Net benefits of silky oak (Grevillea robusta) for small farmers in Musanze District, Rwanda

Rene Niyomfura ,
Rene Niyomfura
Gerald Kapp ,
Gerald Kapp
Canisius Patrick Mugunga ,
Canisius Patrick Mugunga
Jean de Dieu Niyomugabo
Jean de Dieu Niyomugabo

Published: 01.12.2021.

Volume 0, Issue 14 (2022)

pp. 46-62;

https://doi.org/10.21750/refor.14.05.100

Abstract

This study was conducted in Musanze district, Rwanda, to evaluate the net benefits of silky oak (Grevillea robusta) production for small farmers. A semi-structured questionnaire was administered to 100 households distributed in four villages. The cost-benefit ratio was used as a decision-making tool. A diameter tape and a Haga altimeter were used to measure the DBH and height of grevillea and other dominant agroforestry tree species. Results indicate that 66 % of laborers were family members, gaining 625 Rwf per person day with grevillea production (US$ 0.61, with 4-8 hours of work per day. Also, results show that farmers earn 57,950 Rwandan Francs (Rwf) per hectare per year (US$ 57.48 from grevillea products (stakes, poles, charcoal, and timber), whereas the mean investment in grevillea production is 54,200 Rwf ha-1 year-1 (US$ 53.76. The net farm income is 3,225 Rwf (US$ 3.2 ha-1 year-1. The net benefit from grevillea product is affected by poor farmer data record as the majority of67% of respondents has not attended any formal education. However, farmers gain additional benefits of US$ 628, US$ 298, and US$ 224ha-1 year-1 from potatoes, maize, and bean, respectively, depending on their crop choice during intercropping with grevillea. The benefit-cost ratio is 1.06, which highlights the modest profitability of growing grevillea on the farm. In addition, soil erosion control, soil fertility increase, landslide prevention, shade provision, microclimate improvement, and biodiversity conservation were reported as ecosystem services of grevillea on the farm. Growth performance of grevillea (diameter at breast height, tree height, and volume) is analyzed in all four villages. The study shows that growing grevillea is profitable for smallholder farmers via tree products and farm benefits, including ecosystem services aspects.

References

Albaugh, J. M., Dye, P. J., & King, J. S. (2013). Eucalyptusand Water Use in South Africa. International Journal of Forestry Research, 2013, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/852540
Armengot, L., Ferrari, L., Milz, J., Velásquez, F., Hohmann, P., & Schneider, M. (2020). Cacao agroforestry systems do not increase pest and disease incidence compared with monocultures under good cultural management practices. Crop Protection, 130, 105047. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2019.105047
Bucagu, C., Vanlauwe, B., Van Wijk, M. T., & Giller, K. E. (2013). Assessing farmers’ interest in agroforestry in two contrasting agro-ecological zones of Rwanda. Agroforestry Systems, 87(1), 141–158. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-012-9531-7
Ceccon, E., Sánchez, I., & Powers, J. S. (2015). Biological potential of four indigenous tree species from seasonally dry tropical forest for soil restoration. Agroforestry Systems, 89(3), 455–467. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-014-9782-6
De Giusti, G., Kristjanson, P., & Rufino, M. C. (2019). Agroforestry as a climate change mitigation practice in smallholder farming: evidence from Kenya. Climatic Change, 153(3), 379–394. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-019-02390-0

Citation

Copyright

Article metrics

Google scholar: See link

The statements, opinions and data contained in the journal are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publisher and the editor(s). We stay neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Most read articles