EXPLORING THE RELATIVE ADVANTAGES OF LOCAL INNOVATION IN AGROFORESTRY

doi:10.15302/J-FASE-2022476

Front. Agr. Sci. Eng.

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Edi Dwi CAHYONO(

), Eka PRADESTI, Cahyo PRAYOGO, SUHARTINI, Riyanti ISASKAR

Faculty of Agriculture, University of Brawijaya, Jalan Veteran Malang 65145, East Java, Indonesia

Download: PDF(2441 KB) HTML
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks

Abstract

● Promotion of local sustainable innovation developed by forest farmers.

● Focusing on bending of branches to increase coffee production in a pine-based agroforestry system.

● Using a combination of concepts of perceived characteristics of innovation.

● Techno-social, economic and ecological benefits are the key features.

● Local techniques may be prospective for developing sustainable agroforestry innovation.

Adopting community-based innovations in agroforestry is key to enhancing livelihoods in forest farmer communities. This research aimed to explore the perceived advantages of the forest farmer technique of coffee branch bending to overcome the light limitations under the shade of a pine forest. The concepts of perceived characteristics of innovation were used to explore the advantages of this technique. Using a case study of an exclusive forest farmer clique in UB (University of Brawijaya) Forest in Indonesia, it was found that the local technique had high perceived relative advantages. Compared to the others, the bending technique increases coffee production and is easy to do. It was also found to be superior to reducing production costs and is perceived as more environmentally friendly, promoting it as a valuable sustainable practice. Technical experts need to validate it and may embrace it as a co-innovation for the available external agroforestry recommendations. Its adaptability to the local socio-ecological context and techno-economical constraints makes it a prospective innovation to be extended through social forestry programs.

Keywords agroforestry forest farmers local innovation relative advantage social forestry

Corresponding Author(s): Edi Dwi CAHYONO

Just Accepted Date: 07 December 2022 Online First Date: 01 February 2023

Cite this article:

Edi Dwi CAHYONO,Eka PRADESTI,Cahyo PRAYOGO, et al. EXPLORING THE RELATIVE ADVANTAGES OF LOCAL INNOVATION IN AGROFORESTRY[J]. Front. Agr. Sci. Eng. , 01 February 2023. [Epub ahead of print] doi: 10.15302/J-FASE-2022476.

URL:

https://academic.hep.com.cn/fase/EN/10.15302/J-FASE-2022476
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fase/EN/Y/V/I/0

Fig.1 Coffee-pine agroforestry cultivation system in UB Forest (a) and the researcher observed the coffee growth under pine trees (b).

Tab.1 Comparison between coffee branch bending, pruning and without bending/pruning (FGD results with three research participants)

Fig.2 Variations of coffee branch bending: arching the branches (a) and cracking the branches (b).

