts on natural forests. Most of these benefits have direct benefits for local adaptation while contributing to global efforts to control atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations. This paper presents recent findings on how agroforestry as a sustainable practice helps to achieve both mitigation and adaptation objectives while remaining relevant to the livelihoods of the poor smallholder farmers in Africa.

Academic research paper on topic "Achieving mitigation and adaptation to climate change through sustainable agroforestry practices in Africa"

Available online at


Current Opinion in

Environmental Sustainabiliiy

Achieving mitigation and adaptation to climate change through sustainable agroforestry practices in Africa§

Cheikh Mbow1, Pete Smith2, David Skole3, Lalisa Duguma1 and Mercedes Bustamante4

Agroforestry is one of the most conspicuous land use systems across landscapes and agroecological zones in Africa. With food shortages and increased threats of climate change, interest in agroforestry is gathering for its potential to address various on-farm adaptation needs, and fulfill many roles in AFOLU-related mitigation pathways. Agroforestry provides assets and income from carbon, wood energy, improved soil fertility and enhancement of local climate conditions; it provides ecosystem services and reduces human impacts on natural forests. Most of these benefits have direct benefits for local adaptation while contributing to global efforts to control atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations. This paper presents recent findings on how agroforestry as a sustainable practice helps to achieve both mitigation and adaptation objectives while remaining relevant to the livelihoods of the poor smallholder farmers in Africa.


1 World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF), SD6, United Nations Avenue, Gigiri 00100, PO Box 30677, Nairobi, Kenya

2 Institute of Biological and Environmental Sciences and ClimateXChange, University of Aberdeen, 23 St Machar Drive, Aberdeen, AB24 3UU Scotland, UK

3 Department of Forestry, Michigan State University, 126 Natural Resources Building, East Lansing, MI 48824-1222, USA

4 Departamento de Ecologia, Universidade de Brasilia, I.B. C.P. 04457, Campus Universitario Darcy Ribeiro - UnB. D.F., CEP: 70919-970 Brasilia, Brazil

Corresponding author: Mbow, Cheikh (,

§ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use,

distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Scoping agroforestry for climate change

Low income countries mostly rely on agriculture for rural livelihoods and development. Nevertheless, agricultural systems in developing countries are adversely affected by land pressure and climate change, both of which threaten food production. Reduced productivity due to land degradation exacerbates the food deficit, despite the relative success of intensive agricultural systems that are promoted in many regions of the world. The various environmental impacts of agricultural intensification and food production, with negative impacts on soil and biodiversity, result in adverse feedbacks on climate, food security and on-farm income at local scale [1]. In addition, attempts to implement a 'green revolution' model in Africa using subsidies and inputs such as fertilizers have been costly and unsustainable, as technology cannot fully replace the services that trees would normally provide [2]. The current debate on sustainable intensification of agriculture underlines the importance of diversification as a way to improve crop and land management by integrating trees in land use systems [2-4]. There are many ways to achieve sustainable agricultural goals through the combination of increased yields with ecosystem services, but there few options where agroecosystem diversity and farm productivity are enhanced simultaneously. Some forms of agroforestry require low external inputs (pro-poor), have a high recycling rate, and good integration of trees, crops and animals, making them good candidate for achieving both sustainable livelihood and climate changes objectives [5*].

In most parts of Africa, climate change mitigation focusses on reforestation and forest protection. But such efforts to reduce tropical deforestation (often under the umbrella of REDD+) [6] conflict with the need to expand agricultural production in Africa to feed the continent's growing population [7]. Agroforestry could be a win-win solution to the seemingly difficult choice between reforestation and agricultural land use, because it increases the storage of carbon and may also enhance agricultural productivity [8,9**]. Some studies suggest that smallholder farmers in developing countries may combat climate change by reverting to more natural productive systems, which provide improved ecological and social functions [10], while meeting adaptation needs and building resilient agro-ecological systems that actively sequester carbon [11-14]. Currently, there is a growing interest in investing in agroforestry systems for these multiple benefits [15*,16], and also as a set of innovative practices that strengthen the system's ability to cope with adverse

Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2014, 6:8-14

This review comes from a themed issue on Sustainability challenges

Edited by Cheikh Mbow, Henry Neufeldt, Peter Akong Minang, Eike Luedeling and Godwin Kowero

For a complete overview see the Issue and the Editorial

Received 4 May 2013; Accepted 17 September 2013

Available online 12th October 2013

1877-3435/$ - see front matter, © 2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

impacts of a changing climate [17]. Although the feasibility and benefits of agroforestry-based mitigation to smallholder farmers are currently under debate, common ground is found when evidence emerges that high production levels and economic values of agroforestry products may generate financial capital beyond subsistence levels alone, thereby aiding capital accumulation and reinvestment at the farm level [18,19].

