Download CHAPTER 8: Needs and Emerging Opportunities

5/3/2017
Agroforestry and Climate Change: Reducing Threats and Enhancing
Resiliency in Agricultural Landscapes
Assessment Prospectus
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Toral Patel-Weynand, USFS
An overview of assessment findings will be provided and will also serve as a summary for
decision makers.
CHAPTER 1: Introduction
Michele Schoeneberger, USFS NAC; Gary Bentrup, USFS NAC; Toral Patel-Weynand, USFS;
Shibu Jose, University of Missouri, Center for Agroforestry
The agroforestry technical report is a comprehensive scientific assessment of the capacity for
agroforestry to provide mitigation and adaptation strategies to climate change. The assessment
provides technical input to the National Climate Assessment (NCA) and serves as a framework
for managing agroforestry systems in the United States. The report will provide technical input
to the 2017 NCA developed by the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP). From a
land use perspective, this assessment report will be the key technical document for the
agroforestry sector. The report will address adaptation mechanisms from food security to carbon
sequestration and will discuss social, cultural and economic aspects of agroforestry systems and
the ability of these systems to provide multi-purpose solutions to impacts from climatic
variability and change.
Climate disruptions to agricultural production have grown in the recent past and are projected to
continue to increase in the coming decades, with negative effects expected on many crops and
livestock. Current loss and degradation of agricultural services will continue without the
implementation of innovative conservation methods.
Agroforestry, which is the intentional blending of agriculture and Working Trees to enhance
productivity, profitability, and environmental stewardship, is an increasingly-applied method to
improve sustainability of agricultural systems. The five widely recognized types of agroforestry
in the United States include silvopasture, alley cropping, forest farming (also known as
multistory cropping), windbreaks, and riparian forest buffers. As a management activity,
agroforestry can increase the resiliency of agriculture and provide environmental benefits by
protecting soil and water quality, providing wildlife habitat, allowing for diversified income, and
sequestering atmospheric carbon.
An expanded, science-based application of agroforestry on America’s farms, ranches, and
woodlands is essential for landscape-scale conservation in four focus areas in the United States:
1) enhancing water resources; 2) responding to climate change; 3) community-based
stewardship; and 4) jobs to assist rural communities which contribute to increasing resiliency for
1
5/3/2017
food production and sustaining healthy agricultural and range lands, allowing for increased food
production.
The assessment chapters synthesize scientific research in areas such as microclimate
modification, habitat diversification, maintenance and protection of natural resource services,
agroforestry systems and their impacts on island and tribal nations, accounting for goods and
services provided by agroforestry systems and tools for adaptation and implementation.
CHAPTER 2: Reducing Threats and Enhancing Resiliency
Jim Brandle, University of Nebraska, Lincoln; Tom Sauer, ARS; Mike Dosskey, USFS NAC;
Mike Gold, University of Missouri, Center for Agroforestry
2.1 Climate Change and Adaptive Capacity of U.S. Agriculture
The assessment of Walthall et al. (2012) concludes that it is very likely that climate is changing
and will continue to change throughout 21st century. Temperatures will generally get warmer,
producing warmer summer days and nights, especially in the interior western U.S. Precipitation
patterns will change, and those changes will be spatially variable. For example, winters will be
wetter in North & Central US; drier in southern U.S. Summers will be drier in Northwest and
South Central U.S.; wetter in North Central and Eastern U.S. Springtime will be wetter in the
Midwest and rainstorms will be more intense. Drought periods may become more prolonged.
The changes in climate patterns pose hazards for U.S. agriculture and land resources. Yield of
crops and livestock will decline due to average climate and extreme weather events outside of
optimum thresholds, and, due to expanded and shifting ranges of pests (insects, pathogens,
weeds). Higher CO2 may act to increases crop growth (and that of weeds, too), but reduce quality
of some crops. Indirect hazards include increasing soil erosion and water pollution, more
extreme drought periods, and declining habitat quality to support current biodiversity.
New technologies will be needed to avoid significant disruptions in agriculture. The pace and
complexity of changing conditions are likely to overwhelm current systems ability to adapt and
sustain current levels of output in the long term (Walthall et al., 2012). Agroforestry is a strategy
that can enhance adaptive capacity of agriculture for the numerous challenges posed by climate
change.
2.2 Food Production and Food Security
(Mike Gold, University of Missouri, Center for Agroforestry; J.B. Friday, University of Hawaii
Forestry Extension; Craig Elevitch, Agroforestry Net, Inc.)
Annual crops that currently represent the bulk of food and feed production in the U.S. are
particularly vulnerable to the predicted changes in climate. Yields of annual crops are expected
to decline over time which directly threatens food production and food security.
Agroforestry crop systems are perennial-based, multi-species mixes that are inherently more
resilient to environmental stresses than annual cropping systems. They have a higher degree of
species diversity, larger below ground root systems that hedge against climate extremes and
2
5/3/2017
create an ability to aggressively rebound from disturbance. Agroforestry crops such as fruits,
nuts, and berries are food producing and resilient to climate extremes. Agroforestry systems
simultaneously provide additional ecological services that annual crops do not, such as
mitigating non-point source pollution, enabling biocontrol through crop and ecosystem diversity,
and sustaining long-term soil fertility. Agroforestry crops may be especially well-suited to
marginal lands, thereby enabling expansion of productive acres.
Major gaps in our knowledge base inhibit our ability to widely implement agroforestry systems,
including: Optimizing agroforestry systems for marginal lands, selecting specialty food crops to
match site and environmental conditions, long-term economic profitability analyses, and lack of
supporting infrastructure (public and private sectors).
2.3 Microclimate Modification for Agricultural Production
(Jim Brandle, University of Nebraska, Lincoln; Sid Brantly, NRCS; Shibu Jose, University of
Missouri, Center for Agroforestry)
Crop and livestock production and efficacy of production practices are dependent on predictable
weather conditions. Increasing variability and frequency of “atypical” weather conditions
threatens production. Temperature and precipitation patterns (late spring and early fall freezes,
extreme hot or cold temperatures, storm events and drought influence field operations,
productivity of crops and pastures and the health and well-being of livestock.
Windbreaks reduce wind speed which can mitigate weather extremes to benefit crops and
livestock within the sheltered zones. Alley cropping systems also modify the microenvironment
and can have both positive and negative effects on associated crops depending on the crop and
tree species chosen. Silvopasture systems offer protection to livestock by reducing wind chill
stress in winter and heat stress in summer and by increasing forage production, both leading to
improved animal health and weight gain.
Most technical aspects of design and management are well-known as are the financial benefits of
adoption. However, more research is needed into social factors of adoption that appear to inhibit
widespread adoption.
2.4 Soil Resources
(Tom Sauer, ARS; Ranjith Udawatta, University of Missouri)
Climate change presents several direct and indirect stressors on soil resources. Gradual yet
sustained changes in mean temperature and precipitation will produce subtle to significant
changes in the biophysical functioning of soil systems. For example, nutrient cycling capability
will be impaired due to changes in biomass production and macro- and micro-invertebrate
species composition, especially in degraded or marginal soils that are already less resilient,
further reducing their potential productivity. Larger precipitation events will cause greater soil
erosion and more severe droughts will further impair soil productivity and soil biophysical
functioning. Increasing demand for food and fiber production will encourage increasing amounts
of external inputs to cropping systems in an effort to compensate for lost soil productivity, but
3
5/3/2017
impaired soil resources are less likely to efficiently utilize these increased inputs. Consequently,
marginal and vulnerable lands will be increasingly converted to crop production.
A major benefit of agroforestry systems is the soil protection and resilience that perennial
vegetation such as trees provide. Traditional cropping systems are heavily reliant on annual
species which provide less soil protection and are much more vulnerable to weather extremes.
Trees and associated perennial vegetation stabilize and protect soil from erosion and ameliorate
heat and drought effects on the functioning of soil biological communities. Improved soil health
enhances its capability to cycle nutrients, degrade pesticides, store moisture, and recover
biophysical function after disturbances.
While much is known about the advantages of agroforestry over annual cropping systems for
protecting and sustaining soil health and productivity, there is limited knowledge about how its
effects on soil carbon cycling might contribute to net greenhouse gas production when compared
to annual cropping systems.
2.5 Water Resources
(Mike Dosskey, USFS NAC; Ranjith Udawatta, University of Missouri; Diomy Zamora,
University of Minnesota Extension)
Predicted climate changes will profoundly affect water supply and quality in ways that threaten
crop and livestock production, infrastructure (e.g., transportation, water storage), and
environmental quality (e.g., wildlife habitat, domestic consumption, and industrial and recreation
uses). Reduced annual rainfall and longer drought periods, combined with higher evaporative
demand and longer growing seasons will stress crops and livestock. More-frequent extreme
rainfall events will increase soil erosion and flooding and damage infrastructure (e.g., roads,
railways, bridges, reservoirs). Greater erosion and flooding will increase pollution by sediments
and agro-chemicals in runoff. Increasing air temperatures will elevate water temperatures and
degrade cool-water aquatic habitats.