1	A, Warnaen , Sugiyanto Y, Yuliati E D Cahyono . Farmer empowerment in coffee farming business management. EurAsian Journal of BioSciences, 2020, 14(2): 7231–7238
2	J N Pieterse . Development theory. Sage Publications Ltd., 2010
3	Noordwijk M van . Agroforestry-based ecosystem services: reconciling values of humans and nature in sustainable development. Land, 2021, 10(7): 699 https://doi.org/10.3390/land10070699
4	J R, Montambault J R Alavalapati . Socioeconomic research in agroforestry: a decade in review. Agroforestry Systems, 2005, 65(2): 151–161 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-005-0124-6
5	M B, Baig P J, Burgess J H Fike . Agroforestry for healthy ecosystems: constraints, improvement strategies and extension in Pakistan. Agroforestry Systems, 2021, 95(5): 995–1013 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-019-00467-4
6	E D, Cahyono S, Fairuzzana D, Willianto E, Pradesti N P, McNamara R L, Rowe Noordwijk M van . Agroforestry innovation through planned farmer behavior: trimming in pine-coffee systems. Land, 2020, 9(10): 363 https://doi.org/10.3390/land9100363
7	P J, Kitchen A Panopoulos . Online public relations: the adoption process and innovation challenge, a Greek example. Public Relations Review, 2010, 36(3): 222–229 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2010.05.002
8	D M, Malahayatin E D Cahyono . The compatibility factor with the needs of farmers in the decision to adopt innovations in the Jajar Legowo cropping pattern (a case study of rice farmers in Widang District, Tuban Regency. Jurnal Ekonomi Pertanian dan Agribisnis, 2017, 1(1): 56–61(in Bahasa Indonesia)
9	F M, Alawiyah E D Cahyono . Farmers’ perceptions of the introduction of biological agent innovations through a combination of demonstration plot media and FFD. Jurnal Ekonomi Pertanian dan Agribisnis, 2018, 2(1): 19−28 (in Bahasa Indonesia)
10	E D Cahyono . Challenges facing extension agents in implementing the participatory extension approach in Indonesia: a case study of Malang Regency in the East Java Region. Dissertation for the Doctoral Degree. Columbus: The Ohio State University, 2014
11	D, Abrol A Gupta . Understanding the diffusion modes of grassroots innovations in India: a study of Honey Bee Network supported innovators. African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development, 2014, 6(6): 541–552 https://doi.org/10.1080/20421338.2014.976974
12	E Hoffecker . Local Innovation: what it is and why it matters for developing economies. Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) D-Lab Working Paper, 2018
13	E M Rogers . Diffusion of innovations, 5th edition. New York: Free Press, 2003, 229
14	C H, Ho W Wu . Role of innovativeness of consumer in relationship between perceived attributes of new products and intention to adopt. International Journal of Electronic Business Management, 2011, 9: 258–266
15	Y, Bete U, Joka A Nubatonis . Income analysis of tomato farming in paddy fields in Leuntolu Village Raimanuk District Belu Regency. Agribusiness Journal, 2021, 4(1): 1–5
16	T, Singh M, Kaur G Singh . Extent of adoption of happy seeder technology among the farmers of Punjab (India). Indian Journal of Extension Education, 2021, 57(4): 75–79 https://doi.org/10.48165/IJEE.2021.57417
17	Y, Surdianto N, Sutrisna B S, Kurnia Y Argo . Study of “PATBO SUPER” technology innovation promoting the improvement of cropping index and productivity of rainfed rice in West Java Province. IOP Conference Series. Earth and Environmental Science, 2021, 653(1): 012067 https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/653/1/012067
18	A, Freidenreich M, Bhat K Jayachandran . Adoption and perception of cover crop implementation for tropical fruit growers. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2022, 77(2): 158–171 https://doi.org/10.2489/jswc.2022.00084
19	R, Llewellyn B Brown . Predicting adoption of innovations by farmers: what is different in smallholder agriculture?. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, 2020, 42(1): 100–112 https://doi.org/10.1002/aepp.13012
20	C R, Cerdán M C, Rebolledo G, Soto B, Rapidel F L Sinclair . Local knowledge of impacts of tree cover on ecosystem services in smallholder coffee production systems. Agricultural Systems, 2012, 110: 119–130 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2012.03.014