Although the capacity of agroforestry to both raise carbon stocks and produce livelihood benefits has been well demonstrated, the research community needs to better understand the emerging challenge of assessing benefits from other ecosystem services beyond the symbolic value of carbon sequestration.

A defining factor of African agriculture is the dominance of smallholder farmers with a strong priority on food security. Under such conditions, climate mitigation measures will need to demonstrate support for improved food production as well as climate adaptation benefits [14,20**,21]. This synthesis presents the state of the art on the role of agrofor-estry in addressing both climate mitigation and adaptation in primarily food-focused production systems of Africa.

Agricultural performance under agroforestry systems

The steady decrease in soil fertility due to many drivers is a serious constraint for sustainable agriculture in Africa [2227]. Topsoil erosion is the most detrimental form of soil degradation and is likely to be aggravated by long-term removal of surface litter and crop residues. The shortage of mineral fertilizers and poor performance of current agricultural policies have directed discussions on food security towards sustainable agroforestry practices [27-29].

Agroforestry has potential to improve soil fertility. This is mainly based on the increase of soil organic matter and biological nitrogen fixation by leguminous trees. Trees on farms also facilitate tighter nutrient cycling than monoculture systems, and enrich the soil with nutrients and organic matter [30], while improving soil structural properties. Hence, through water tapping and prevention of nutrient leaching [10,31], trees help recover nutrients, conserve soil moisture and improve soil organic matter [32].

The potential of agroforestry to reduce the yield gap varies depending on the biophysical and human context. There are a number of successful agroforestry technologies, such as trees that improve soil, fast-growing trees for fuel wood, indigenous fruit trees to provide added nutrition and income, and trees that can provide medicinal plant products [33]. In practice, there is a need to differentiate between simple agroforestry systems (such as alley cropping, intercropping and hedgerow systems) and complex agroforestry systems that function like natural forest ecosystems but are integrated into agricultural

management systems [34,35]. The interest of investigating agroforestry in a changing climate comes from the potential of agroforestry practices to produce assets for farmers, combined with opportunities for climate change mitigation and potential to promote sustainable production that enhances agroecosystem diversity and resilience.

Agroforestry as a potential mitigation strategy

Cultivated lands have the potential to contribute significantly to climate change mitigation by improved cropping practices and greater numbers of trees on farms. The global estimated potential of all greenhouse gas (GHG) sequestration in agriculture ranges from ^1500 to 4300 Mt CO2e yr_1, with about 70% from developing countries; 90% of this potential lies in soil carbon restoration and avoided net soil carbon emission [20**]. Tree densities in farming landscapes range from low cover of about 5% in the Sahel to more than 45% in humid tropical zones where cocoa, coffee and palm oil agroforestry systems prevail [36]. The cited study indicates that in sub-Saharan Africa, 15% of farms have tree cover of at least 30%. This points to a high potential in Africa for sequestering carbon and reducing other agriculture related GHG emissions — particularly in farm land that currently has low tree cover — while maintaining the basic production systems. Performance of mitigation options in agroforestry will depend on the relative influence of tree species selection and management, soil characteristics, topography, rainfall, agricultural practices, priorities for food security, economic development options, among others. In order to improve carbon sequestration, or to reduce carbon emissions, several options are available (Table 1), but all are related to development needs of local communities.

These agroforestry practices are based on a variety of management approaches and have potential positive implications for climate change mitigation [42]. It has been shown that agroforestry systems have 3-4 times more biomass than traditional treeless cropping systems [20**,43], and in Africa they constitute the third largest carbon sink after primary forests and long term fallows [35]. In addition, Zomer et al. [36] show that the area suitable for agroforestry worldwide is much larger with substantially greater potential than existing systems. In Africa, Unruh et al. [8] reported that a total of ^1550 million ha are suitable for some type of agroforestry.

