Addressing Farmer’s Perceptions-attitudes and Constraints to Adopt Agroforestry adjacent to the Coastal Belt of Sundarbans, Bangladesh



Abstract Views
288

Downloads
320

Citations

Share

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##

Submitted May 20, 2021
Published Aug 29, 2021
10.24018/ejfood.2021.3.4.304

Abstract viewed = 288 times

Table of Contents

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

Agroforestry is receiving a win-win strategy for low-income countries through increasing attention in Bangladesh especially in the coastal region because of its capacity to address some of the negative consequences of intensive agriculture with sustainable perceptions, attitudes, and management through farmers both locally and globally. As the actual uptake and maintenance of agroforestry in proximity to the coastal area by farmers remains low and that is why this research work investigates agroforestry practices e.g., Homestead agroforestry, boundary plantation, mixed plantation, cropland agroforestry, agrisilvicultural systems, Agro-aqua silviculture, and Agro-aquaculture systems on a sustainable basis with a view to find out the farmers ‘perceptions and attitudes through identifying their constraints and problems with potential opportunities to adopt agroforestry in Satkhira district of Bangladesh. A sample of 80 respondents selected randomly was interviewed through a semi-structured interview schedule individually and a multistage random sampling technique was adopted to conduct the study. Therefore, results revealed that middle-aged farmers (36-50) (46%) are interested in agroforestry practice than a traditional practice. The adoption of younger (26-35) 35% farmers is increasing day by day since they have had more schooling than the older generation or perhaps have been exposed to new ideas as a migrant. Illiteracy (56%) has primary level of education) is the main reason for non-adoption of agroforestry. The farmers (28%) they taken lease from other people who have no own land they are not interested in agroforestry. Farmers (47%) are interested in agro-aquaculture practice, because high cash return get from this practice. About 68.7% respondents have taken positively agroforestry practice, but they have no training skill or facility. If they get this facility, they are more interested in agroforestry practice. Finally result mentioned that 76.25% respondents perceived agroforestry positively and most of the farmer’s (68.7%) have positive attitude towards it whilst maximum farmers (80%) think agroforestry system should be expanded. This research indicates that agroforestry is a catalyst factor which can be adopted more through directed programs, policies and practices by government and its related agencies from this positive perceptions and attitudes of this research. Thus, agroforestry is a sustainable potential land use in the long term through combination of intrinsic and extrinsic factors interact and drive adoption can help integrating technologies appropriately to ensure sustainability adjacent to the coastal region of Sundarbans of Bangladesh.

Keywords: Agroforestry, attitude, constraints, perception, Sundarbans, Sustainable