21	A, Fitch R L, Rowe N P, McNamara C, Prayogo R M, Ishaq R D, Prasetyo Z, Mitchell S, Oakley L Jones . The coffee compromise: is agricultural expansion into tree plantations a sustainable option?. Sustainability, 2022, 14(5): 3019 https://doi.org/10.3390/su14053019
22	T Suri . Selection and comparative advantage in technology adoption. Econometrica, 2011, 79(1): 159–209 https://doi.org/10.3982/ECTA7749
23	D E Mercer . Adoption of agroforestry innovations in the tropics: a review. Agroforestry Systems, 2004, 61: 311–328 https://doi.org/10.1023/B:AGFO.0000029007.85754.70
24	A, Subramanian M Qaim . Village-wide effects of agricultural biotechnology: the case of Bt cotton in India. World Development, 2009, 37(1): 256–267 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2008.03.010
25	M H, McDermott K Schreckenberg . Equity in community forestry: insights from North and South. International Forestry Review, 2009, 11(2): 157–170 https://doi.org/10.1505/ifor.11.2.157
26	Larson A M. Democratic decentralization in the forestry sector: lessons learned from Africa, Asia and Latin America. In: Colfer C J P, Capistrano D, eds.. The Politics of Decentralization. Routlege, 2005, 31
27	K K, Shrestha P McManus . The embeddedness of collective action in Nepalese community forestry. Small-scale Forestry, 2007, 6(3): 273–290 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11842-007-9020-4
28	A, Maryudi R R, Devkota C, Schusser C, Yufanyi M, Salla H, Aurenhammer R, Rotchanaphatharawit M Krott . Back to basics: considerations in evaluating the outcomes of community forestry. Forest Policy and Economics, 2012, 14(1): 1–5 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2011.07.017
29	L, Porter-Bolland E A, Ellis M R, Guariguata I, Ruiz-Mallén S, Negrete-Yankelevich V Reyes-García . Community managed forests and forest protected areas: an assessment of their conservation effectiveness across the tropics. Forest Ecology and Management, 2012, 268: 6–17 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2011.05.034
30	M F, Zerihun Z, Worku M Muchie . Institutional analysis of adoption of agroforestry innovations in the Eastern Cape Province, South Africa. SARChI Working Papers, Tshwane University of Technology, 2014
31	B E, Myers T G Roberts . Conducting and evaluating professional development workshops using experiential learning. NACTA Journal, 2004, 48(2): 27–32
32	M, Saunders P, Lewis A Thornhill . Research methods for business students (6th Edition). Pearson, 2012
33	A, Pizam Y Mansfeld . Consumer Behaviour in Travel and Tourism. London: Taylor and Francis Group, 2009
34	J W Creswell . Research design: qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar, 2016 (in Bahasa Indonesia)
35	P, Bexter S Jack . Qualitative case study methodology: study design and implementation for novice researchers. Qualitative Report, 2008, 13(4): 544–559
36	R K Yin . Case study research: Design and methods (3rd Edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2003
37	C, Leuuwis den Ban A W van . Communication for rural innovation: rethinking agricultural extension. Wiley-Blackwell, 2004
38	S W, Littlejohn K A Foss . Agency. In: Littlejohn S W, Foss K A, eds. Encyclopedia of communication theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Inc., 2009, 28–32
39	K, Joshi A, Pattanayak R, Jethi V S Meena . Promoting gender equality in the context of agriculture and natural resource management: opportunities, challenges, and management policies in Indian Mid-Himalayas. In: Rakshit A, Chakraborty S, Parihar M, Meena V S, Mishra P K, Singh H B, eds. Innovation in Small-Farm Agriculture. CRC press, 2022, 275–286
40	P, Arsil Y S, Tey M, Brindal , Ardiansyah E, Sumarni , Masrukhi , Ardiansyah , Sumarni , E Masrukhi . Perceived attributes driving the adoption of system of rice intensification: the Indonesian farmers’ view. Open Agriculture, 2022, 7(1): 217–225 https://doi.org/10.1515/opag-2022-0080
41	M, Kernecker V, Seufert M Chapman . Farmer-centered ecological intensification: using innovation characteristics to identify barriers and opportunities for a transition of agroecosystems towards sustainability. Agricultural Systems, 2021, 191: 103142 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2021.103142
