4.6 Article

UPLAND FARMING SYSTEM EROSION YIELDS AND THEIR CONSTRAINTS TO CHANGE FOR SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURAL CONSERVATION PRACTICES: A CASE STUDY OF LAND USE AND LAND COVER (LULC) CHANGE IN INDONESIA

Journal

LAND DEGRADATION & DEVELOPMENT
Volume 28, Issue 2, Pages 421-430

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/ldr.2598

Keywords

LULC change; RUSLE; erosion; farm typology; constraints

Funding

  1. DIKTI Indonesia Doctoral-Overseas Scholarship Project (Beasiswa doktoral Luar Negeri)
  2. CIRAD, UMR G-EAU

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In the upper catchments of Southeast Asia, land use change from forest to agricultural systems generated land degradation and conflicts between uplanders and lowlanders. More sustainable cropping systems are proposed to upper-catchment farmers. Grass fodder strip (GFS) is an effective anti-erosion practice, and it involves lower costs for farmers. However, labour and cash constraints are sometimes preventing farmers to implement it. To evaluate farms' current impact and adaptation capacities, we need a comprehensive understanding of farm and farm household characteristics that influence their activities. This paper proposes an approach that combines farm household surveys and modelling of farm erosion yield to help project planners and policy makers to identify such farmers in a data-scarce environment. We developed two farm typologiesone based on both farm and farm household characteristics and one based on their erosion yield and constraints. We calculated erosion yields on plot level by using revised universal soil loss equation method and identified their constraints. We found that a typology based on farm constraints and calculated farm erosion was a good complement to identify farmers who are generating the highest erosion yields and would be able to change their production systems. This methodology is mainly useful at the beginning of conservation projects, when very few hard data are available. Copyright (C) 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available