References

  1. Islam A, Sharmin A, Biswas R, Dey T, Bachar BK et al., (2020). Utilization of Minor Forest Products of the Sundarbans in Bangladesh. Adv in Agri, Horti and Ento: AAHE-126.https://kosmospublishers.com/utilization-of-minor-forest-products-of-the-Sundarbans-in-bangladesh/.
     Google Scholar
  2. SA Mukul, MB Uddin, AZM Manzoor Rashid, J Fox, (2010). Integrating livelihoods and conservation in protected areas: understanding the role and stakeholder views on prospects for non-timber forest products, a Bangladesh case study. International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology 17 (2), 180-188.
     Google Scholar
  3. Zashimuddin, M., (2004). Community forestry for poverty reduction in Bangladesh. In Sim, H.C., Appanah, S. and Lu, W.M. (Ed.). Forests for Poverty Reduction: Can Community Forestry Make Money, FAO Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific (FAORAP), Bangkok, Thailand, pp 81-94.
     Google Scholar
  4. Poffenberger, M. (2000). Communities and forest management in South Asia (Ed.). IUCN, DFID and Asia Forest Network, Indonesia, pp. 35-46.
     Google Scholar
  5. FAO (2013). Advancing Agroforestry on the Policy Agenda: A guide for decision- health harms of industrial agriculture. Env Heal Persp 110(5). Retrieved August 23, 2012.Rome.
     Google Scholar
  6. Sheikh, R., Islam, M. A., Sharmin, A., Biswas, R., & Kumar, J., (2021). Sustainable Agroforestry Practice in Jessore District of Bangladesh. European Journal of Agriculture and Food Sciences, 3(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.24018/ejfood.2021.3.1.150.
     Google Scholar
  7. Rahman M. M., (2017). Development of Homestead Forest and Environment to Support the Rural People Living Adjacent to the Sundarbans. Int. J. Bus. Soc. Sci. Res. 5(3): 37-44. Retrieve from http://www.ijbssr.com/currentissueview/14013211].
     Google Scholar
  8. Uddin, M.B. and Mukul, S.A., (2007). Improving Forest Dependent Livelihoods through NTFPs and Home Gardens: A case study from Satchari National Park. In Fox, J., Bushley, B., Dutt, S. and Quazi, S.A. (Ed.). Making Conservation Work: Linking Rural Livelihoods and Protected Areas in Bangladesh. East-West Center, Hawaii, USA and Nishorgo Support Project of the Bangladesh Forest Department, Dhaka, Bangladesh, pp. 13-35.
     Google Scholar
  9. Islam, M. A., (2019). Status of Social Forestry for the Socio-Economic Development in the Coastal Belt of Sundarbans. International Journal of Agriculture Innovations and Research (IJAIR), (India) Volume 8, Issue 3, ISSN (Online) 2319147. https://www.ijair.org/administrator/components/com_jresearch/files/publications/IJAIR_3115_FINAL.pdf.
     Google Scholar
  10. Helal Siddiqui, A.S.M. and Islam, M. A., (2019). Survivality and Growth Performance of Jarul (Lagerstroemia speciosa) in the Raised Land of Less Saline Water Zone in the Sundarbans. International Journal of Agriculture Innovations and Research (IJAIR), (India) Volume 8, Issue 2, ISSN (Online): 2316-1473. 144 150pp.https://www.ijair.org/index.php/issues?view=publication&task=show&id=1298.
     Google Scholar
  11. Helal Siddiqui, A.S.M. and Islam, M. A., (2020). Vegetation scenarios of artificially planted mangrove species in the Sundarbans as a tool to mitigate climate change issues in Bangladesh, Indian Forester, 146 (8): 736-583, DOI: 10.36808/if/2020/v146i8/148406 ISSN: 0019-4816 eISSN: 2321 094X.
     Google Scholar
  12. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/344650085.
     Google Scholar
  13. Chaffey, D.R.; Miller, F.R. and Sandom, J.H., (1985). A Forest Inventory of the Sundarbans, Bangladesh: Main Report. Project Report No. 140. Overseas Development Administration, London. 196 pp.
     Google Scholar
  14. Forestal (1960). Forest Inventory 1958-59 Sundarbans Forests. Oregon: Forestal International Incorporated.
     Google Scholar
  15. Dey, T., Kamruzzaman, M., Islam, M. A., Bachar, B. K. and Pitol, M. N. S., (2020). Attitudes of local people towards community based eco-tourism in the Sundarbans. International Journal of Business, Management and Social Research, 09(02), 528-535.https://doi.org/10.18801/ijbmsr.090220.55.
     Google Scholar
  16. Sourovi Z, Salah Uddin. S, and Masatok. (2010). The Open Forest Science Journal, 2010, 3, 38-44, Structure and Diversity of Homegarden Agroforestry in Thakurgaon District, Bangladesh.
     Google Scholar
  17. FAO, (2011). Facts and figures: people and forests [online]. Available from: http://www.fao.org/forestry/.
     Google Scholar
  18. Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) (2005), 'Unlocking the Potential'. National Strategy for A Comission, Government of the People's Republic of Bangladesh. Accelerated Poverty Reduction Bangladesh: General Economics Division, Planning.
     Google Scholar
  19. Tiwari, A.K. (1994). Mapping forest biomass through digital processing of IRS-1A data. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 15(9):1849-1866.
