Loading...

Research on Crops

Resource-saving efficiency of agroforestry in areas prone to deflation and desertification





DOI: 10.31830/2348-7542.2023.ROC-918    | Article Id: ROC-918 | Page : 341-345
Citation :- Resource-saving efficiency of agroforestry in areas prone to deflation and desertification. Res. Crop. 24: 341-345
E. A. KORNEEVA korneeva.eva@list.ru
Address : Federal Scientific Center of Agroecology, Complex Melioration and Protective Afforestation, Russian Academy of Sciences, 400062, Volgograd, 97, University Ave., Russia
Submitted Date : 13-01-2023
Accepted Date : 15-02-2023
Online Published:

Abstract

Natural disasters and climate change have significantly reduced the land fund of Russia. In recent years, it has decreased several times. Among the various means of land reclamation, agroforestry is singled out as the most effective means of preventing deflation and desertification of agricultural land. Protective forest stands in arid areas dramatically change the environmental conditions of the environment, in particular the properties and fertility of soils. Forest reclamation increases the forest-growing effect and crop yields. To study further on this, this study was conducted during 2021-22 at the Laboratory of Mathematical Modelling of the Federal Scientific Center of Agroecology, Complex Melioration and Protective Afforestation of the Russian Academy of Sciences, located in the Volgograd region (Russia), to reveal the resource-saving role of forest strips. To do this, we compared a typical variant of agroforestry and the optimal variant of agroforestry, which ensured sustainable land use. These options were used to study the costs that are necessary for the creation and cultivation of forest plantations and their potential benefits in the form of prevented damage from deflation and desertification of land. A comparison of the resource-saving benefits obtained through forest-reclamation of arable land with the costs required for this arrangement showed that the benefits of agroforestry in protecting land from degradation were several times higher than the costs and indicated the feasibility of measures in the region.

Keywords

Agroforestry benefit-cost ratio desertification technological model wind erosion

References

Castle, S. E., Miller, D. C., Merten, N., Ordonez, P. J. and Baylis, K. (2022). Evidence for the impacts of agroforestry on ecosystem services and human well-being in high-income countries: A systematic map. Environ. Evid. 11. doi: org/10.1186/s13750-022-00260-4.
Fasina, A. S., Kadiri, W. O. J., Babalola, T. S., Ilori, A. O. A., Ogunleye, K. S. and Shittu, O. S. (2021). Influence of land-use and soil depth on the soil organic carbon in two agro-ecological zones of Nigeria. Res. Crop. 22: 273-78.
Gavrilov, A. M. and Protsko, M. T. (1989). , Volgograd Agricultural Institute, Volgograd, Russia. pp. 96.
Hanif, M. A., Bari, M. S. and Rahman, A. (2015). Potentiality of carbon sequestration by agroforestry species in Bangladesh. Res. Crop. 16: 562-67.
Instructional Instructions (1983). Instructional instructions on the agroforestry arrangement of protective forest plantations on the lands of agricultural enterprises. Kolos, Moscow, Russia. pр. 32.
Jose, S. (2009). Agroforestry for ecosystem services and environmental benefits: An overview. Agrofor. Syst. 76: 1-10.
Korneeva, E. A. (2022). Economic assessment and management of agroforestry productivity from the perspective of sustainable land use in the South of the Russian Plain. Forests 13.  doi: org/10.3390/f13020172.
Korneeva, E. A. and Belyaev, A. I. (2022). Assessment of ecological and economic efficiency of agroforestry systems in arid conditions of the Lower Volga. Forests 13. doi.org/10.3390/f13081248.
Manaenkov, A. S. (2018). Forest Reclamation of Arid Zone Arenas, 2nd edn. Publishing House of the Federal Research Center of Agroecology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Volgograd, Russia. pp. 428.
Nair, P.K.R. (1984). Soil Productivity Aspects of Agroforestry.ICRAF, Nairobi, Kenya. pp. 85.
OECD (2022). Purchasing Power Parities (PPP) (Indicator). Available online: https:// doi.org/10.1787/1290ee5a-en (accessed on 20 July 2022).
Pathak, P. S. and Solanki, K. S. (2002). National Research Centre for Agroforestry, ICAR, New Delhi, India. pp. 42.
Rodríguez, A. R., McAdam, J. and Mosquera-Losada, M. R. (2009). Agroforestry in Europe- Current Status and Future Prospects. Springer, Dordrecht, Netherlands. pp. 450.
Sanz, M. J., de Vente, J., Chotte, J. L., Bernoux, M., Kust, G., Ruiz, I., Almagro, M., Alloza, J. A., Vallejo, R., Castillo, V. М., Hebel, A. and Akhtar-Schuster, M. (2017). Sustainable land management contribution to successful land-based climate change adaptation and mitigation. United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD), Bonn, Germany. pp. 178.
Seminchenko, E. (2020). The yield of winter wheat depends on the predecessor as it moves away from the forest belt. Proc. Nizhnevolzhsky Agrouniversitetskiy Complex Sci. High. Prof. Educ. 4: 194-98.
Shashko, D. I. (1985). Agro-climatic resources of the USSR. Hydrometeoizdat, Leningrad, Russia. pp. 248.
UT Green Economy (2022). Meatus ad progressum et paupertatem exstirpatione Sustainable: UNEP, MMXI. (2022). Available online: http://www.unep.org/greeneconomy (accessed on 5 December 2022).
van Noordwijk, M. (2021). Agroforestry-based ecosystem services. Land 10: 770.
Wilson, M. and Lovell, S. (2016). Agroforestry–The next step in sustainable and resilient agriculture. Sustainability 8. doi: org/10.3390/su8060574.
Yin, R. S. and Hyde, W. F. (2000). The impact of agroforestry on agricultural productivity: The case of Northern China. Agrofor. Syst. 50: 179-94.
Zinkhan, C. F. and Mercer, D. E. (1997). An assessment of agroforestry systems in the southern USA. Agrofor. Syst. 35: 303-21.
 

Global Footprints