There are many methods to estimate carbon sequestration in agroforestry systems; some of them are based on in situ measurements, but the application of different assumptions introduces large inconsistencies into available data [9**]. Reported C stocks and C sequestration vary widely across agroforestry systems in Africa. Integrated land use practices, such as agro-silvo-pastoral systems, combine high C stocks with high C sequestration potentials. Table 2 shows the potential of various agro-forestry systems for climate change mitigation.

Table 1

Feasibility and limits of some AF practices.

Objectives of AFS Example of feasibility Limits of the influence factors References

Increased soil fertility Using nitrogen fixing trees. Windbreaks Integrated nutrient management [9",38"]

Low input fertilizer and erosion control, long fallows (balance with other sources of nutrients)

Increase availability of water Conservation agriculture (CSA) with trees, Tree density, selection of species [37]

shade trees to reduce evaporation

Wood (fuel wood) — production Thinning, coppicing, woodlots Long term viability. Land tenure [53-]

Fruit production Fruit trees of high market value (e.g. shea butter) Age of trees in parklands. Productivity [39-]

Ecosystem health Shade trees (e.g. in Cocoa farms), Dominance of cash crops, [40]

promotion of agrobiodiversity, Forest corridors limited lands for food crops

Animal husbandry Fodder trees, grassland management Pressure on selected fodder trees, [41]

available land for animals

In addition, agroforestry systems can meaningfully reduce the pressure on natural forests for energy needs. Some authors assume that higher consumption of tree products would motivate farmers to adopt agroforestry [54], in particular where fuel wood is diminishing. Development of agroforestry for sustainable fuel wood can contribute to energy substitution and becomes an important carbon offset option [8].

Agroforestry and ecosystem resilience

Agroforestry systems comprise a long list of land management practices, including crop diversification, long rotation systems for soil conservation, homegardens, boundary plantings, perennial crops, hedgerow intercropping, live fences, improved fallows or mixed strata agro-forestry [14,34,35,40,42,55-57]. If well managed (success hinges essentially upon proper implementation), agrofor-estry can play a crucial role in improving resilience to uncertain climates through microclimate buffering and regulation of water flow [15*].

Management options in agroforestry include tree pruning, and measures to reduce below-ground competition, particularly for water [58], such that trees tap into deep groundwater rather than top soil moisture that annual crops rely on. Growing attention is paid to the impact of agrofor-estry on microclimate control, and other favorable ecosystem functions. Agroforestry helps to conserve and protect natural resources by, for example, mitigating non-point

source pollution (e.g. dust), controlling soil erosion and creating wildlife habitat [33]. It facilitates flexible responses to rapid shifts in ecological conditions, while at the same time maintaining or restoring soil and water resources [13,33,59].

Microclimatic improvement through agroforestry has a major impact on crop performance as trees can buffer climatic extremes that affect crop growth. In particular, the shading effects of agroforestry trees can buffer temperature and atmospheric saturation deficit — reducing exposure to supra-optimal temperatures, under which physiological and developmental processes and yield become increasingly vulnerable [10]. Scattered trees in agroforestry farms can enhance the understory growth by reducing incident solar radiation, air and soil temperature, while improving water status, gas exchange and water use efficiency [31]. These scientific claims are based on few examples and need to be substantiated more in future research.

Agroforestry contributes to ecosystem functions in water recycling by increased rainfall utilization compared to annual cropping systems. Lott et al. [60] reported that about 25% of the water transpired by trees is used during the dry season, indicating that they are able to utilize offseason rainfall (comprising 15-20% of the total annual rainfall) and residual soil water after the cropping period, with the rest being lost by evaporation (40%) or deep

Table 2

Potential C stock and C sequestration of some AFS in Africa.

Legend Description (source) C sequestration C stock (Mg C /ha) Max rotation

(Mg C/ha/yr) [range] [range] period (yr)

a Parklands dominate AFS (Faidherbia albida) 0.5 [0.2-0.8] 33.4 [5.7-70.8] 50

b Rotational woodlots 3.9 [2.2-5.8] 18.5 [11.6-25.5] 5

c Tree planting-windrows-homegardens 0.6 [0.4-0.8] 19.0 [ns] 25

d Long term fallows, regrowth of woodlands in 2.24 [0.22-5.8] 15.7 [ns] 25

abandoned farms

e AFS and integrated landuse 3.12 [1.0-6.7] 77.9 [12-228] 50

f Soil C in AFS 0.9 [0.25-1.6] 90.7 [13-300] ns

ns: not specified. Source: (a) [44,45*,46]; (b) [44,45*,46,47]; (c) [44,48]; (d) [44,49]; (e) [50-52,53*]; (f) [9 ",42,52].

Table 3

Examples of positive or negative implications of agroforestry practices for adaptation or mitigation to climate change.







Soil carbon sequestration, improved water holding capacities, use of manure instead, mixed agroforestry for commercial products, income diversification with trees, reduced nitrogen fertilizer, fire management Dependence on biomass energy, overuse of ecosystem services, Increased use of mineral fertilizers Poor management of nitrogen and manure, over extraction of non-timber products, timber extraction

Integral protection of forest reserves, limited rights to agroforestry trees, Forest Plantation excluding harvest Use of forest fires for pastoral and land management, tree exclusion in farming lands,

drainage (33-40%). This complementarity between trees and annual crops extends possibilities of soil moisture uptake, hence making soil resource utilization more efficient than in pure monoculture [30,58].

Trials have been conducted to demonstrate that reduction of vegetation cover amplifies the decline of rainfall through positive feedbacks between precipitation and vegetation via reduced evapotranspiration and increased albedo [61**]. Additionally, analysis of the water cycle addresses the importance of managing tree cover as part of the direct influences trees have on local and regional patterns of rainfall [62,63*]. This highlights the potential of agroforestry to alleviate drought in Africa.

Adaptation-mitigation in agroforestry

Combining adaptation with mitigation has been recognized as a necessity in developing countries, particularly in the AFOLU (agriculture, forestry and other land use) sector. In reality, there is no dissociation between crop production and other ecosystem services from land use. Agroforestry in general may increase farm profitability through improvement and diversification of output per unit area of tree/crop/livestock, through protection against damaging effects of wind or water flow, and through new products added to the financial diversity and flexibility of the farming enterprise [33]. It can also substantially contribute to climate change mitigation


The use of multipurpose trees and integrated approaches can enhance the profitability of agroforestry [15*], for example, trees can be sources of fodder, which in turn is converted into valuable plant nutrients [14]. Trees on farms can provide wild edible fruits [39*] and non-timber products that serve as alternative food during periods of deficit and primary sources of income for many rural communities [64]. Hence, a growing scientific challenge relates to the methods and tools to assess useful trees in

various human-ecological contexts [1S*]. In most cases, benefits of agroforestry add up to a substantial improvement of the economic and resource sustainability of agriculture, while contributing to GHG sequestration.

Agroforestry may nevertheless involve practices that raise GHG emissions, such as shifting cultivation, pasture maintenance by burning, nitrogen fertilization and animal production. In order to optimize agroforestry for adaptation and mitigation to climate change, there is a need for more integrated management to increase benefits and reduce negative impacts on climate (Table З).

Conclusion and key messages

This paper shows how agroforestry systems readily bundle both mitigation and adaptation strategies and provide several pathways to securing food security for poor farmers, while contributing to climate change mitigation. Agroforestry should attract more attention in global agendas on mitigation because of its positive social and environmental impacts. However, adding trees to cropping systems and/or animal production requires learning of advanced cultivation methods and some support to ensure swift adoption [б5**]. The failure of extension services in poor African countries limits the possibility to scale up innovations in agroforestry for improved land use systems. Another structural limitation to bringing agroforestry adoption to scale can be seen in the limited investment in the sector compared to intensified farming systems, which has seen strong support during the post-colonial era, mostly for export cash crop (monocultures of groundnut, cocoa, cotton, among others).

At farm level, combining mitigation and adaptation in agroforestry to enhance the resilience of social and land use systems should be scrutinized in a context where the primary goal is to increase social and economic benefits through agriculture. Screening of priority activities needs

multifaceted analysis that responds first and foremost to basic local needs [65**]. So if seen as a win-win approach under optimal land management practices, equal importance of mitigation efforts should be given to adaptation; and any mitigation strategies should demonstrate clear adaptation benefits. In the case of Africa, carbon sequestration should generally be considered a co-benefit of strategies to support sustainable livelihoods and adapt to climate change, rather than the other way round. Progress towards adapted and sustainable livelihoods may be measured by accumulation of assets, and mitigation measures should be mapped against these assets.

On the other hand, uncertainties related to future climates, land use and land cover, soil fertility in drier environments and pests and diseases pose challenges to the scaling up of agroforestry practices. The effects of climate change on agroforestry systems are not fully understood despite many efforts in modeling climate analogs and future climate impacts [66]. This raises questions on which trees and management options will be suitable in future climates and how to best minimize negative climate change impacts on farming systems [15*]. There is, therefore, a need to better predict the range of climate variability to assess the short and long term impacts of changing temperature and rainfall on ecosystem suitability for current agroforestry practices [10]. Inversely, there is little knowledge on quantitative effects of trees on local and regional climate, and better documentation is needed on the interconnections related to water recycling and its association with evapotranspiration. Also, it is unclear how much deforestation can be limited by provision of ecosystem services such as wood energy from agroforestry landscapes.


We acknowledge support from the CGIAR Research Programs on 'Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security' (CCAFS), as well as 'Forests, Trees and Agroforestry' (FTA).

References and recommended reading

Papers of particular interest, published within the period of review, have been highlighted as:

* of special interest

** of outstanding interest

1. Krausmann F, Erb HK, Gingrich S, Haberl H, Bondeau A et al.: Global human appropriation of net primary production doubled in the 20th century. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2013, 110:10324-10329.

2. Mueller DN, Gerber SJ, Johnston M, Ra KD, Ramankutty N et al.: Closing yield gaps through nutrient and water management.

Nature 2012, 490:254-257.

3. GarnettT, Appleby CM, Balmford A, Bateman JI, Benton GT etal.: Sustainable intensification in agriculture: premises and policies. Science 2013, 341:33-34.

4. Gockowski J, Asten PV: Agricultural intensification as a climate change and food security strategy for sub-Saharan Africa. In

Climate Change Mitigation and Agriculture. Edited by Wollenberg E, Nihart A, Tapio-Bostrom M-L, Grieg-Gran M. London-New York: ICRAF-CIAT; 2012:382-390.

5. Koohafkan P, Altieri AM, Gimenez HE: Green Agriculture:

• foundations for biodiverse, resilient and productive agricultural systems. Int J Agric Sustain 2012, 10:61-75.

This paper provides an analysis of conditions for successful green agriculture. It provides an approach to track unsustainable trends related to farming technologies and shows the complexity of challenges and the attributes of a sustainable green agriculture.

6. FAO: Global Forest Resources Assessment 2010. Rome: FAO; 2010,.

7. Mbow C, Skole D, Dieng M, Justice C, Kwesha D et al.: Challenges and Prospects for REDD+ in Africa: Desk Review Of REDD+ Implementation in Africa. Copenhagen: GLP-IPO; 2012, .

8. Unruh JD, Houghton RA, Lefebvre PA: Carbon storage in agroforestry: an estimate for sub-Saharan Africa. Climate Res 1993, 3:39-52.

9. Kumar BM, Nair PKR: Carbon Sequestration Potential of

•• Agroforestry Systems. Opportunities and Challenges. Springer; 2012.

This book presents an up-to-date synthesis of agroforestry's potential to sequester carbon. It covers many agroforestry systems and many regions and case studies. It is a good source of recent findings on sequestration potentials and methodological underpinnings carbon assessment in agroforestry systems.

10. Lott JE, Ong CK, Black CR: Understorey microclimate and crop performance in a Grevillea robusta-based agroforestry system in semi-arid Kenya. Agric Forest Meteor 2009, 149:1140-1151.

11 Jonsson K, Ong CK, Odongo JCW: Influence of scattered nere and karite trees on microclimate, soil fertility and millet yield in Burkina Faso. Exp Agric 1999, 35:39-53.

12. Nsabimana D, Klemedtson L, Kaplin BA, Wallin G: Soil carbon and nutrient accumulation under forest plantations in southern Rwanda. Afr J Environ Sci Technol 2008, 2:142-149.

13 Powell JM, Rivera FS, Hiernaux P, Turner MD: Nutrient cycling in integrated rangeland/cropland systems of the Sahel. Agric Syst 1996, 52:143-170.

