Trees and shrubs suitable for the construction of agroforestry systems in a temperate climate and their use in economic activities: a study in Bulgaria
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.51599/is.2023.07.03.03Keywords:
agroforestry systems, standardization, agroforestry standards, trees, shrubs, Bulgaria.Abstract
Purpose. The study aims to (i) discover the various trees and shrubs appropriate for building agroforestry systems in Bulgaria’s temperate climate and their possible use in various economic activities, (ii) identify the contribution of Bulgarians’ agroforestry systems to the three dimensions of sustainable development.
Results. The contributions of Bulgarians’ agroforestry systems to three pillars of sustainability were pointed out. Regarding the social dimension of sustainability, the respondents highlighted the social benefits of agroforestry (e.g., raising the standard of living and the social status of the population; providing jobs and access to renewable energy; overcoming social inequality in individual regions; providing recreation opportunities for the population; give social, educational, scientific, landscape and recreational benefits to society; generate firewood for society). The contribution of agroforestry in the environmental dimension is unquestionable. Moreover, 46 trees and 15 shrubs have been presented. The use of their products in various economic activities and industries has been discussed. These trees and shrubs are appropriate for the construction of various agroforestry systems such as forest-farming, alley-cropping, and forest-pasture agroforestry systems.
Scientific novelty. A few scientific researches focus on tree species suitable for agroforestry systems in particular counties with different climates. However, there is limited research on various trees and shrubs suitable for constructing agroforestry systems in a temperate climate, especially in Bulgaria. Moreover, the use of the products of these trees and shrubs in various economic sectors and activities, which can bring additional economic value for agroforestry farmers in temperate climates, is not discussed in one paper.
Practical value. The current findings will provide farmers with additional knowledge about trees and shrubs suitable for the construction of agroforestry systems in temperate climates and the possible implementation of their products in various economic activities and industries. This will encourage them to create ecoefficient agroforestry systems using some of the 46 trees and 15 shrubs, based on their regional location and local conditions, to support sustainable development and the environment. What is more, if these tree species are promoted by decision-makers and professional/farmer associations, and adopted by the farmers can support and reinforce agroforestry in Bulgaria and regions with temperate climates.
References
Tschora, H., & Cherubini, F. (2020). Co-benefits and trade-offs of agroforestry for climate change mitigation and other sustainability goals in West Africa. Global Ecology and Conservation, 22, e00919. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2020.e00919.
Burgess, P. J., & Rosati, A. (2018). Advances in European agroforestry: results from the AGFORWARD project. Agroforestry Systems, 92, 801–810. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-018-0261-3.
Chavan, S. B., Keerthika, A., Dhyani, S. K., Handa, A. K., Ram Newaj, & Rajarajan, K. (2015). National agroforestry policy in India: a low hanging fruit. Current Science, 108(10), 1826–1834. https://doi.org/10.18520/cs/v108/i10/1826-1834.
Costa, M. P., Schoeneboom, J. C., Oliveira, S. A., Viñas, R. S., & de Medeiros, G. A. (2018). A socio-eco-efficiency analysis of integrated and non-integrated crop-livestock-forestry systems in the Brazilian Cerrado based on LCA. Journal of Cleaner Production, 171, 1460–1471. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.10.063.
Muthuri, C., Kuyah, S., Njenga, M., Kuria, A., Oborn, I., & Noordwijk, M. (2023). A systematic review of agroforestry’s contribution to livelihoods and carbon sequestration in East Africa. Trees, Forests and People, 14, 100432. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tfp.2023.100432.
Montes, O, Uribe, M, Castro, R., Villanueva, C., Pérez, M., & Lara, A. (2020). Policy forum: proposal of a Mexican precision agroforestry policy. Forest Policy and Economics, 119, 102292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2020.102292.
Plieninger, T., Muñoz-Rojas, J., Buck, L. E., & Scherr, S. J. (2020). Agroforestry for sustainable landscape management. Sustainability Science, 15, 1255–1266. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-020-00836-4.
Elevitch, C. R., Mazaroli, D. N., & Ragone, D. (2018). Agroforestry standards for regenerative agriculture. Sustainability, 10(9), 3337. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10093337.
Espada, A. L. V., & Sobrinho, M. V. (2019). Logging community-based forests in the Amazon: an analysis of external influences, multi-partner governance, and resilience. Forests, 10(6), 461. https://doi.org/10.3390/f10060461.
Trozzo, K. E., Munsell, J. F., Chamberlain, J. L., Gold, M. A., & Niewolny, K. L. (2021). Forest farming: who wants in? Journal of Forestry, 119(5), 478–492. https://doi.org/10.1093/jofore/fvab023.
Vaupel, A., Bednar, Z., Herwig, N., Hommel, B., Moran-Rodas, V. M., & Beule, E. (2023). Tree-distance and tree-species effects on soil biota in a temperate agroforestry system. Plant and Soil, 487, 355–372. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-023-05932-9.
Pessôa, G. C. M., Piscoya, V. C., Rolim Neto, F. C., Araújo Filho, R. N. A., Melo, R. C. P., Pessôa, U. C. M., Silva, L. J. S., … & Santos, L. D. V. (2022). Carbon and nitrogen stocks and microbiological activity under forest-pasture system and traditional pasture in pernambuco. Floresta e Ambiente, 29(2), e20210068. https://doi.org/10.1590/2179-8087-FLORAM-2021-0068.
Mackay-Smith, T. H., López, I. F., Burkitt, L. L., & Reid, J. I. (2023). Pasture production-diversity relationships in a kānuka silvopastoral system. Ecological Solutions and Evidence, 4(2), e12218. https://doi.org/10.1002/2688-8319.12218.
Rawat, Y. S., Negi, V., Moussa, I. M., Zaman, W., & Elansary, H. O. (2023). Distribution and vegetation assessment of woody plant species in the cold desert environment, North-Western Himalaya, India. Sustainability, 15(13), 10429. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151310429.
Ramli, M.R., Milow, P., & Malek, S. (2022). Diversity and composition of trees and shrubs species in homegardens in Kampung Masjid Ijok Perak, Malaysia. Agroforestry Systems, 96, 1161–1174. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-022-00775-2.
Yin, R. K. (2014). Case study research design and methods, 5th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Herder, M., Moreno, G., Mosquera-Losada, R. M., Palma, J. H. N., Sidiropoulou, A., Santiago Freijanes, J. J., Crous-Duran, J., … Burgess, P. J. (2017). Current extent and stratification of agroforestry in the European Union. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 241, 121–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2017.03.005.
Kachova, V., Hinkov, G., Popov, E., Trichkov, L., & Mosquera-Losada, R., (2018). Agroforestry in Bulgaria: history, presence status and prospects. Agroforestry System, 92, 655–665. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-016-0029-6.
Trichkov, L., & Kachova, V. (2016). Necessity, opportunities and priorities for development of agroforestry in Bulgaria. Forestry Ideas, 22(1), 3–15.
Marinova, V., (2017). Main characteristics and perspectives for the development of ideal forms of agriforestry in Bulgaria. New Knowledge Journal of Science, 6(2), 45–52. Available at: https://science.uard.bg/index.php/newknowledge/article/view/231.