     Google Scholar
  20. Unseld R, Reppin N, Eckstein K, Zehlius-Eckert W, Hoffmann H, Huber T., (2011). Leitfaden Agroforst Systeme Möglichkeiten zur Naturschutzgerechten Etablierung von Agroforstsystemen. Gefördert durch Bundesamt für Naturschutz (BfN), p 48.
     Google Scholar
  21. Hanif MA; Amin; MHA; Bari MS; Ali MS and Uddin MN, (2010). Performance of okra under litchi based agroforestry system. J. Agrofor. Environ. 4 (2): 137-139.
     Google Scholar
  22. Sing, M. P. and D. N. Tewari, (1996). Agro forestry and wasteland, 1st edition, Anmol publications private limited, New Delhi. PP-299.
     Google Scholar
  23. Reeg T, (2011). Agroforestry systems as land use alternatives in Germany? A comparison with approaches taken in other countries. Outlook Agric 40:45–50.
     Google Scholar
  24. Meijer S., Delia Catacutan, Oluyede C. Ajayi, Gudeta W. Sileshi& Maarten Nieuwenhuis. (2015). The role of knowledge, attitudes and perceptions in the uptake of agricultural and agroforestry innovations among smallholder farmers in sub-Saharan Africa, International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, 13:1, 40-54, DOI: 10.1080/14735903.2014.912493.
     Google Scholar
  25. Zeweld W, Van Huylenbroeck G, Tesfay G, Speelman S., (2016). Smallholder farmers' behavioural intentions towards sustainable agricultural practices. J Environ Manage. 2017 Feb 1; 187:71-81. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.11.014. Nov 21. PMID: 27883941.
     Google Scholar
  26. Dabbs, Jr, J. M., and Leventhal. H., (1966). “Effects of Varying the Recommendations in a Fear-Arousing Communication.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 4 (5): 525–531.
     Google Scholar
  27. Likert R, (1932). A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of Psychology.140:1–55.
     Google Scholar
  28. Agbarevo MN, Obinne CPO, (2009). “An evaluation of the effect of agricultural extension delivery on cassava production in Nigeria: A Case Study of Cross-River State, Nigeria.” The Niger. Agric. J. 39(1&2):16-21. Agroforstschla¨ge. Agrar Umweltr 1:7–12.
     Google Scholar
  29. Annual Report, I.I.T.A. (1997). Farmers’ perceptions of soil degradation. International Institute of Tropical Agriculture. Lambourn UK. http://www.iita.org/info/ar97/26-27.htm.
     Google Scholar
  30. Garcı´a de Jalo´n S, Burgess PJ, Graves A et al., (2017). How is agroforestry perceived in Europe? An assessment of positive and negative aspects among stakeholders. AgroforSyst. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-017-0116-3.
     Google Scholar
  31. Gautam G, Mitchell R, and Hanstad T, (2004). Small homegarden plots and sustainable livelihoods for the poor. FAO-LSP, WP. p. 11.
     Google Scholar
  32. Yazdanpanah, M., et al., (2014). Understanding farmers' intention and behavior regarding water conservation in the Middle-East and North Africa: a case study in Iran. J. Environ. Manag. 135, 63e72.
     Google Scholar
  33. Montagnini F, Nair P.K.R., (2004). Carbon sequestration: An underexploited environmental benefit of agroforestry systems. Agroforestry Systems 61, 281-29.
     Google Scholar
  34. Sharmin A, and Rabbi SA, (2016). Assessment of Farmers’ Perception of Agroforestry Practices in Jhenaidah District of Bangladesh. Journal of Agriculture and Ecology Research International6 (4): 1-10; Article no.JAERI.21760.ISSN: 2394-1073.
     Google Scholar
  35. Patt, A. G., and D. Schr€oter., (2008). “Perceptions of Climate Risk in Mozambique: Implications for the Success of Adaptation Strategies.” Global Environmental Change 18 (3): 458–467.
     Google Scholar
  36. Saha S; Sharmin A; Biswas R and Ashaduzzaman M, (2018). Farmers’ Perception and Adoption of Agroforestry Practices in Faridpur District of Bangladesh. International Journal of Environment, Agriculture and Biotechnology (IJEAB). ISSN: 2456-1878, Vol-3, Issue -6.
     Google Scholar
  37. Nurunnahar, Pitol M. N. S., and Sharmin, A, (2020). Status and Prospects of Agroforestry at Kaligonj Upazila in Satkhira District EJFOOD, European Journal of Agriculture and Food Sciences Vol. 2, No. 6. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.24018/ejfood.2020.2.6.186.
     Google Scholar
  38. Klie MS., (2018). Agroforestry as a biodiversity conservation tool and the motivations and limitations for small scale farmers to implement Agroforesty systems in the north eastern Atlantic forest biome in Brazil.
     Google Scholar
  39. Parihaar R.S., Bargali K, Bargali S.S., (2015). Status of an indigenous agroforestry system: A case study in Kumaun Himalaya, India. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 2015;85(3):442-447.
     Google Scholar
  40. Yamano, T., Rajendran, S., Malabayabas, M., (2013). Determinants of Psychological Constructs toward Agricultural Technology Adoption: Evidence from Eastern India.
     Google Scholar
  41. Borges, J.A.R., et al., (2014). Understanding farmers' intention to adopt improved natural grassland using the theory of planned behavior. Livest. Sci. 169, 163e174. Case study in Kumaun Himalaya, India. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 85(3):442-447.
     Google Scholar
  42. Martínez-García, C.G., Dorward, P., Rehman, T., (2013). Factors influencing adoption of improved grassland management by small-scale dairy farmers in central Mexico and the implications for future research on smallholder adoption in developing countries. Livest. Sci. 152 (2e3), 228e238.
     Google Scholar
  43. Fielding, K.S., et al., (2005). Explaining landholders' decisions about riparian zone management: the role of behavioural, normative, and control beliefs. J. Environ. Manag. 77, 12e21.
     Google Scholar
  44. Terano, R., et al., (2015). Factors influencing intention to adopt sustainable agriculture practices among paddy farmers in Kada, Malaysia. Asian J. Agric. Res. 9 (5), 268e275.
     Google Scholar
  45. Menozzi, D., Fioravenzi, M., Donati, M., (2015). Farmer's motivation to adopt sustainable agricultural practices. Bio-based Appl. Econ. 4 (2), 125e147.
     Google Scholar
  46. Sharifzadeh, M., et al., (2012). Agricultural climate information use: an application of the Planned Behaviour Theory. J. Agric. Sci. Technol. 14 (2), 479e492.
     Google Scholar
  47. Power, E.F., Kelly, D.L., Stout, J.C., (2013). Impacts of organic and conventional dairy farmer attitude, behaviour and knowledge on farm biodiversity in Ireland. J. Nat. Conserv. 21 (5), 272e278.
     Google Scholar
  48. Wauters, E., (2010). The Use of Social Psychology for Improving the Adoption of Conservation Practices Soil Conservation in Belgium. Faculty of Bioscience Engineering KU Leuven. PhD thesis.
     Google Scholar
  49. Herath, C.S., (2013). Does intention lead to behaviour? A case study of the Czech Republic farmers. Agric. Economics-Czech 59 (3), 143e148.
     Google Scholar
  50. Price, J.C., Leviston, Z., (2014). Predicting pro-environmental agricultural practices: the social, psychological and contextual influences on land management. J. Rural Stud. 34, 65e78.
     Google Scholar
  51. Veisi, H., Toulabi, S.B., (2012). Factors influencing pro-environmental behaviour in agriculture. In: International Conference on Ecological, Environmental and biological sciences. Environmental Sciences Reserach Institute, Dubai, pp 346e349. Shahid Beheshti University.
     Google Scholar
  52. Bayard, B., Jolly, C., (2007). Environmental perceptions and behavioral change of hillside farmers: the case of Haiti. J. Caribb. Agro-Economic Soc. 7 (1), 122e138.Biological Sciences. Environmental Sciences Research Institute, Dubai, pp. 346e349. Shahi Beheshti University.
     Google Scholar
  53. Jordan, J.L., (2005). Farmers' choice of using sustainable agricultural practices: a social capital approach. In: The Southern Agricultural Economics Association Annual Meeting, pp. 1e25. Arkansas.
     Google Scholar
  54. Kittur B., Bargali S.S., (2013). Perspectives of agroforestry: Present and future facets. Journal of Progressive Agriculture.4 (2):91-94.
     Google Scholar
  55. Ogunjimi SI, Farinde AJ, (2012). Farmers’ knowledge level of precautionary measures in agro-chemicals usage on cocoa production in Osun and Edo States, Nigeria. Int. J. Agric. Forestry 2(4):186-194.
     Google Scholar
  56. Kurina, B., Wayne, G., & Lendel, N., (2015). Farmer’s knowledge, attitudes and perceptions of occupational health and safety hazards in Trinidad, West Indies and implications for the Agriculture sector. Journal of Agricultural Extension and Rural Development, 7, 221-228.DOI: 10.5897/JAERD2015.0672.
     Google Scholar
  57. Wilson, M. and Lovell, S. (2016). Agroforestry — The Next Step in Sustainable and Resilient Agriculture. Sustainability, 8(6), 574. doi:10.3390/su8060574.
     Google Scholar
  58. Mercer, D., (2004). Adoption of agroforestry innovations in the tropics: a review. Agroforestry systems, 61 (1).
     Google Scholar
  59. Mekoya, A.K., Oosting, S.J., Fernandez-Rivera, S., Van der Zijp, A.J., (2008). Farmers' perceptions about exotic multipurpose fodder trees and constraints to their adoption. Agroforestry Systems 73:141–153.
     Google Scholar
  60. De, T., Ahmed, S, Islam M. A., (2021). Relationships of tree height-diameter at breast height (DBH) and crown diameter-DBH of Acacia auriculiformis plantation. Asian journal of forestry, E-ISSN: 2580-2844, DOI: 10.13057/asianjfor/r050203, Pages: 71-75.
     Google Scholar
  61. De, T., Rajib, M. G. M. Islam M. A., (2021). People’s Perceptions about the Socio-Economic and Environmental Impact of Coastal Green Belt in Bangladesh. Indonesian journal of social and environmental issues (IJSEI), Vol-2, Issue-2, and DOI: 10.47540/ijsei.v2i2.280, pp: 155 – 162.
     Google Scholar


Most read articles by the same author(s)