42	R, Strong J T 2nd, Wynn J R, Lindner K Palmer . Evaluating Brazilian agriculturalists’ IoT smart agriculture adoption barriers: understanding stakeholder salience prior to launching an innovation. Sensors, 2022, 22(18): 6833 https://doi.org/10.3390/s22186833 pmid: 36146184
43	C, Mbow Noordwijk M, Van E, Luedeling H, Neufeldt P A, Minang G Kowero . Agroforestry solutions to address food security and climate change challenges in Africa. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 2014, 6: 61–67 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2013.10.014
44	A P, Reimer D K, Weinkauf L S Prokopy . The influence of perceptions of practice characteristics: an examination of agricultural best management practice adoption in two Indiana watersheds. Journal of Rural Studies, 2012, 28(1): 118–128 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2011.09.005
45	E D Cahyono . Participatory communication and extension for indigenous farmers: empowering local paddy rice growers in East Java. In: Dutta M, Zapata D, eds. Communicating for Social Change. Singapore: Palgrave Macmillan, 2019, 213–233
46	R D T, Manningtyas K Furuya . Traditional ecological knowledge versus ecological wisdom: are they dissimilar in cultural landscape research. Land, 2022, 11(8): 1123 https://doi.org/10.3390/land11081123
47	F, Vanclay G Lawrence . Farmer rationality and the adoption of environmentally sound practices; a critique of the assumptions of traditional agricultural extension. European Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension, 1994, 1(1): 59–90 https://doi.org/10.1080/13892249485300061
48	M S S, Ali R, Bakri D, Rukmana E B, Demmallino D, Salman Marsuka . Farmers rationality in doing land conversion. IOP Conference Series. Earth and Environmental Science, 2020, 486(1): 012017 https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/486/1/012017
49	D, Octavia S, Suharti , Murniati I W S, Dharmawan H Y S H, Nugroho B, Supriyanto D, Rohadi G N, Njurumana I, Yeny A, Hani N, Mindawati , Suratman Y, Adalina D, Prameswari E E W, Hadi S Ekawati . Mainstreaming smart agroforestry for social forestry implementation to support sustainable development goals in Indonesia: a review. Sustainability, 2022, 14(15): 9313 https://doi.org/10.3390/su14159313
50	J A, Sierra-Huelsz Fernández P, Gerez Binnqüist C, López L, Guibrunet E A Ellis . Traditional ecological knowledge in community forest management: evolution and limitations in Mexican forest law, policy and practice. Forests, 2020, 11(4): 403 https://doi.org/10.3390/f11040403
51	Hoang Nguyen L, Le A, Halibas Nguyen T Quang . Determinants of precision agriculture technology adoption in developing countries: a review. Journal of Crop Improvement, 2022
52	M J, Herington de Fliert E van . Positive deviance in theory and practice: a conceptual review. Deviant Behavior, 2018, 39(5): 664–678 https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2017.1286194
53	J, Sternin R Choo . The power of positive deviancy. An effort to reduce malnutrition in Vietnam offers an important lesson about managing change. Harvard Business Review, 2000, 78(1): 14–15 pmid: 10977192
54	R Tuhus-Dubrow . The power of positive deviants: a promising new tactic for changing communities from the inside. Boston, 2009. Available at Boston website on April 20, 2022
55	D S, Shija O A, Mwai P K, Migwi D M, Komwihangilo B O Bebe . Identifying positive deviant farms using pareto-optimality ranking technique to assess productivity and livelihood benefits in smallholder dairy farming under contrasting stressful environments in Tanzania. WORLD, 2022, 3(3): 639–656 https://doi.org/10.3390/world3030035
56	K, Malloch T Porter-O’Grady . Positive deviance: advancing innovation to transform healthcare. In: Melnyk B M, Tim R, eds. Evidence-based Leadership, Innovation and Entrepreneurship in Nursing and Healthcare: A Practical Guide to Success. New York: Springer, 2021, 209
57	K, Ruggeri T Folke . Unstandard deviation: the untapped value of positive deviance for reducing inequalities. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2022, 17(3): 711–731 https://doi.org/10.1177/17456916211017865 pmid: 34813715

[1]	Ian T. RILEY. *A CASE FOR ASSESSING ALLOCASUARINA* AND CASUARINA SPP. FOR USE IN AGROECOSYSTEM IMPROVEMENT IN SEMI-ARID AREAS WITH A FOCUS ON CENTRAL ANATOLIA, TURKEY**[J]. Front. Agr. Sci. Eng. , 2021, 8(4): 568-582.

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed