A final aspect of agroforestry technology that is relevant for the deforesta-
tion impact is the extent to which a new practice or technology consists of
fixed investments. The land degradation–deforestation hypothesis is more
applicable to annual than perennial crops. If farmers have invested a lot in
their land, by planting perennials or making land improvements (e.g., terrac-
ing), they would be more reluctant to move on and clear new forestland. In
Nicaragua, for example, coffee planting has helped stabilize the forest frontiers
(D. Kaimowitz, pers. obs., 1991).
Overall, our discussion is based largely on the question about what hap-
pens when farmers adopt new agroforestry practices, ignoring the issue of
technology adoption. Generally, farmers prefer to adopt technologies that
increase their opportunities rather than limit them. This was suggested long
ago by the work of Boserup (1965) on the demographic determinants of agri-
cultural intensification and of Hayami and Ruttan (1985) on induced inno-
vation based on the relative factor scarcity. Thus, if farmers face serious labor
constraints, they will be reluctant to adopt labor-intensive practices or tech-
nologies. Similarly, if land is abundant, they have limited incentives to adopt
land-saving practices or technologies. As we saw before, labor- and capital-
intensive practices that bind the farmers’ resources on small, intensively
managed plots are those with the greatest potential to reduce pressures on the
forest, yet labor (and capital) shortage and land abundance are typical charac-
teristics of the situation at the forest frontier. Thus, the paradox is that the
practices or technologies that have the highest forest-saving potential are more
likely to be adopted once the forest is gone.
Sometimes farmers adopt these labor-intensive and land-saving practices
or technologies in forest-abundant situations if they are very profitable or have
other desirable characteristics such as reducing risk or fitting in well with the
farmers’ seasonal labor needs. Coffee adoption among smallholder settlers in
Ecuador illustrates this point (Pichon et al. 2001). More generally, adoption
of agroforestry practices is also determined by a number of factors, classified
by Franzel (1999) as feasibility, profitability, and acceptability. Nevertheless,
the general point is still valid: encouraging farmers to adopt practices or tech-
nologies that save resources that are not perceived as scarce, such as forestland
in an open frontier situation, is difficult.
Market and Tenure Conditions
The prevailing market conditions are important for the deforestation outcome
of a particular technological change. A large number of farmers adopting agro-
forestry practices will change the demand and supply in various markets and
alter the prices of the commodities in these markets. Such effects—general
equilibrium effects, in economic jargon—can in some cases be crucial for the
final forest outcomes of agroforestry.
- Is Agroforestry Likely to Reduce Deforestation? 99