The labor and capital needs (factor intensities) are key features of new
agroforestry practices. We assume here that these are fixed for a given technol-
ogy, ignoring that farmers can to some extent vary the labor and capital inputs
in each technology or production system (e.g., how often and how thoroughly
weeding is done). But in practice the technology chosen clearly constrains the
relevant range of inputs. Because most farmers are capital or labor constrained,
how new technologies affect total capital and labor demand determines how
much land farmers can cultivate. In particular, when markets are imperfect,
the households’ endowments of labor and cash critically influence the defor-
estation outcome. A labor- or capital-intensive agroforestry technique is more
likely to promote forest conservation when markets are imperfect and farmers
are constrained. When farmers are not capital or labor constrained or these
markets are functioning well, labor and capital intensities are less important
for the deforestation outcome.
Most agroforestry technologies appear to be labor intensive, although some
practices such as the use of tree shade to reduce weed pressure (and replace
hand weeding) in cropping systems aim to reduce the labor needs (but
compared with herbicides, tree shade tends to be more labor intensive). In
particular, compared with traditional shifting cultivation, pasture, and slash-
and-burn annual cropping systems, permanent agroforestry practices entail
more labor per unit area. In fact, labor shortage often is a reason why agro-
forestry practices are not adopted. Interestingly, a technology characteristic
(labor intensiveness) that makes farmers reluctant to adopt agroforestry prac-
tices is the same characteristic that makes the practice, once adopted, less likely
to lead to primary forest encroachment.
But there are exceptions. Kudzu (Pueraria phaseoloides) is a leguminous
vine that fixes nitrogen and makes more nutrients available to the soil, speed-
ing up soil recuperation. It also suppresses weeds, reducing the demand for
labor for clearing and weeding. Kudzu therefore permits shorter fallow peri-
ods. This should reduce the stock of fallow land, allowing a larger forest area.
This is a low-cost, labor-saving technology that increases yields and could
potentially save forests. What more could you wish for? It is therefore not sur-
prising that kudzu is explicitly mentioned in the Sanchez and Benites (1987)
article as one of the promising species for managed fallows. But no one can
guarantee the forest outcome. Yanggen and Reardon (2001) reported from a
study of 220 farm households in Pucallpa, Peru, that farmers who use kudzu
fallows can clear substantially less forest to cultivate the same land area (tradi-
tional secondary forest fallow uses 40–116 percent more land). But higher
productivity and labor savings pull in the opposite direction. The authors’
econometric analysis shows that kudzu reduces primary forest clearing but
boosts secondary forest clearing, with the net effect being a modest rise in total
forest clearing. This study illustrates a major point of this chapter: higher yield
can in principle reduce deforestation, but higher benefits (increased yields or
- Is Agroforestry Likely to Reduce Deforestation? 97