Agroforestry practices can mitigate drought stress by promoting infiltration and soil storage of
rainfall, controlling evapotranspiration of crops, and reducing heat stress on livestock (See also
“Microclimate Control”). Enhanced infiltration also reduces field runoff from peak storm flows
that cause erosion and floods which contribute to water pollution. Agroforestry buffers filter
pollutants out of runoff water and protect soil from erosion (See also “Soil Resources”).
Streamside trees provide shade which can limit the rise in water temperature. Technical
feasibility to achieve these benefits is fairly well-established. The level of these benefits,
however, is dependent primarily upon extent of adoption, which at this point in time is very low,
and to a lesser degree their design for which improved tools are being developed. However, more
research is needed into social factors of adoption that appear to inhibit widespread adoption.
2.6 Biodiversity
(Gary Bentrup, USFS NAC; Shibu Jose, University of Missouri, Center for Agroforestry)
Biodiversity provides ecosystem services that are critical in supporting agricultural production
and will be impacted by climate change and extreme weather events. Insect pests are expected to
4
5/3/2017
increase due to longer growing seasons yielding more generations per year leading to pests
developing greater resistance to insecticides. This will necessitate an ever more important role
for biological pest control. More than 30 percent of food production relies on insect pollination,
overwhelmingly provided by European honey bees which are experiencing declines compounded
by climate change. Habitat quality and structure will shift under changes in temperature and
precipitation requiring species to find suitable habitat in order to persist.
Agroforestry systems can support these ecosystem services by providing critical habitat
resources for beneficial insects for biological pest control and for native pollinators to augment
honey bee pollination. In addition, agroforestry practices can protect these valuable insects by
reducing spray drift and providing refugia from pesticides. Habitat connectivity and refugia
provided by the woody structure of agroforestry systems can facilitate animal and plant species
persistence under climate change. Negative impacts from agroforestry systems may result due to
providing habitat and dispersal corridors for invasive weeds, crop pests, and wildlife which may
distribute food-borne pathogens into cropped areas. Proper planning and management can
mitigate these potential impacts.
The general effectiveness of agroforestry practices to provide these services is documented but
specific knowledge gaps remain. The level of these benefits is dependent on appropriate plant
species selection and design of the agroforestry practices to optimize gains and minimize
potential problems. In addition to technical concerns, economic information is needed to guide
decision-making and tools for taking in account biodiversity considerations need to be
developed.
2.7 Air Quality
(Adam Chambers, NRCS)
Increased temperatures and prolonged droughts will periodically increase the amounts of windblown dust in the air from agricultural sources and exacerbate health risks to livestock and
people in rural and urban communities.
Agroforestry practices such as windbreaks and alley cropping reduce wind speeds near the
ground to both reduce the mobilization of soil particles into the air and to promote its deposition
out of the air. The perennial vegetation also stabilizes soil to resist the erosive force of wind.
2.8 Effects of Climate Change on Agroforestry Species
(Andrew Bell, Chicago Botanic Gardens; Jason Griffen, Kansas State University)
Climate change and climate variability will influence the health and growth of agroforestry
species. Selection of hardy species will improve agroforestry success and minimize threats to
tree health. In some regions, expected climate variability will greatly reduce the number of hardy
tree species that can be used for particular agroforestry application. For example, temperature
and moisture stress greatly limit the number of woody species available for agroforestry systems
in the Great Plains and future climate scenarios indicate that stresses from weather extremes will
become even greater. Furthermore, new insect (e.g., emerald ash borer) and disease (e.g., pine
wilt) threats will also affect the choices. How we select and evaluate these potential species is
5
5/3/2017
key to successfully implementing agroforestry practices not only in the Great Plains but in other
regions as well.
CHAPTER 3: Agroforestry Accounting (Mitigation)
Michele Schoeneberger, USFS NAC; Grant Domke, USFS; Toral Patel-Weynand, USFS; Marlen
Eve, USDA Climate Change Program Office
3.1 Introduction
(Michele Schoeneberger, USFS NAC; Grant Domke, USFS; Toral Patel-Weynand, USFS;
Marlen Eve, USDA Climate Change Program Office)
Temperate agroforestry is recognized as a viable agricultural option for mitigating greenhouse
gas (GHG) emissions in the U.S. and Canada (CAST 2011, Schoeneberger et al. 2012).
Agroforestry contributes to agricultural GHG mitigation activities by 1) sequestering carbon (C),
2) reducing GHG emissions, and 3) reducing fossil fuel and energy usage. The potential
contributions have been estimated to be large (Brandle et al. 1992, Udawatta and Jose 2011),
however, reliable and accurate GHG accounting within these systems is needed to assess the
extent and value of the contributions to inform management, program and policy decision
making. Agroforestry represents a unique case within C accounting as it encompasses both
forest and agricultural components, along with many combinations of their respective
management activities (i.e., fertilization, harvesting, and tillage). While current methodologies
are relatively well defined for forest and cropping/grazing systems, those for agroforestry are
only beginning to be formulated. This Chapter will address what accounting approaches and
methodologies are being pulled from the forestry and agricultural sectors to build a C accounting
system within agroforestry and what needs to be addressed in the future to give a more complete
accounting of C sequestered and the net GHG dynamics in these spatially and temporally
complex systems.
3.2 Carbon Accounting at the Field/Entity Level
(Grant Domke, USFS; Mark Easter, National Renewable Energy Laboratory; Amy Swan,
National Renewable Energy Laboratory; Michele Schoeneberger, USFS NAC; Alan
Franzluebbers, ARS; Marlen Eve, USDA Climate Change Program Office; Toral PatelWeynand, USFS)
The approach to terrestrial carbon accounting is generally done within defined land uses, which
for purposes here include forests or crop/grazing lands. Agroforestry, however, contains
deliberately integrated components of both land uses, or in the case of silvopasture, even a third
component of livestock. Further, agroforestry does this generally without then changing the
original land use but rather is put in place to help support it. As such, agroforestry requires
accounting approaches that can accurately estimate a more complex suite of C fluxes. This
section will provide a brief overview of forest C estimation in the ecosystem pools currently
required under current IPPC and FIA recommendations. Likewise, a brief overview of
crop/grazing land C estimation in agricultural operations will be provided. The central focus of
this section will be on describing the ‘agroforestry unit’, what pools within that unit that can and
should be estimated, and the methodologies that can be used in the estimation and prediction of
6
5/3/2017
the highly spatially and temporally variable C fluxes that occur in agroforestry systems. The
development of a common framework and measurement protocols for sequestered C in these
systems is essential to develop the repeated and repeatable data required for developing the
models and other tools used in estimating C dynamics in these practices over time and in the
various settings they can be placed. USDA ARS’s GRACEnet approach will be presented as a
model system for developing a more standardized approach in C assessment, both for C
accounting and directing future C research in agroforestry.
3.3 Carbon Accounting at the Regional/National Level
(Grant Domke, USFS; Chris Woodall, USFS; Toral Patel-Weynand, USFS)
Agroforestry in the U.S. is not explicitly included in either of the two national natural resource
inventories (Hobie et al. 2005, Hobie et al. 2009). The lack of agroforestry inventory data limits
its inclusion in forest resource, agricultural resource, sustainability and, for the purpose of this
document, in U.S. GHG reporting. The current limitations of inclusion in both the USFS FIA
and NRCS NRI inventories will be identified. Based on the findings from recent pilot studies,
such as the Great Plains Initiative, the need for developing an inventory and how that might be
accomplished within current inventory constructs, as well as using emerging inventory
technologies will be discussed. As with the sampling and accounting at the entity-level, building
institutional arrangements and devising a consistent sampling protocol(s) at this larger scale will
be essential for providing efficient and accurate GHG reports.
3.4 Agroforestry’s Other Direct & Indirect Impacts on GHG Emissions
(Michele Schoeneberger, USFS NAC; Jim Brandle, University of Nebraska, Lincoln; Marlen
Eve, USDA Climate Change Program Office; William Ballesteros, University of Nebraska,
Lincoln)
Agroforestry can play several other key roles in GHG mitigation beyond sequestering new C.
These include shifts in nitrous oxide (N2O), methane (CH4) and indirect impacts via shifts in
fertilizer, fuel and energy use. The mitigation of GHG emissions by agroforestry can extend far
beyond the plantings themselves, such as in the reduction of N available for subsequent N2O
emissions. Research data on these activities are only beginning to emerge, especially for the
more complex systems that combine integrated management of trees, forage and livestock
(silvopasture). Prior work estimating potential CO2 eq savings from agroforestry in the Plains
states by Brandle et al. (1992) indicated that many of these indirect GHG benefits may be much
larger than the contributions from the C sequestered in woody biomass and soils. Accounting for
all these different avenues in agroforestry requires further research to elucidate the amounts and
extents of these activities. Only then will we have a more accurate picture of the net GHG
effects these practices can confer within U.S. farms, ranches and landscapes.
3.5 Key Research Gaps/Needs/Priorities
(All Chapter Authors and Contributors)
An overview of key research gaps/needs/priorities will be generated on the topics presented in
the three sections listed above. Some of these have been previously identified in the CAST
Report (2011) and the soon-to-be-released USDA Climate Change Program report: Science7
5/3/2017
Based Methods for Entity-Scale Quantification of Greenhouse Gas Sources and Sinks from
Agriculture and Forestry Practices
CHAPTER 4: Valuation of Agroforestry Services
Evan Mercer, USFS; Janaki Alavalapati, Virginia Tech. University; Andrew Stainback,
University of Kentucky
This section will provide an overview and synthesis of scientific research related to the valuation
of agroforestry in the face of climate change. The first part of the chapter will synthesize the
current literature on the financial valuation of agroforestry from the landowner’s perspective
focusing on the question, “Under what conditions is agroforestry a viable financial enterprise for
landowners?” We will briefly review the various tools used for this type of analysis including
capital budgeting, production function analysis, and portfolio analysis. Then we will synthesize
the recent literature on the role and impact of risk and uncertainty from climate change on land
use and the value of flexibility and diversity in the face of climate change. More specifically,
the chapter will provide an overview of the use of economic analysis to assessing the potential
for agroforestry to ameliorate or mitigate those risks from the landowner’s perspective, focusing
on techniques such as mean-variance analysis and real options models. The second section of
the chapter will synthesize the literature on the value of agroforestry from society’s perspective
emphasizing the valuation of the ecosystem services and both positive and negative externalities
associated with agroforestry and how they relate to climate change. We will examine
valuations of the following ecosystem services: Carbon Sequestration, Water quality/quantity,
Soil Conservation, and Habitat/biodiversity. Valuation techniques to be discussed include:
contingent valuation, hedonic analysis, and benefits transfer.
CHAPTER 5: Human Dimensions of Agroforestry Systems (Social, Cultural,
Economic)
Larry Godsey, Missouri Valley College; Kate MacFarland, USFS NAC; Evan Mercer, USFS
5.1 Adoption Constraints and Opportunities
(Dean Currant, University of Minnesota; Kate MacFarland, USFS NAC; Diomy Zamora,
University of Minnesota Extension; Larry Godsey, Missouri Valley College)
This section will outline the opportunities and constraints for adoption of agroforestry.
Understanding these parameters is important to understanding the potential for climate change
adaption and mitigation outlined in the other chapters of this assessment. The section will discuss
constraints to adoption and why landowners do not adopt agroforestry practices. It will also
include a discussion of the opportunities provided through policies, partnerships, and incentives
that will help in overcoming these constraints.
5.2 Tribal and Indigenous Knowledge and Practices
(Frank Lake, USFS; J.B. Friday, University of Hawaii Forestry Extension; Craig Elevitch,
Agroforestry Net, Inc.; Katie Friday, USFS)
8
5/3/2017
Tribal Lands
(Frank Lake, USFS)
American Indians across North American have been utilizing and adapting traditional
management practices to maintain and enhance food, fiber, and medicinal resources. Many tribal
programs and communities are implementing Agroforestry practices to achieve resource
objectives that integrate local values. Many of these Agroforestry practices are locally adaptive
and responsive to particular agricultural, range, and forestry systems that reflect tribal traditions.
Tribal lands broadly include an array of designations ranging from reservations, Rancherias,
tribal allotments, fee, and Trust lands. Additionally, many tribes have secured private properties,
leasing lands, or have arrangements and agreements to work on public lands within their
ancestral territory as well. Historically many tribes were displaced, relocated or moved out of
their ancestral territory, and engaging in Agroforestry practices can foster the integration of
traditional values with modern resource management.
Agroforestry practices being implemented include but are not limited to: Forest farming; Alley
cropping; Riparian forest buffers; Windbreaks; Silvopasture; Forest/woodland grazing;
Fuelwood, biofuel, and fiber from agricultural and forest or range lands; Wild harvest (pine nuts,
acorns, berries, mushroom, etc.); Edible landscaping; Intercrops as beneficial insect refuges; and
Groundwater and irrigation drain water management (USDA-NAC, Bainbridge 1994). Tribes or
tribal individuals practice these often with the objective to promote traditional foods, fibers,
basketry/art materials, medicinal plants, or maintain traditional customs and practices. These
practices are often at smaller scales, both in the extent of area, or the size or scope of the project
compared to conventional forestry, range, or agricultural industries.
Pacific/Caribbean Islands
(Katie Friday, USFS)
The US-affiliated Pacific and Caribbean regions comprise thousands of tropical islands of
varying sizes, elevations, climates, peoples, and histories. The practice of agroforestry was and
on many islands still is the predominant form of subsistence agriculture, using species and
techniques introduced and developed prior to contact with European/Western culture. The
diversity of cultivars and precise management techniques are a wealth of agroethnobotanical
knowledge that could foster resilience. However, traditional knowledge is being lost with passing
generations and there is a need to not only record but teach and affirm these practices.
Indigenous agroforestry systems have always been dynamic with changing environmental
conditions and species choices. Current changes and challenges include not only the direct
effects of changing climate and sea level, but also the introduction and spread of invasive
species. Technical advice concerning these changing conditions is generally welcome if the
advice and advisor respects the local context and knowledge. Innovations designed for resistance
and resilience in the face of storm events also will help systems adapt to climate change. The
variety of island climates, indigenous systems and species provides an opportunity for one island
with changing conditions to look to another island for potential solutions.
9
5/3/2017
CHAPTER 6: North and Central American Perspectives: Canada and Mexico
Henry deGooijer, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada; Heidi Asbjornsen, University of New
Hampshire
6.1 Mexico
(Heidi Asbjornsen, University of New Hampshire)
Mexico has a long history and rich history of producing a variety of food, fuel, and timber
products within agroforestry systems. Traditional agroforestry systems in Mexico include
homegardens, forest farming, and silvopasture, while more modern practices include shade
coffee and oil palm production. These systems can play an important role in Mexico’s strategy
to enhance food security and adapt to future climate change. Over the past several decades, the
Mexican government has established diverse policies and programs that either directly or
indirectly promote the implementation, expansion, and strengthening of agroforestry systems.
For example, Payment for Ecosystem Service programs provide funds to landowners to protect
forests and, in some cases, maintain agroforestry systems such as shade coffee or plant trees on
degraded lands, as a means of conserving biodiversity, enhancing hydrologic services, and
increasing carbon sequestration and storage. Other programs, including “ProArbol”, are
specifically designed to encourage reforestation of degraded lands, while a forestry management
planning and permitting system provides regulatory and administrative oversight over
agroforestry systems implemented in natural forest areas, including the extraction of both timber
and non-timber products. Finally, a range of different government programs exists to support
livestock management, including silvopasture and rotational grazing systems.
This chapter will first provide a brief overview of the different types of agroforestry systems
commonly practiced in Mexico and their climate change mitigation and adaptation potential.
Next, existing national government policies that either directly or indirectly promote agroforestry
systems will be examined in detail, including their objectives, structure, administration, and
history of implementation. Where possible, an analysis will be conducted of the overall
effectiveness of each of these programs in achieving their stated goals, as well as any
unintentional impacts on society or the environment, and the major constraints and challenges
faced during program implementation. Finally, a synthesis of the main conclusions and
recommendations for future work will be presented.
6.2 Canada
(Henry deGooijer, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada; Tricia Pollock, Agriculture and AgriFood Canada)
Agricultural landscapes of Canada can be described as a mosaic of annually cropped fields,
forages, native grasslands, pastures, woodlots, remnant forests, marshes, and riparian areas. The
principles of agroforestry can be integrated into this mosaic to maximize conservation benefits
through biophysical interactions with other components of the agricultural landscape when
woody vegetation is strategically placed or retained at a landscape level. Typical agroforestry
practices in Canada predominantly include field and farm shelterbelts, riparian buffers, alley
cropping or tree based intercropping systems, silvopasture and forest farming. The role of
agroforestry is linked to the need to lessen environmental impacts of modern agriculture and
10
5/3/2017
balance productivity and environmental stewardship. For agroforestry to be successful it must
offer viable options that are compatible with production agriculture and involve minimal tradeoffs to producers. Agroforestry must be economically viable and add both economic and
environmental value to the land. The federal and provincial governments have concurrent
jurisdiction over agriculture. As such, provincial support for agroforestry varies across Canada
but is emerging in certain provinces with a perceived role in sustainable agricultural practices
and mitigation of agricultural impacts. The Canadian government has recently taken the lead to
fund a national network of agroforestry practitioners, ideals, and practices, in both research and
development related to greenhouse gas mitigation and adaptation through the Agriculture
Greenhouse Gas Program (AGGP).