14. Neupane RP, Thapa GB: Impact of agroforestry intervention on soil fertility and farm income under the subsistence farming system of the middle hills, Nepal. Agric Ecosyst Environ 2001, 84:157-167.

15. Nguyen Q, Hoang MH, Oborn I, Noordwijk MV: Multipurpose

• agroforestry as a climate change resiliency option for farmers: an example of local adaptation in Vietnam. Climatic Change 2013, 117:241-257.

This paper demonstrates how diversity of agroforestry systems provides multiple benefits and secure assets for farmers all year round if well managed. The authors present appraisal methods to assess priority species and community vulnerability. Such methods are needed to develop adaptation options in agroforestry landscapes.

16. FAO: Advancing Agroforestry on the Policy Agenda: A guide for decision makers. By G. Buttoud, in collaboration with O. Ajayi, G. Detlefsen, F. Place &E. Torquebiau. In Agroforestry Working Paper no 1. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Rome; 2013: 48

17. Verchot LV, Noordwijk MV, Kandji S, Tomich T, Ong C, Albrecht A, Mackensen J, Bantilan C, Anupama KV, Palm C: Climate change: linking adaptation and mitigation through agroforestry.

Mitigation Adapt Strat Global Change 2007, 12:901-918.

18. Thorlakson T, Neufeldt H: Reducing subsistence farmers' vulnerability to climate change: evaluating the potential contributions of agroforestry in western Kenya. Agric Food Security 2012, 1:1-13.

19. Noordwijk MV, Hoang MH, Neufeldt H, Oborn I, Yatich T: How Trees and People Can Co-adapt to Climate Change. Reducing Vulnerability in Multifunctional Landscapes. ICRAF; 2011.

20. Smith P, Wollenberg E: Achieving mitigation through synergies •• with adaptation. In Climate Change Mitigation and Agriculture.

Edited by Wollenberg E, Nihart A, Tapio-Bostrom M-L, Grieg-Gran M. London-New York: ICRAF-CIAT; 2012:50-57. Land use based mitigation in developing countries should be tightly linked with adaptation needs. This paper demonstrates that with some improved management practices the two concepts can be combined

at small scale level in order to address climate change challenges in poor countries.

21. Pandey DN: Carbon sequestration in agroforestry systems.

Climate Policy 2002, 2:367-377.

22. Altieri MA: The ecological role of biodiversity in agroecosystems. Agric Ecosyst Environ 1999, 74:19-31.

23. Bationo A, Buerkert A: Soil organic carbon management for sustainable land use in Sudano-Sahelian West Africa. Nutr Cycling Agroecosyst 2001:131-142.

24. Bielders CL, Alvey S, Cronyn N: Wind erosion: the perspective of grass-roots communities in the Sahel. Land Degradation Develop 2001, 12:57-70.

25. Breman H, Groot JJR, Keulen VH: Resource limitations in

Sahelian agriculture. Global Environ Change-Human Policy Dimensions 2001, 11:59-68.

26. Mbow C, Mertz O, Diouf A, Rasmussen K, Reenberg A: The history of environmental change and adaptation in eastern Saloum - Senegal. Driving forces and perceptions. Global Planet Change 2008, 64:210-221.

27. Muchena FN, Onduru DD, Gachini GN, Jager DA: Turning the tides of soil degradation in Africa: capturing the reality and exploring opportunities. Land Use Policy 2005, 22:23-31.

28. Kiptot E, Franzel S: Gender and agroforestry in Africa: a review of women's participation. Agroforest Syst 2012, 84:35-58.

29. Tschakert P, Tappan G: The social context of carbon sequestration: considerations from a multi-scale environmental history of the Old Peanut Basin of Senegal. J

Arid Environ 2004:535-564.

30. Lehmann J, Peter I, Steglich C, Gebauer G, Huwe B, Zech W: Below-ground interactions in dryland agroforestry. Forest Ecol and Manage 1998, 111:157-169.

31. Bayala J, Heng LK, Noordwijk MV, Ouedraogo SJ: Hydraulic redistribution study in two native tree species of agroforestry parklands of West African dry savanna. Acta Oecolo 2008. doi:10.1016/j.actao.06.2008010.

32. Duguma LA, Hager H: Farmers' assessment of the social and ecological values of land uses in central highland Ethiopia.

Environ Manage 2011, 47:969-982.

33. Molua EL: The economics of tropical agroforestry systems: the case of agroforestry farms in Cameroon. Forest Policy Econ 2005, 7:199-211.

34. Rice RA: Agricultural intensification within agroforestry: the case of coffee and wood products. Agric Ecosyst Environ 2008, 128:212-218.

35. Oke DO, Odebiyi KA: Traditional cocoa-based agroforestry and forest species conservation in Ondo State, Nigeria. Agric Ecosyst Environ 2007, 122:305-311.

36. Zomer RJ, Trabucco A, Coe R, Place F: Trees on farm: analysis of global extent and geographical patterns of agroforestry. In

vol. Working Paper no. 89. Edited by ICRAF. Nairobi, Kenya: World Agroforestry Centre; 2009:72.

37. Spracklen DV, Arnold SR, Taylor CM: Observations of increased tropical rainfall preceded by air passage over forests. Nat Res

Lett 2012, 000:5 pp.

38. Garrity DP, Akinnifesi FK, Ajayi OC, Weldesemayat SG, Mowo JG, ** Kalinganire A, Larwanou M, Bayala J: Evergreen agriculture: a

robust approach to sustainable food security in Africa. Food Security 2010, 2:1970-2214. On the basis of examples across Africa, this paper shows how agroforestry is a way forward for sustainable food production.

39. Assogbadjo AE, Kakai RG, Vodouhe FG, Djagoun CAMS,

* Codjia JTC, Sinsin B: Biodiversity and socioeconomic factors supporting farmers' choice of wild edible trees in the agroforestry systems of Benin (West Africa). Forest Policy Econ 2012, 14:41-49.

This paper provides important examples on how trees can contribute to increased food quality and adaptation to climate change. Recommendations on how to bring tree based food production into policy agendas are discussed.

40. DeSouza HN, DeGoede RGM, Brussaard L, Cardoso IM, Duarte EMG, Fernandes RBA, Gomes LC, Pulleman MM: Protective shade, tree diversity and soil properties in coffee agroforestry systems in the Atlantic Rainforest biome. Agric Ecosyst Environ 2012, 146:179-196.

41. Lusiana B, Noordwijk MV, Cadisch G: Land sparing or sharing?. Exploring livestock fodder options in combination with land use zoning and consequences for livelihoods and net carbon stocks using the FALLOW model. Agric Ecosyst Environ 2012, 159:145-160.

42. Albrecht A, Kandji ST: Carbon sequestration in tropical

agroforestry systems. Agric Ecosyst Environ 2003, 99:15-27.

43. IPCC: LandUse, Land Use Change and Forestry. UNEP: WMO; 2000,.

44. Luedeling E, Sileshi G, Beedy T, Dietz J: Carbon sequestration potential of agroforestry systems in Africa. In Carbon Sequestration Potential of Agroforestry Systems: Opportunities and Challenges vol. Advances in Agroforestry 8. Edited by Kumar BM, Nair PKR. Springer; 2012:23.

45. Takimoto A, Nair PKR, Nair VD: Carbon stock and

* sequestration potential of traditional and improved agroforestry systems in the West African Sahel. Agric Ecosyst Environ 2008:159-166.

This paper is a great contribution on the potential of agroforestry systems to sequester carbon both in biomass and in soil components in semi-arid conditions of the Sahel region. The importance of soil C in agroforestry system is underlined.

46. Tschakert P, Khouma M, Sene M: Biophysical potential for soil carbon sequestration in agricultural systems of the Old Peanut Basin of Senegal. J Arid Environ 2004:511-533.

47. Kimaro AA, Isaac ME, Chamshama SAO: Carbon pools in tree biomass and soils under rotational woodlot systems in eastern Tanzania. In Carbon Sequestration Potential of Agroforestry Systems. Edited by Kumar BM. Nair PKR: Springer; 2012:142-156.

48. Glenday J: Carbon storage and emissions offset potential in an African dry forest, the Arabuko-Sokoke Forest, Kenya. Environ Monitor Assess 2008, 142:85-95.