This chapter will provide an overview of the different agroforestry practices, by agricultural
region in Canada and their climate change mitigation and adaptation potential. Existing national
and provincial government policies and programs that impact agroforestry practice directly or
indirectly will also be examined and evaluated. An evaluation on current constraints and
challenges will also be presented. The chapter will conclude with a discussion on future needs
for agroforestry adoption and implementation.
CHAPTER 7: Tools and Resources for Adaptation and Implementation
Keith Moser, USFS; Gary Bentrup, USFS NAC
This chapter provides a synthesis of tools, techniques and mechanisms available to practitioners
and land managers in developing sustainable agroforestry systems and strategies that assist in
adapting to climatic variability and change. Agroforestry has the potential to serve as a climate
change management option for building healthy, resilient, and profitable agricultural operations
and landscapes. Realizing this potential is, however, a complex task of determining what
opportunities, limitations, and trade-offs existing in each situation, and of designing an
agroforestry practice that achieves the best balance among them. This decision-making process
must incorporate many considerations, not only at the practice scale but also at the larger scales
of farm, landscape, and watershed. This chapter will address tools and resources that are
available to support this complex decision-making process as well discuss types of tools that still
need to be developed.
The chapter will begin with a discussion on the purpose, goals, and objectives of agroforestry
tools. Crucial differences between research tools and planning and design tools will be clarified
with the focus of this chapter on tools that aid implementation. Attributes of successful
agroforestry tools will be covered including simplicity, scalability, transparency, flexibility,
ability to compare trade-offs, and consider risk and uncertainty, particularly under climate
change. The utility of existing and future tools must take into account the limits of current
scientific information on agroforestry, diversity of considerations (i.e., economic, social, and
biophysical) that will be incorporated in the decision-making process, and most importantly, the
needs, capabilities, and levels of risk aversion of the end-users.
An overview of currently available agroforestry tools will be presented and organized into six
broad categories of tools: databases, geographic information systems (GIS), models, knowledge11
5/3/2017
based or expert systems, hybrid systems, and other resources. Specific tools will be discussed in
greater detail including COMET-Farm, agroforestry financial models, and AgBufferBuilder. The
chapter will conclude with a discussion of the tools that are still needed in the toolbox and how
we can move forward on developing these missing resources.
CHAPTER 8: Needs and Emerging Opportunities
PK Nair, University of Florida; Michele Schoeneberger, USFS NAC; Toral Patel-Weynand,
USFS; Shibu Jose, University of Missouri, Center for Agroforestry
Critical information and data gaps exist on agroforestry systems and on our ability to predict how
agroforestry systems will affect and respond to direct and indirect effects of climate change.
Ongoing research continues to address these gaps. This chapter will synthesize information on
existing gaps at regional and national scales including biophysical, ecological, economic, social,
and cultural resources impacted by climatic variability and change.
CHAPTER 9: Conclusions
Toral Patel-Weynand, USFS; Michele Schoeneberger, USFS NAC; Gary Bentrup, USFS NAC;
Shibu Jose, University of Missouri, Center for Agroforestry; Eric Norland, NIFA
By as early as the mid-21st century a warmer and more variable climate along with interacting
stressors will challenge land resource managers and will impact food security world-wide. Many
strategies such as agroforestry will be required to reduce threats to food security. Using
agroforestry as a bridging mechanism to provide adaptation and mitigation strategies that can be
applied to food production systems across the United States to ensure sustainability of ecosystem
services in a changing climate will be critical. This chapter will provide a synthesis of findings
and take a forward thinking approach to assess and prioritize areas that need immediate attention
in the agroforestry arena.
12
5/3/2017
Appendix 1: Regional Summaries
Michele Schoeneberger, USFS NAC; Kate MacFarland, USFS NAC
As part of the USDA technical report on the potential of agroforestry to serve as a climate
change management option for building more healthy, resilient, and profitable agricultural
operation and landscapes, regional summaries will be developed for each of the 8 regions as
described in the National Climate Assessment (Fig. A1). Similar to the Regional Summaries
presented in the USDA report: Effects of Climatic Variability and Change on Forest Ecosystems,
these summaries will present the challenges and needs being faced within each of these regions
but with a focus on the lands within each region where these challenges and needs can
potentially be addressed through the introduction and use of agroforestry. Therefore, these
summaries will not focus on the threat of climate change and other pressures on the area and
persistence of agroforestry already in place, but rather on the challenges and pressures being
faced by agricultural, Tribal, and even merging into community/urban lands where agroforestry
may provide mitigation and adaptation to these issues. These regional assessments will be
limited to 2-3 pages and will cover the following aspects; the level of discussion being
determined by what information is available regarding agroforestry for each region:
 Description of land area in agricultural production where use of agroforestry as a
management activity is appropriate.
 Description of threats and challenges to meeting the production and other ecosystem
services being demanded from these lands.
 Description of the agroforestry practices that may be relevant in helping to address
these threats and challenges, and, where available, information on historical and
current use of these practices in these regions.
 Description of the potential and limitations to agroforestry within that region.
Primary sources of information will include peer reviewed journal articles, along with:

Natural Resources Conservation Service, Resources Conservation Act (RCA) reports

U.S. Forest Service, Resources Planning Act Assessment (RPA) reports

U.S. Forest Service, Forest Inventory & Assessment (FIA) State reports

Regional summaries in Agroforestry & Sustainable Systems: Symposium Proceedings,
RM-GTR-261,

Other information as applicable.
13
5/3/2017
Figure A1. Eight regions as used in the US National Climate Assessment.
REGION
AUTHORS
Alaska
Nicole Grewe, Linda Kruger, Sue
Alexander, Toral Patel-Weynand
Hawaii & US affiliated Pacific
Islands
Southwest
Northwest
Great Plains
Midwest
Southeast (incl: Caribbean Islands)
JB Friday, Craig Elevitch, Katie Friday
Northeast
Dan Neary
Badege Bishaw, Kate MacFarland
Michele Schoeneberger & Gary Bentrup
Shibu Jose, Mike Gold, Diomy Zamora
Becky Barlow & Sarah Workman, John
Fike
Tracey Coulter, Julie Mawhorter, Sally
Claggett, Rachel Reyna
14
CONTACT
USFS/JFSL/R&D Linda
Kruger& USFS/R10 Nicole
Grewe
University of Hawaii and
Agroforestry Net, USFS
USFS
OSU, USFS
USFS
UMo, U Minnesota Extension
U Alabama, UGA, VA
PolyTech
PA Department of Natural
Resources and Conservation &
USFS
5/3/2017
APPENDIX 2: Risk Assessment Matrix
Keith Moser, USFS; Mike Dosskey, USFS NAC; Andrew Bell, Chicago Botanic Gardens; Larry
Godsey, Missouri Valley College
A risk management matrix will be developed as a framework within which decisions
about agroforestry management can be made. Agroforestry offers a suite of management options
that can reduce risk to agriculture. The risk management matrix evaluates the benefits to at-risk
resources which can be realized when particular agroforestry strategies are adapted. Furthermore,
each strategy will be analyzed to determine whether it is a “Low Regret” or “No Regret”
strategy.
First, we will present risky outcomes for climate influences and risky outcomes of
biosphere responses. Second, we will discuss the range of potential synergy between individual
components of an agroforestry system. The synergy in an agroforestry system represents both a
potential increase in the outputs of the components (e.g., Nana and Lu 2013) and a potential
reduction in the variability of total returns from the system. Third, we will add the levels of riskaversion of potential agroforestry decision-makers. Decision-makers shape their choices by the
amount of risk they are willing to accept. We will look at two contrasting decision rules (Pažek
and Rozman 2009; Pažek et al. 2010): Maximax and Minimax. Maximax represents an
optimistic approach where the decision maker examines the maximum payoffs of alternatives
and chooses the alternative whose outcome is the best (e.g., output, profit). Minimax, reflects a
less optimistic outlook. Here the decision-maker looks at the maximum regret associated with
each strategy and selects the strategy with the smallest value (losses, damage, least criticism,
etc.). Finally, with all these factors in mind, we’ll examine the value of information in decisionmaking and the “cost of being wrong.”
15