49. Walker SM, Desanker PV: The impact of land use on soil carbon in Miombo Woodlands of Malawi. Forest Ecol Manage 2004, 203:345-360.

50. Dixon R, Winjum J, Andrasko K, Lee J, Schroeder P: Integrated land-use systems: assessment of promising agroforest and alternative land-use practices to enhance carbon conservation and sequestration. Climatic Change 1994, 27:71-92.

51. Woomer PL, Toure A, Sall M: Carbon stocks in Senegal's Sahel

transition zone. J Arid Environ 2004:499-510.

52. Jarecki MK, Lal R: Crop management for soil carbon sequestration. Crit Rev Plant Sci 2003, 22:471-502.

53. Kursten E: Fuelwood production in agroforestry systems for

* sustainable land use and CO2-mitigation. Ecol Eng 2000, 16:S69-S72.

There are many theories on how agroforestry can buffer human pressure on natural forest, particularly to meet the growing need of wood energy. This paper gives evidence on how this could contribute to future mitigation efforts.

54. Sood KK, Mitchell CP: Household level domestic fuel consumption and forest resource in relation to agroforestry adoption: evidence against need-based approach. Biomass

Bioenergy 2011, 35:337-345.

55. Thangata PH, Alavalapati JRR: Agroforestry adoption in southern Malawi: the case of mixed intercropping of Gliricidia sepium and maize. Agric Syst 2003, 78:57-71.

56. Stigter CJ, Mohammed AE, Al-amin NKN, Onyewotu LOZ, Oteng'i SBB, Kainkwa RMR: Agroforestry solutions to some

African wind problems. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 2002, 90: 1101-1114.

57. Torquebiau EF: A renewed perspective on agroforestry concepts and classification. CR Acad Sci Paris, Sciences de la vie /Life Sciences 2000, 323:1009-1017.

58. Jackson NA, Wallace JS, Ong CK: Tree pruning as a means of controlling water use in an agroforestry system in Kenya.

Forest EcolManage 2000, 126:133-148.

59. Du-Toit JT, Walker BH, Campbell BM: Conserving tropical nature: current challenges for ecologists. Trends Ecol Evol 2004, 19:12-17.

60. Lott JE, Khan AAH, Black CR, Ong CK: Water use in a Grevillea robusta — maize overstorey agroforestry system in semi-arid Kenya. Forest Ecol Manage 2003, 180:45-59.

61. Gonzalez P, Tucker CJ, Sy H: Tree density and species decline •• in the African Sahel attributable to climate. J Arid Environ 2012,


This paper gives evidence of declining tree cover and density in the Sahel. It is a good contribution, based on evidence on the ground of how climate change has contributed to loss of biodiversity and tree cover. The paper can be used as a baseline to evaluate impacts of advanced efforts in the development of agroforestry in this region.

62. Ellison D, Futter MN, Bishop K: On the forest cover-water yield debate: from demand- to supply-side thinking. Global Change Biol 2012, 18:806-820.

63. van der Ent RJ, Savenije HHG, Schaefli B, Steele-Dunne SC: • Origin and fate of atmospheric moisture over continents.

Water Resour Res 2010, 46 W 50952.

A good study on how évapotranspiration contributes to regional water cycling and how improving tree cover can change rainfall patterns. This paper gives evidence on the importance of green water in improving the water cycle in Africa.

64. Neufeldt H, Dawson IK, Luedeling E, Ajayi OC, Beedy T, Gebrekirstos A, Jamnadass RH, Konig K, Sileshi GW, Simelton E etal. : Climate Change Vulnerability of Agroforestry. Working Paper 143. World Agroforestry Centre; 2012.

65. Matocha J, Schroth G, Hills T, Hole D: Integrating climate

•• change adaptation and mitigation through agroforestry and ecosystem conservation. In Agroforestry-The future of Land Use, vol Advances in Agroforestry 9. Edited by Nair PKR, Garrity D. Springer; 2012:105-126.

This book chapter presents good recommendations on how to include adaptation needs into mitigation projects. The authors present options to minimize conflicts between intensive farming practices with 'climate smart' agroforestry by promoting participatory approaches and avoiding that mitigation strategies become a threat for food security.

66. Luedeling E, Kindt R, Huth NI, Koenig K: Agroforestry systems in a changing climate — challenges in projecting future performance. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2014, 6: