Agroforestry Practices in Kinama, Rizal, Kalinga: A documentation

International Journal of English Literature and Social Sciences

Vol-7, Issue-6; Nov-Dec, 2022

Journal Home Page Available: https://ijels.com/

Journal DOI: 10.22161/ijels

IJELS-2022, 7(6), (ISSN: 2456-7620)

https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/ijels.76.52 451

Agroforestry Practices in Kinama, Rizal, Kalinga: A

documentation and basis for intervention plan

Marsky A. Ubeña

Received: 03 Nov 2022; Received in revised form: 11 Dec 2022; Accepted: 21 Dec 2022; Available online: 31 Dec 2022

(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Abstract— This study was conducted to document the Agroforestry Practices in Kinama, Rizal, Kalinga.A

documentation and basis for intervention plan from September05 to September 30, 2022. There were 102

respondents of the study. The descriptive statistics was used. Frequency counts, percent, means, ranks and

correlation analysis were used in the analysis and interpretation of data. Results of the study showed that

most of the respondents are males and married. Many of the respondents belong to age bracket 41 to 50

years and attained elementary level. All the respondents are owner-operators and less than half have six to

eight years’ experience in Agroforestry farming: cultivating an area of 1 to 5 hectares Many of the

respondents earned Php 9,000 and above after adopting Agroforestry. Almost all of the respondents

practiced multi-storey with tree components of yemane, mahogany, mango, citrus, rambutan, lanzones and

coffee. The integrated agricultural crops are pigeon pea, banana, corn and eggplant. The respondents are

moderately benefitted in terms of economic and environmental benefits and also fairly benefitted in

cultural benefits. Results showed that the degree of seriousness of the overall problems encountered were

fairly serious with a mean of 2.26. However, poor location was rated as the highest and the non-ownership

of land and unstable tenure status was claimed not serious with the lowest rating. The correlation analysis

was found to have no significant relationship of income derived from agroforestry farming to educational

attainment and years of farming of the farmer-respondents.

Keyword— Agroforestry farming practices, land tenure, multi-storey, intervention plan, documentation

I. INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study

The Philippines is considered as one of the

biodivsersity hot spots in the world due to its unique flora

and fauna. Just like in many parts of the world, Philippines

is also experiencing forest destruction (deforestation

and/or forest degradation). These consequently pose a

great threat to the stability of the whole ecosystem (Dulay,

2015).

Philippine forest covers have degenerated because

of massive logging activities, extreme poverty and shifting

cultivation. Current deforestation rate has been estimated

at 100,000 ha per year. There are about 20 million

Filipinos living in upland watershed areas, half of whom

are dependent on shifting cultivation for livelihood. The

continuous influx of migrant communities has further

aggravated the diminishing forest resources. Given the

dependence of human and social life of products from the

forest from wood to water and to the oxygen they produce,

these consequences impinge on all sectors of the society

(Mapili, 2019).

Agroforestry is so far one of the solutions to

ecological degradation. There is now a worldwide

acceptance of agroforestry as the most appropriate

technological approach to improve the upland areas. In

Cordillera Administrative Region (CAR), agroforestry

development was listed in the Regional Development Plan

of 2004-2010 as one of the programs that will support the

watershed cradle (Latap, 2015).

Upland agroforestry systems have been proven to

have a positive impact on smallholders’ livelihoods: they

contribute to economies from local through to global and

also provide valuable environmental services. However,

these systems are often overlooked and face several major

Ubeña Agroforestry Practices in Kinama, Rizal, Kalinga: A documentation and basis for intervention plan

IJELS-2022, 7(6), (ISSN: 2456-7620)

https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/ijels.76.52 452

barriers. Upland smallholders are particularly vulnerable to

the threats of climate change, notably, erratic rainfall

patterns and more frequent extreme weather.

Consequently, upland populations are increasingly

migrating to urban areas where opportunities are perceived

to be better. However, with improved support, upland

farmers can enhance their agroforestry systems and

livelihoods and thereby strengthen local through to global

economies and also enhance environmental services

(Roshetko et al., 2017).

Cordillera Administrative Region (CAR) is

blessed with abundant natural resources like wide forest

cover and as such, it is aptly called the “watershed cradle

of Northern Luzon”. However, the region is now

confronted with an imbalance between the productive and

protective uses of the watersheds. Socio-economic

pressures have forced upland dwellers to farm even steep

slopes, and even to the extent of converting forest lands

for agricultural purposes (Latap, 2015).

The province of Kalinga is surrounded by

mountains and divided into three distinct geographical

areas, with the Chico River as the center: the mountainous

western portion; the valley of the river and its tributaries;

and the plains between the river and Cagayan Province.

Most of the residents grow crops and livestock for

domestic needs and income.

Agroforestry has always been a part of the

Ykalingas’ traditional farming practices. They usually

grow root crops and rice on slopes, supported by trees,

which in turn prevent soil erosion. Animal waste and

leftover food are used as fertilizers. Some tribes in the

province plant high-value crops alongside nitrogen-fixing

plants, such as peanuts and beans.They also use land-

management systems in which trees and shrubs are grown

around or among crops or pastures. With this system, they

are able to make the production of food, firewood and

clothing sustainable (Berry, 2020). According to

Domoguen (2018), Agroforestry is best for mountainous

regions like Cordillera. The practice of agroforestry in

Kalinga Province, Philippines is a tradition that has been

passed from generations to generations and has become a

way of life to the people of Kalinga (Bayon et al., 2016).

The municipality of Rizal is called the gateway to

the provincial capital, the city of Tabuk. It is situated

along the provincial boundaries of Kalinga, Cagayan and

Isabela. Rizal has a total land area of 23,011 hectares

composed of valleys and hills. Its fertile clay soil is best

suited for crops and rice production. On its western sides

are grazing lands and patches of forest. The town’s major

source of livelihood is agriculture. Monocropping is

widely used in the municipality. Rice and corn farming are

the most dominant and only few are engage in vegetable

production.

Rizal is an agriculture-based municipality

because of its favorable topography. The barangays of

Bulbul, Kinama, San Pedro and San Francisco belong to

the upland communities of the municipality. These

barangays practiced slash and burn and even converting

the grassy and rocky hills to corn plantation. This made

possible when upland farmers recognized the power of

herbicides which makes the soil friable and the stones

were rapidly weathered (Balbuena & Javillonar, 2018).

One peculiarity of agroforestry farming systems

is their being location-specific. Because of the presence of

diverse cultural communities in the province, a number of

indigenous agro- forestry farming systems have also been

developed in other localities but remained undocumented.

The need of documentation therefore is necessary

before it will get lost forever or forgotten if not properly

documented, analyze and disseminated. Knowledge gained

but is unavailable to others is wasted

https://digital;commons.unL.edu/libphilprac (2017).

The Philippines is still primarily an agricultural

country of which most citizens still live in rural areas and

support themselves through agriculture. Filipino farmers

still uses traditional way of farming because of its benefits

in sustaining the capacity of the soil to produce healthy

and organic crops using available resources .This is the

type of farming that prevailed in the Philippines before the

coming in of mechanized and chemical farming. However,

some of these indigenous or traditional farming practices

still remained undocumented particularly within the upland

communities.

This local knowledge developed in the

community through time is very important in achieving

sustainable agriculture and food security. It’s essential in

maintaining farm productivity, efficiency and profitability

in the long run, without depleting the natural resources and

the environment. It is therefore imperative to create

awareness and bring critical issues relating to the

documentation and dissemination of agricultural

indigenous knowledge to the policy makers so that its

potentials can be harnessed to achieve sustainable food

production to combat food crisis.

Documentation is one of the means of preserving

indigenous knowledge for posterity, national growth and

sustainable development. Access to relevant information

has been documented as crucial to the economic, political,

and social well-being of any community. It is believed that

indigenous knowledge has much to offer and teach the

world at large and only by research and documentation can

Ubeña Agroforestry Practices in Kinama, Rizal, Kalinga: A documentation and basis for intervention plan

IJELS-2022, 7(6), (ISSN: 2456-7620)

https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/ijels.76.52 453

it be preserved and made available to development

workers worldwide.

Since agroforestry practices within the

Municipality of Rizal, Kalinga remained undocumented as

observed and witnessed by the author himself being a

resident, prompted him to document these practices

particularly agroforestry farming within Kinama, Rizal,

Kalinga before these practices disappear or vanish that will

curtail knowledge growth.

Further, the study will serve as baseline

information on the agroforestry farming practices adopted

by the farmer-respondents that can be used by researchers,

extensionists and policy makers on the identified strength,

weaknesses, and opportunities as reference in improving

and addressing the needs of the farmer-adopters to pursue

sustainable agroforestry farming among the people of the

municipality of Rizal, Kalinga and other interested

individuals and neighbouring communities.

Fig. 1. Framework of the Study. This study will beguided

by the Input-Process-Output (IPO Model) (Fig. 1) for the

documentation of agroforestry practices among upland

farmers in Rizal, Kalinga. It was conceptualized to address

the need of the upland farmers and evaluate their

agroforestry farming practices. The input of study includes

INPUT

1. Socio-

demographic

profile of the

respondents

2. Identification of

Agroforestry

practices

3. Economic,

Environmental

and cultural

benefits

4. Problems

encountered by

farmers in the

practice of

agroforestry

farming.

5. Formulation of

an

intervention plan

PROCESS

1. Formulation of

questionnaire

2. Pre-testing of

questionnaire

3. Validation of

questionnaire

4. Floating of

questionnaire

combined with

direct

interview/observati

on methods

5. Consolidation and

tabulation of data

collected

6. Data Analysis

7. Write-up

OUTPUT

1. Documentation

of Agroforestry

practices in the

upland barangays

of Rizal, Kalinga

2. Intervention plan

Feedback

Ubeña Agroforestry Practices in Kinama, Rizal, Kalinga: A documentation and basis for intervention plan

IJELS-2022, 7(6), (ISSN: 2456-7620)

https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/ijels.76.52 454

the socio-demographic profile, identification of

agroforestry practices, economic and environmental and

cultural benefits of agroforestry and the problems

encountered by the farmers in the practice of agroforestry

farming.

The process involved the formulation of

questionnaire, pre-testing and floating of questionnaires

combined with direct interview and observation method,

survey and presentation of data gathered and the analysis

of data.

The outputs were the documentation of agroforestry

practices adopted in the upland barangays of Rizal,

Kalinga and a proposed/recommended intervention plan.

Statement of the Problem

Generally, the study aimed to document the

Agroforestry practices in Kinama, Rizal, Kalinga.

Specifically, it aimed to answer the following

questions:

1. What are the socio-demographic profile of the

respondents?

2. What are the identified agroforestry practices in

Kinama, Rizal,

Kalinga?

3. What are the economic, environmental and

cultural benefits of agroforestry farming practices

adopted by farmers?

4. What are the problem encountered by farmers

and the perceived solutions in the practice of

agroforestry?

5. What is the correlation analysis between the

following?

a. income and educational attainment; and

b. income and years of agroforestry practice.

6. What is the recommended intervention plan to be

designed to have sustainable agroforestry farming

practices in the Kinama, Rizal, Kalinga?

Significance of the Study

This study sought to provide additional

information to the farmers for good quality farming. This

will also provide the municipality baseline information on

the farmers who are practicing agroforestry farming. The

result of this study will serve as the baseline data and

information for researchers, extension agents and policy

makers to improve agroforestry practices among the

people in the Municipality of Rizal, Kalinga.

Scope and Delimitation of the Study

The study focuses on the Agroforestry Practices

in Kinama Rizal, Kalinga: economic, environmental and

cultural benefits of agroforestry farming practices adopted

by farmers and recommended intervention plan to be

designed to have sustainable agroforestry farming

practices in the Kinama, Rizal, Kalinga.

II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

According to Obura, (2018), the basic component

of any country’s agricultural knowledge system is its

agricultural indigenous knowledge (AIK) that

encompasses the skills, experiences and insights of people,

applied to maintain or improve their livelihood. Many

authors have recognized AIK as an important source of

developmental information (Anyira, 2010) and have

recommended its proper documentation and dissemination

for sustainable agricultural development.

Kudakwashe & Gift, (2013) also consider

traditional indigenous /agricultural knowledge as a

knowledge that is unique to a given culture, community or

society that is different from the knowledge learned from

formal institutions. It encompasses all aspects of life, such

as the management of natural environment. It forms the

basis of survival for the people who own the knowledge.

Moreover, IK and practice are usually unwritten relying on

oral transmission and human memory, therefore, the

importance documentation (Abebayo and Adeyemo,

2017). Additionally, is its scientific validity because

modern agriculture could learn a lot from it (Zaid and

Egberongbe, 2011). It is believed that indigenous

knowledge has much to offer and teach the world at large

and only by research and documentation can it be

preserved and made available to development workers

worldwide.

According to Fransen (2020), Agroforestry is an

economically and ecologically sound practice that

incorporates cultivation, conservation and tree planting

alongside crops or livestock farming. Agroforestry

practices come in many forms but fall into two groups-

those are sequential, such as fallows, and those that are

simultaneous, such as alley cropping (Leaky, 2017). In

particular, agroforestry is crucial to small holder’s farmers

and other rural people because it can enhance their food

supply, income and health. It is a multifunctional system

that can provide a wide range of economic, sociocultural

and environmental benefits (FAO, 2015). Agroforestry is

likened to a principle that is well accepted by many forest

and hill-side farmers in tropical regions (Luna, 2018). It

increases or sustains productivity while maintaining the

ecological stability of the environment (Gacutan, 2012).

According to Gangadharappa et al. (2003), the

Ubeña Agroforestry Practices in Kinama, Rizal, Kalinga: A documentation and basis for intervention plan

IJELS-2022, 7(6), (ISSN: 2456-7620)

https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/ijels.76.52 455

approximate annual returns of one acre of agroforestry

plot is averaging of $ 800 or Rs 31466.20 which is much

profitable than any traditional crop.

Agroforestry systems have the potential to

address both food insecurity and carbon mitigation goals.

Agroforestry is a system in which trees and different crops

are merged together in the same area for net economic

return to farmers. Agroforestry has been identified as a

potential greenhouse gas mitigation and afforestation

approach under the Kyoto protocol. Average carbon

storage by agroforestry system is estimated at 9, 21, 50

and 63 Megagrams C/ha/year in semiarid, sub-humid,

humid and temperate regions respectively (Yasin et al.

2019). Agroforestry also strengthens farmers' adaptive

capacity to counter climate change impacts by building

more resilient agricultural systems and diversifying

income sources. Also importantly to farmers, agroforestry

contributes to food security by providing multiple

products and benefits to farmers such as food, fodder and

shade for livestock, timber and renewable wood energy.

Agroforestry is an intensive land management

system that integrates trees into land already used for crop

and animal farming. It is an important approach to improve

the environmental, economic, and social benefits of

complex social–ecological systems in the Asia-Pacific

region (Shinet al., 2020).

Agroforestry bridges the gap that often separates

agriculture and forestry by building integrated systems that

address both environmental and socio-economic

objectives. Agroforestry can improve the resiliency of

agricultural systems and mitigate the impacts of climate

change (Brownet al.,2018).

Interactions between trees and other components

of agriculture such as livestock, fishery and aquatic species

is important at a range of scales: in fields (where trees and

crops are grown together), on farms (where trees may

provide fodder for livestock, fuel, food, shelter or income

from products, including timber) and landscapes (where

agricultural and forest land-uses combine in determining

the provision of ecosystem services(SEARCA,2021).

Finleyet al. (2018) cited that one of the

agroforestry systems such as intercropping can be used to

increase crop yields through resource partitioning and

facilitation in addition to achieving greater productivity.

To improve the livelihood and nutrition status of

the people of the Philippines and the world as well, the

viable agricultural solution to this problem is to adopt the

practice of agroforestry systems. Agroforestry is the

combination of agriculture and forestry practices within a

farming system. It involves the combination of trees and

crops that increase the medicinal, environmental, and

economic value of land with much profit and food security

(Sobola et al., 2015).

Among the agroforestry systems that would be an

effective tool to solve the problems mentioned above is the

practice of intercropping.

Few studies have been conducted to examine the

benefits of adopting agroforestry technologies; however, of

the studies conducted, the results show that there are

significant benefits for land owners adopting agroforestry.

This premise is supported by Jacobson and Kar (2013),

who conducted a similar study and reported “A review of

the literature on agroforestry extension adoption in the

United States finds only a few examples”.Furthermore,

limited-resource farmers are faced with the challenge of

making their farm business economically viable,

III. METHODOLOGY

Locale of the Study

The study was conducted at Kinama, Rizal,

Kalinga from November to December 2022.

Research Design

The descriptive statistics such as mean, frequency

counts and percentage will be used in this study. A

structured interview will be utilized to gather relevant data.

Likewise, field observation and documentation will be

employed in this study.

Respondents of the Study

The respondents of the study were the

Agroforestry farmers particularly in Kinama, Rizal,

Kalinga.

Instrumentation

Prior to the conduct of this study, request

letter was sent to the Barangay Captain of Kinama, Rizal,

Kalinga for permission and assistance in the conduct of the

study. Survey questionnaire will the main instrument of the

study.

To ensure reliability and validity of the

questionnaires, pre-testing will done at barangay San

Francisco, Rizal, Kalinga with eight farmers as

respondents which were no longer considered in the

identification of respondents. A structured questionnaire

and interview schedule will be done to collect data in this

study. The questions that are hard to be understood by the

respondents will be translated to local dialect by the

researcher during the interview to facilitate the discussions

and encourage more responses from the farmers. After the

interview, actual field visitation was conducted for

validation vis-à-vis the collected information provided by

Ubeña Agroforestry Practices in Kinama, Rizal, Kalinga: A documentation and basis for intervention plan

IJELS-2022, 7(6), (ISSN: 2456-7620)

https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/ijels.76.52 456

the respondents. Observations will be done to take note of

the practices adopted by the agroforestry farmers. Sample

photos were taken from the agroforestry farms of the

farmers serve as pieces of evidence on the type of

agroforestry farming practices adopted by the respondents.

The data to be collected were as follows: 1. socio-

demographic profile of respondents; 2. identification of the

agroforestry farming practices of the respondents; 3.

economic, environmental and cultural benefits of

agroforestry and; 4. problems encountered by the

respondents in agroforestry farming practices.

Data Gathering Procedure

The study was a descriptive research design.

Face-to-face interviews with the respondents will be

conducted using the interview guide questionnaire. The

content of the questionnaire survey is the level of

awareness and their practices pertaining to the solid waste

management and the effectiveness of campaigns and

program of the Local Government Unit. It was explained

to the respondents before answering. The purpose of the

interview was to verify the information that the

respondents will give about:

A. Level of Participation/Involvement of

Respondents to the CBFM Activities

B. Degree of Seriousness of the Problems

Encountered by the Respondents

Actual observations and site visits will be done to

validate the answer of respondents.

Data Analysis

The data collected/gathered were tallied,

tabulated and analysed using the descriptive statistics such

as frequency counts, mean and percentage.

The following rating scale and descriptive equivalent will

be used:

A. Numerical Values, Range of Values and Descriptive Rating on the Benefit of Agroforestry Farming Practices adopted by

the Respondents.

Numerical Values

Range Values

Descriptive Rating

5

4.20 – 5.00

Very Highly Adopted

4

3.40 – 4.19

Highly Adopted

3

2.60 – 3.39

Moderately Adopted

2

1.80 – 2.59

Fairly Adopted

1

1.00 – 1.79

Not Serious

B. Numerical Values, Range of Values and Descriptive Rating on the Degree ofSeriousness of the Problems Encountered by

the Respondents.

Numerical Values

Range Values

Descriptive Rating

5

4.20 – 5.00

Very Highly Serious

4

3.40 – 4.19

Highly Serious

3

2.60 – 3.39

Moderately Serious

2

1.80 – 2.59

Fairly Serious

1

1.00 – 1.79

Not Serious

IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

This section presents the findings, interpretation,

analyses of data gathered from the respondents of the

study. It includes the socio-demographic profile of such as

gender, age, civil status, ethnicity, land tenure, number of

years in agroforestry farming, income from agroforestry

farming. It also includes farm profile such as farm size,

farming practices, components of agroforestry system,

problems encountered and correlation analysis between

income derived from agroforestry farming to educational

attainment and number of years in farming.

Ubeña Agroforestry Practices in Kinama, Rizal, Kalinga: A documentation and basis for intervention plan

IJELS-2022, 7(6), (ISSN: 2456-7620)

https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/ijels.76.52 457

Table 1. Frequency Distribution of Respondents by Socio- demographic Profile

Profile

Frequency

(f)

Percentage

(%)

1. Gender

Male

Female

Total

2. Age

41-50

31-40

51-60

21-30

61 years & Above

Total

77

25

102

37

29

24

6

102

75.49

24.51

100.00

36.27

28.43

23.53

5.88

100.00

3. Civil Status

Married

Widower

Total

98

4

102

96.08

3.92

100.00

Profile

Frequency

(f)

Percentage

(%)

4. Educational Attainment

Elementary Level

High School Level

44

32

43.14

31.37

Continuation of Table 4

Profile

Frequency

(f)

Percentage

(%)

College level

High school graduate

Elementary graduate

College graduate

Total

11

6

5

4

102

10.78

5.88

4.90

3.92

100.00

5. Etnicity

Kalinga

Ilokano

Igorot

Itawes

89

9

2

87.25

8.82

1.96

Ubeña Agroforestry Practices in Kinama, Rizal, Kalinga: A documentation and basis for intervention plan

IJELS-2022, 7(6), (ISSN: 2456-7620)

https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/ijels.76.52 458

Total

102

100.00

6.Tenure of Land

Owner operator

Total

102

100.00

7. Number of Years in Agroforestry Farming

6-8 years

5 years & below

9 years & above

Total

8. Farm Size Devoted to AF Farming

1-5 ha.

50

46

6

102

64

33

49.02

45.10

5.88

100.00

62.75

32.35

Below 1 ha.

11 ha. And above

Total

5

102

4.90

100.00

Farm Size Devoted to AF Farming

1-5 ha.

Below 1 ha.

11 ha. And above

Total

64

33

5

102

62.75

32.35

4.90

100.00

9. Monthly Income

3,000 & below

3,001-5,000

9,001 & above

5,001-7,000

7,001-9,000

Total

85

10

4

2

1

102

83.33

9.80

3.92

1.96

0.98

100.00

Continuation of Table 4

Profile

Frequency

(f)

Percentage

(%)

10. Farming Income before AF Farming

3,001- 5,000

9,001 & above

5,001-7,000

3,001 & below

7,001- 9,000

30

29

23

18

29.41

28.43

22.55

17.65

Ubeña Agroforestry Practices in Kinama, Rizal, Kalinga: A documentation and basis for intervention plan

IJELS-2022, 7(6), (ISSN: 2456-7620)

https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/ijels.76.52 459

Total

2

102

1.96

100.00

11. Farming Income During AF Farming

9,001 & above

3,001-5,000

5,001-7,000

3,000 & below

7,001- 9,000

Total

38

26

21

12

5

102

37.25

25.49

20.59

11.76

4.90

100.00

12. Other Sources of Income

Laborer

Store owner

Gov’t worker/official

None

Carpentry

Total

13. Distance of e Households to the Farms

1-2 km

Less than 1 km

3-4 km

7 km & above

5-6 km

Total

90

4

3

2

102

54

20

7

1

102

88.24

3.92

2.94

1.96

100.00

52.94

19.61

6.86

0.98

100.00

14.Source of Capital used for AF Farming

Loan

Cooperatives

Friends

Self-financed

Total

75

2

25

102

73.53

1.96

24.51

100.00

The salient findings of the study were the following:

Most of the respondents (75.49%) were males

while 24.51% were females. Many of the respondents

(36.27%) belonged to the age bracket of 41 to 50 years and

almost all (96.08%) were married.

Many (43.14%) of the respondents have

elementary education, some (31.37%) have high school

education and few have attained college education (10.78

%), 5.88% are high school graduates, 4.90% graduated

from elementary, and 3.92% graduated from college.

Almost all (87.25%) of the farmer-respondents

are Ikalingas and owner operators of the farms they are

tilling. Less than half (49.02%) of the farmers have 6 to 8

years of farming experience. A great majority of the

respondents (62.75%) were cultivating 1 to 5 hectares of

Ubeña Agroforestry Practices in Kinama, Rizal, Kalinga: A documentation and basis for intervention plan

IJELS-2022, 7(6), (ISSN: 2456-7620)

https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/ijels.76.52 460

land, while 32.35% have size less than one hectare and few

(4.9%) have above 10 hectares.

Almost all (88.24%) of the farmer-respondents

were laborers and (83.33%) earned a monthly income of

Php 3,000.00 and below while some (29.41%) of the

respondents earned Php 3,001 to Php 5,000 before

engaging in agroforestry farming. Many (37.25%) earned

Php 9,001 and above, and some (25.49%) earned Php

3,001 to Php 5,000 during the adoption of agroforestry

practices.

On the distance of their households their farms,

majority (52.94%) reside within 1 to 2 kilometers while

few (0.98%) reside within 5 to 6 kilometer distance.

A great majority (72.55%) of the farmers were

members of cooperative while some (27.45%) were

members of the Federation of Farmers. A great majority

(73.53%) of the respondents borrow their capital from

cooperative; few (24.51%) were self- financed and only 2

borrow from their friends.

Almost all (96.08%) of the respondents practiced

multi-storey farming planted with trees composed of

yemane, mahogany, mango, citrus, rambutan, lanzones and

coffee. The integrated crops are pigeon pea, banana, corn

and eggplant.

In terms of economic benefits that are derived

from agroforestry farming practices, it is observed that the

farmer-respondents are moderately benefited with a mean

of 3.04. The respondents rated source of food as the

highest followed by the source of lumber and construction

materials, sources of fuel wood, income, green

manure/soil fertility, feed/fodder for the animals, and

source of herbal medicine which was rated the lowest.

On the environmental benefits of agroforestry

farming practices, the respondents claimed to be

moderately benefited with a mean of 3.35.

Soil erosion control as a function/benefit of

agroforestry was claimed the highest with a rating of

3.60 because of its protective function in minimizing the

occurrence of soil erosion brought about by strong

typhoons and heavy rains during wet season; followed by

flood and drought control, carbon sequestration,

improvement of water quality, climate amelioration, soil

formation and fertility improvement, biodiversity

conservation, increase water quantity, and control of pest

and disease. Meanwhile, the increase in crop production

was rated the lowest due to the large population of trees

present in their multi-storey farms that limited the space

allotted for crop production.

The farmer-respondents were fairly benefited in

terms of cultural benefits with a mean of 2.33. Landscape

improvement was rated the highest because of the presence

of diverse species of trees and crops planted in their farms

that obviously improved the physical aesthetic feature of

their farms.

Results showed that the degree of seriousness of

the overall problems/constraints encountered by the

farmer-respondents was fairly serious with a mean of 2.26.

However, poor location was rated as the highest, followed

by forest fire, erratic weather conditions, lack of

infrastructure, slow delivery of support services, lack of

farming skills and distance of farm to household which

were all considered moderately serious, while the rest were

claimed fairly serious except the non-ownership of land

and unstable tenure status which is not serious and rated as

the lowest because the farmers were themselves owner

operators of their farms.

From the findings of Solomon (2019) and Ninh

(2021), higher education contributes to

productivity/output. This claim conforms to the reports of

researchers to include educational attainment as an explicit

determinant of agricultural output (e.g. Vollrath, 2007;

Asadullah and Rahman, 2009; Reimers and Klasen, 2013;

Wouterse, 2016; Wouterse, F. and Badiane, 2019).

Moreover, Onwubuya (2005) stated that highest

agricultural productivity depends primarily on the

education of the rural farmers to understand and accept the

complex scientific changes that are difficult for the

uneducated rural farmer.

Ethnicity

Almost all (89 or 87.25%) of the respondents are

IKalingas, few (8.82%) are Ilokano and 1.96% each for

Igorot and Itawes. This implies that upland agroforestry

farmers in Rizal, Kalinga are dominated by Ykalingas.

In the article on the importance of ethnicity in the

depletion of the forest resources in the Sierra Madre

(northeast Luzon, Philippines), it argues that ethnically

highly diverse population living on the forest edge shows

little variation in the exploitation of available resources.

ethnic groups seem to be engaged in the same kind of

activities irrespective of their cultural background.

However, once resources become scarcer and the

population is offered opportunities for community forestry,

ethnicity becomes a highly relevant factor for the future

management of diminishing resources (Schlesing &

Munishi, 2020)

Land Tenure Status

All (102 or 100%) of the respondents are owner

operators of the land they are cultivating. This implies that

land tenure is not a problem in the upland barangays of

Rizal, Kalinga.

Ubeña Agroforestry Practices in Kinama, Rizal, Kalinga: A documentation and basis for intervention plan

IJELS-2022, 7(6), (ISSN: 2456-7620)

https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/ijels.76.52 461

Land tenure is the relationship, whether legally or

customarily defined among people as individuals or groups

with respect to land. It is an institution, i.e., rules invented

by societies to regulate behaviours. Rules of tenure define

how property rights to land are to be allocated within

societies. They define how access is granted to rights to

use, control, and transfer land, as well as associated

responsibilities and restrains. In simple terms, land tenure

systems determine who can use what resources for how

long, and under what conditions. Land tenure is an

important part of social, political and economic structures.

It is multi-dimensional, brining into play social, technical,

economic, institutional, legal and political aspects that are

often ignored but must be taken into account (FAO, 2015).

Land tenure distribution has been a salient issue

in the Philippines for decades. In recent years, population

growth and degradation of productive land has led to

increased stress and tensions between smallholder farmers,

wealthy landlords and the state. Philippines, as agriculture

is an essential livelihood, and difficult access to land

tenure is correlated with poverty, which is a mainly rural

phenomenon (ADB 2009; Boras; Tadem , 2015). Farmers

protest to obtain rights to land has often been met with

violence from landlords and security forces.

In connection to land tenure issues contributing to

deforestation, degradation of the environment, lowering of

carrying capacities of soils, poaching and extinction of

wild biotic resources, the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform

Program was implemented in 1988 to promote a more

equitable distribution of land and improve productivity.

Although the reform contained more favourable provisions

for farmers, its success is still being debated after its

completion in 2014 (Asia: Land and Foods, n.d).

Idoma and Ismail (2014) have also suggested that

inalienability, insecurity of tenure system, land

fragmentation and atomization of holdings due to

customary law of inheritance have been responsible for the

growing small scale and subsistence farming systems

which no longer meet the food and industrial demand of

the present growing population. Further, the lack of secure

access to land is closely linked to poverty, especially in

rural Philippines.

Number of Years in Agroforestry Farming

Almost half (49.02%) and 45.10% of the

respondents were engaged in agroforestry farming from six

to eight years and five years below, respectively, only few

(5.88%) were engaged for more than nine years. This

implies that most of the upland agroforestry farmers adopt

agroforestry farming during the implementation of the

Integrated Natural Resources and Environmental

Management Project (INREMP) which was mentioned

during the interview. This is a seven year project of the

Asian Development Bank (ADB) being implemented by

the Department of Environmental and Natural Resources.

(DENR).

Farm Size Devoted to Agroforestry Farming

In terms of farm size, most (62.75%) were tilling

1 to 5 hectares. Many (32.35%) of them were tilling less

than one hectare and the rest (5 0r 4.9%) were tilling above

10 hectares. The average farm size devoted to agroforestry

by the farmer-respondents is 2 hectares which is higher

than the farm size devoted in agroforestry in Ifugao which

is less than a hectare (Latap, 2015). This means that

farmers had enough area allocated for agroforestry

farming.

In the statement of Noack and Larsen (2019),

increasing farm size reduces the output per unit of land but

larger farms have higher output per unit of labor. Further

income fluctuations decline with increasing farm size

while the risk of aggregate production increases with

increasing farm size and the effects can be large. In

addition, they that indicated that while output per unit of

land does decline with increasing farm size as suggested

by previous literature, agricultural incomes increase with

farm size, the variance of local food production increases

with farm size. This suggest that farmers benefit from

larger farms, earning higher and more stable incomes

while consumer suffer from lower and more volatile food

supply.

While there is an inverse relationship between

land productivity and farm size, there is a direct

relationship between labor productivity and size. Analysis

of the farm size and productivity relationship using labor

productivity suggests that larger farms are more productive

than their smaller counterparts (Helfand and Taylors ,

n.d.).

Monthly Income from Other Sources

Almost all (83.33%) of the respondents earned a

monthly income of Php 3,000 and below, few (9.80%)

earned Php 3001to Php 5000, 3.92% earned Php 9,000

and above, 0.98% to 1.96% earned Php 5,001 to Php 7,000

and Php 7,001 to Php 9,000 respectively. Results indicate

that their low income could hardly sustain the basic needs

of their family. However, respondents have other sources

of income (as labourers) to sustain their living.

Monthly Income before Adopting Agroforestry

Farming

In terms of farming income before adopting

agroforestry, many (29.41%) of the respondents earned

Php 3,001 to Php 5,000, 28.83% earned Php 9,001 and

above, 22.55% earned Php 5,001 to Php 7,000, 18 or

Ubeña Agroforestry Practices in Kinama, Rizal, Kalinga: A documentation and basis for intervention plan

IJELS-2022, 7(6), (ISSN: 2456-7620)

https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/ijels.76.52 462

17.65% earned Php 3,000 and below, and the rest (1.96%)

earned Php 7,001 to Php 9,000.

Monthly Income after Adopting Agroforestry Farming

Many (37.25%) of the respondents earned Php

9,001 and above, 25.49% earned Php 3,001 to Php 5,000,

20.59% earned Php 5,001 to Php 7,000, 11.76% earned

Php 3,000 and below, and the rest (4.90%) earned Php

7,001 to Php 9,000. These results show that their income

increased when the farmers adopted agroforestry farming.

Studies showed that agroforestry practices were able to

generate more income and increased the standard of living

through integrated farming system (Muza et al., 2019;

Dahlan & Kamal, 2014).

In conformity to this report, Gangadharappa et al.

(2003), stated that farmerswere found earning at an average

of $800 or Rs. 31466.20 every year from one acre of

agroforestry plot which is much profitable than any

traditional crop. The farmers were also able to save surplus

money in the bank, which is a healthy sign of economic

sustainability. He further reported that agroforestry is found

to be the most desirable strategy for maintaining social,

economic and ecological sustainability in India. This

findings prompted them to conduct a study in India to

investigate the following: the perception and attitude of

farmers towards agroforestry; the crop diversity maintained

in agroforestry; the adoption level of agroforestry practices;

and the ecological impact of agroforestry on the farmers. As

a result of their investigation, findings was found to be

significant on social, economic and ecological conditions of

the farmers. Among the social parameters celebration of

festivals, migration and communication exposure were

found to contribute more to the total impact of agroforestry

on farmers. While among the economic parameters, family

income, livestock possession and employment status were

found to contribute more to the total impact of agroforestry

on farmers. They concluded that agroforestry has brought

improvement in socio-economic and ecological conditions

of farmers by generating employment, increasing family

income, enhancing the drop diversity and reducing

dependency on natural forest. Therefore, development

agencies can use the success story of agroforestry to

stimulate other farmers to attain both natural resources and

socio-economic sustainability.

Relative to the above findings on agroforestry

practices (Desmewati et al., 2021) of Parungpanjang

FASP, reported that although it contributed to the income

of group members, however, the effects were found still

imbalanced which were influenced by the types of plant

cultivated, motivation and skills, and age relative ability to

manage land. Based on the results of their regression

analysis, age and land area were the two agroforestry

factors that influence farmer’s income. They suggested

therefore, that in order to sustain the contribution of

agroforestry system to the farmer’s income in the

Parungpanjang FASP, it is necessary to increase land

productivity by assessing profitable intercropped plant

types in corresponding soil or land characteristics and

minimum requirements of physical treatments.

Furthermore, FTSTRDC need to strengthen the capacity of

farmer’s group members by facilitating technical capacity

for training of good agricultural practices, including

facilitating the business model and market network of

agroforestry products.

Distance of Households to Farms

Majority of the respondents (52.94%) lived within

1 to 2 kilometers from their farm, 19.61% each lived in

less than a kilometre and 3 to 4 kilometres, 6.86% lived in

7 kilometers and above, and 0.98% lived in 5 to 6

kilometers away from the farm they till. Living within

reach to the farm affords a farmer closer supervision as

well as immediate attention and action on any need that

may suddenly occur. Time, effort and money that are

otherwise wasted unnecessarily due to distance are spared

for more profitable pursuits.

Membership to Organization

Most (72.55%) of the respondents are members of

cooperative and the rest (27.45%) are members of

Federation of Farmers. The result indicates that the farmer-

respondents have a positive concept on the role and benefit

provided by joining organizations hence, their willingness

to participative or to register as members of the

organization within their community.

In agreement to the importance of farmer’

organization, (Penunia, 2021) claimed that farmers’

organizations (FOs) are essential institutions for the

empowerment, poverty alleviation and advancement of

farmers and the rural poor. Politically, FOs strengthens the

political power of farmers, by increasing the likelihood

that their needs and opinions are heard by policy makers

and the public. Economically, FOs can help farmers gain

skills, access inputs, form enterprises, process and market

their products more effectively to generate their incomes.

By organizing, farmers can access information needed to

produce add value, market their commodities and develop

effective linkages with agencies such as financial service

providers, as well as output markets. FOs can achieve

economies of scale, thereby lowering costs and facilitating

the processing and marketing of agricultural commodities

for individual farmers. Marketing-oriented FOs can assist

their members purchase inputs, equipment, meet quality

standards and mange the drying, storage, grading,

cleaning, processing, packaging, branding, collection and

Ubeña Agroforestry Practices in Kinama, Rizal, Kalinga: A documentation and basis for intervention plan

IJELS-2022, 7(6), (ISSN: 2456-7620)

https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/ijels.76.52 463

transportation of produce. In this way FOs provide a more

reliable supply to buyers and sell larger quantities at higher

prices. Organized farmers have greater bargaining power

than individuals and are better able to negotiate with other

more powerful market players to ultimately increase the

profits that accrue to farmers rather than intermediaries

and buyers. The role of farmers’ organizations is to

empower and promote the leadership of rural women.

Moreover, farmers’ organization play an

important role to help members increase their access to

supports of information, capital, and technology; bring

benefits to members; and partly promote production,

enhance productivity, and increase income (Vu , Ho &

Hoi Le , 2011).

Source of Capital used for Agroforestry Farming

Most (73.53%) of the respondents borrow their

capital from cooperatives, 24.51% self-finance, and 1.96%

borrow from their friends. Result implied that the

respondents have insufficient capital to use in their

farming activities due to their minimal income (Table 2).

As commonly observed, most small farmers

borrow money for the requirement of capital. They borrow

money from large farmers or traders that they supply

various raw materials for cultivation of land or

moneylenders within the village. These moneylenders

charge a high rate of interest on the amount borrowed.

More specifically, capital can be the money that companies

use to buy resources, as well as the physical assets

companies use when producing goods or services, such as

factories and machinery. Capital is an important factor of

production because it allows labor and land to be

purchased.

The difficulties faced by small farmers due to

lack of capital include the following: the small farmers are

not able to do work properly; they don’t have enough

money to pay taxes; and as we all know that today’s time

the farmers need more capital than before to increase their

crop production. They are not able to do farming properly

because of lack of less land.

Without working capital, farms cannot reinvest in

their crops. Farmers are then not able to pay out their

employees, nor will they invest in new and reliable

equipment. Farms are an industry in which having money

leads to making money, and not having money makes it

impossible to continue generating revenue. A working

capital loan makes it possible for a farm to remain open

during lean times and eventually recover. Even though

having strong working capital is essential to farm business,

many of them struggle to maintain this buffer. Even when

working capital is achieved, it can be wiped out by issue s

as they arise ( My company, n.d.).

Agroforestry Farming Practices Adopted

The agroforestry farming practices adopted by

respondents is presented in Table 5. Almost all (96.08%)

of the respondents adopted multistorey system, 1.96%

adopted intercropping and the rest adopted silvopasture

and windbreak.

Table 2. Agroforestry Farming Practices Adopted by the Respondents

Agroforestry Practices

Frequency

(f)

Percent

(%)

Rank

Multistorey

Intercropping

Silvopasture

Windbreak

Total

98

2

1

102

96.08

1.96

0.98

100.00

1

2

3

The results imply that the farmers were

knowledgeable in multistorey agroforestry practices

because of the multifarious benefits derived from it. They

also observed that the more species they plant, the more

harvest/products they could derive resulting to more

income. This holds true to the findings of Sharma et al.

(2020), that multi-storied cropping is found to be

sustainable productivity by which natural resources are

utilized efficiently to enhance productivity of the main

crop (15-20%) and high revenue realization per unit area

(50-90%).

Components of Agroforestry Farming Practices

Table 2a shows that Narra (Pterocarpus indicus),

yemane, acacia, mango, citrus and rambutan were the

major trees used, while pigeon pea and banana were the

major agrticultural crops integrated in their multi-storey

farm. Farmers did not integrate livestock because of the

fear that their animals will only graze and destroy their

Ubeña Agroforestry Practices in Kinama, Rizal, Kalinga: A documentation and basis for intervention plan

IJELS-2022, 7(6), (ISSN: 2456-7620)

https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/ijels.76.52 464

trees and crops which they have mentioned during the interview.

Table 2a. Components of Agroforestry Farming Practices Adopted by Respondents

Components of Agroforestry

Practices

Frequency

N=102

Percent

(%)

Forest Trees

Yemane

Mahogany

102

48

100.00

47.06

Fruit Trees

Mango

Citrus

Rambutan

Lanzones

Coffee

Crops

Corn

Pigeon pea

Eggplant

Banana

Livestock

Cattle

Carabao

99

97

85

56

5

27

92

2

92

3

1

97.06

95.10

83.33

54.90

4.90

26.47

90.20

1.96

90.20

2.94

0.98

According to Fern (2022), yemane tree has

suitable characteristics for agroforestry, with fast growth,

ease of establishment, and relative freedom from pest

outside its natural range. It is an especially promising

fuelwood species and can be intercropped with crops like

maize and cassava which has been found beneficial in

increasing the simultaneous production of wood and food.

It is also used as windbreak and as a hedge.

Benefits of Agroforestry Farming Practices Adopted by

the Farmers

Table 3 shows the economic, environmental and

cultural benefits of agroforestry farming practices adopted

by the farmers. On the general benefits derived from

agroforestry farming, the environmental aspect was rated

the highest with a mean of 3.35 (highly benefit)) followed

by economic benefit with a mean of 3.04. The cultural

aspect was the least rated with a mean of 2.33 (fairly

benefited).

The environment benefit was observed and was

claimed to be favored by the upland farmer-respondents

because somehow, it was able to address their problem on

soil erosion which is experienced particularly during rainy

season and the occurrence of typhoons. These benefits

observed reflect the protective function of agroforestry.

Considering the other aspects under the

environmental benefits, soil erosion, flood and drought

control, carbon sequestration and improvement of water

quality were rated highly benefited with means of 3.60,

3.51, 3.50, and 3.43 respectively. This is the reason why

they have adopted the multi-system because the forest

trees and fruit trees they have planted had addressed their

problems on soil erosion, drought and flood which were

attributed to the multi-functions of trees in their upland

farms. This result also conforms to the claim of Sharma et

al. (2020), that multi-storey cropping reduces the impact of

hazards like soil erosion, flood and landslide. Additionally,

she reported that it can also sequester carbon over pure

stands; that the presence of cover crops will also enhance

the soil carbon content, thus participating in climate

change mitigation; and likewise improves soil health and

soil fertility, reduce weed, pest and disease, enrich

biodiversity, and maintain ecological balance.

Ubeña Agroforestry Practices in Kinama, Rizal, Kalinga: A documentation and basis for intervention plan

IJELS-2022, 7(6), (ISSN: 2456-7620)

https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/ijels.76.52 465

Table 3. Benefits of Agroforestry Farming Practices Adopted by the Respondents

Benefits of Agroforestry Practices

Mean

Descriptive Equivalent

A. Economic Benefits

1. Source of food

2. Source of feed/fodder for animal

3. Source of herbal medicine

4. Source of lumber and construction

materials

5. Source of fuel wood

6. Source of income

7. Source of green manure/

Soil fertility

Mean

B. Environmental Benefits

1. Climate amelioration

2. Improvement of water quality

3. Pest and disease control

4. Flood and drought control

5. Increase water quantity

6. Increase crop production

7. Soil erosion control

8. Soil formation and fertility

Improvement

9. Carbon sequestration

10.Biodiversity conservation

Mean

C. Cultural Benefits

1. Landscape improvement

2. Historical consideration

3. Spiritual consideration

4. Aesthetic considerations

Mean

3.43

2.68

2.56

3.37

2.97

2.84

3.04

3.37

3.43

3.25

3.51

3.32

2.91

3.60

3.37

3.50

3.33

3.35

3.07

1.87

1.86

2.51

2.33

Highly Benefited

Moderately Benefited

Fairly Benefited

Moderately Benefited

Highly Benefited

Moderately Benefited

Highly Benefited

Moderately Benefited

Highly Benefited

Moderately Benefited

Highly Benefited

Moderately Benefited

Fairly Benefited

Legend:

4.20 – 5.00 Very Highly Benefited

3.40 – 4.19 Highly Benefited

2.60 – 3.39 Moderately Benefited

1.80 – 2.59 Fairly Benefited

1.00 – 1.79 Not Benefited

Ubeña Agroforestry Practices in Kinama, Rizal, Kalinga: A documentation and basis for intervention plan

IJELS-2022, 7(6), (ISSN: 2456-7620)

https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/ijels.76.52 466

Furthermore, increased crop production was rated

the lowest due to the large population of trees present in

their multi-storey practice that limited the space for the

production of agricultural crops. On the economic benefits,

source of food was rated the highest with a mean of 3.43

(highly benefited) followed by the source of lumber and

construction materials, source of fuel wood, source of

income, source of green manure/soil fertility, source of

feed/fodder for the animal which ware rated were

moderately benefited, The source of herbal medicine was

the least with a mean of 2.56 (fairly benefited).

In terms of the cultural benefits, landscape

improvement was rated moderately benefited and the rest

such as historical, spiritual consideration and aesthetic

values were rated fairly rated benefited. Nevertheless, the

presence of the diverse species of trees and crops had

contributed to the beauty and improved the total landscape

of their agroforestry farms.

The results of the study on the benefits derived

when adopting agroforestry practices agrees to the claim of

(Zada et al., 2022), that agroforestry provides several

benefits to the household like income, food, firewood and

construction and improving not only the cultural,

environmental but primarily the socio-economic needs of

farmers (Gangahharappa et al.,2003).

Problems Encountered by the Respondents

Table 4 presents the problems as well as the

degree of seriousness encountered by the respondents in

their agroforestry farming practices.

On the farmers’ problem such as low

productivity, occurrence of pest/diseases, high cost of

production, and seed quality were all rated fairly serious,

while on the resource problems of farmers such

as small farm size , inadequate water availability, poor

land quality (e.g. soil class, soil texture & soil type) , were

all rated fairly serious, while on poor location ( e.g. access

to market and other services), it was moderately serious,

and the non-ownership of land and unstable status (tenant)

was rated not serious.

On Inadequate capital, poor access to credit and

lack of financial assistance were rated fairly serious. On

the institutional aspect, the lack of infrastructure and slow

delivery of support services were both rated moderately

serious.

In terms of other problems encountered by

farmers such as distance of farm to the household, lack of

skills in farming, erratic weather conditions, forest fire

were rated moderately serious, while the technology of

farming practices was claimed not sound which was rated

fairly serious.

Additionally, on the overall problems experienced

by farmers, results show that the problem on resources

such as small farm size, non-ownership of land and

unstable status (tenant), inadequate water availability, poor

land quality (e.g. soil class, soil texture & soil type), and

poor location ( e.g. access to market and other services)

were identified as highly serious problems that affected

their adoption of agroforestry practices with a rated mean

of 3.99. Despite that all of the farmer-respondents are

owners of the land they are cultivating and have devoted 1-

5 ha of land for agroforestry farming, they still face a

problem in bringing or transporting their products to the

market because of the long distance from the source of

products to the market, particularly so when perishable

products are transported.

The slow delivery of support services such as

technical assistance, loans, farm inputs such as seeds,

fertilizers and other planting materials were also identified

as problems that brought about low productivity.

On the overall results as classified, it was

observed that the problem on resources was the highest

with a descriptive rating of highly serious followed by

institutional linkages (moderately serious), while the

inadequacy of labor, farmer’s problem, and inadequate

capital were rated fairly serious.

Table 4. Problems Encountered in the Adoption of Agroforestry Farming Practices Based on Classification .

Classification

Mean

Descriptive Equivalent

A. Farmers Problem

1. Low productivity

2. Occurrence of Pest/diseases

3. High cost of production

4. Seed quality

Mean

2.32

2.02

2.33

1.96

2.16

Fairly Serious

Fairly serious

Fairly Serious

Ubeña Agroforestry Practices in Kinama, Rizal, Kalinga: A documentation and basis for intervention plan

IJELS-2022, 7(6), (ISSN: 2456-7620)

https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/ijels.76.52 467

Continuation of Table 4

C. Inadequate Labor 4

1. Low productivity of labor

2. Underutilization of farm labor

3. Limited opportunity of farm labor

4. Limited supply of family labor

Mean

D. Inadequate Capital

1. Poor access to credit

2. Lack of financial assistance

Mean

E. Institutional Linkages

1. Lack of infrastructure

2. Slow delivery of support services

Mean

F. Other Problems

1. Distance of farm to the household

2. Technology of farming practices

not sound

3. Lack of skills in Farming

4. Erratic weather condition

5. Forest fire

Mean

Grand Mean

2.27

2.23

2.26

2.34

2.28

1.88

1.98

1.93

2.69

2.67

2.68

2.43

2.17

2.60

2.73

2.78

2.54

2.59

Fairly Serious

Fairly Serous

Fairly Serious

Moderately Serious

Fairly Serious

Moderately Serious

Fairly Serious

Legend:

4.20 – 5.00 Very Highly Serious

3.40 – 4.19 Highly Serious

2.60 – 3.39 Moderately Serious

1.80 – 2.59 Fairly Serious

1.00 – 1.79 Not Serious

Correlation Analysis

Table 5 shows the correlation analysis of income in agroforestry practices, educational attainment and years in

agroforestry farming.

Table 5. Correlation Analysis of Income in Agroforestry Practices, Educational Attainment and Years in Agroforestry

Farming.

Income in Agroforestry farming

Income in agroforestry farming

Pearson’s Correlation

1

Ubeña Agroforestry Practices in Kinama, Rizal, Kalinga: A documentation and basis for intervention plan

IJELS-2022, 7(6), (ISSN: 2456-7620)

https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/ijels.76.52 468

Sig. (2-tailed)

N

102

Educational attainment

Pearson’s Correlation

0.058

Sig. (2-tailed)

0.559

N

102

Years in agroforestry farming

Pearson’s Correlation

-0.065

Sig. (2-tailed)

0.515

N

102

Legend:

N – Number of respondents

Results show that there is no significant relationship

of income in agroforestry to educational attainment and

years in farming. Income in agroforestry farming and

educational attainment is markedly low and negligible

positive correlation, while income in agroforestry farming

and number of years in farming is markedly low and

negligible negative correlation. The results of this study

contradicted the result of the study conducted by Iduma et

al. (2020), that farmers with higher number of years of

farming experience are likely to produce higher yield than

those with fewer years of experience and those with better

education have better chance of increasing their farm

output especially when they bring the acquired knowledge

they have acquired in their years of education to bare in

their farming activities.

V. CONCLUSIONS

Based on the results of the study the following

conclusions were drawn:

1. A great majority of the respondents were males

and almost were married. Many belonged to the age group

of 41 to 50 years old. In terms of educational attainment,

many of the farmer-respondents have obtained elementary

education and almost were Ikalingas. All the respondents

were owner operators, and engaged in agroforestry

farming for 6-8 years. A great majority have 1 to 5

hectares devoted for agroforestry farming. Almost all of

the respondents were not only owner operators but act as

laborers in their agroforestry farms earning a monthly

income of Php 3,000 and below (before adopting

agroforestry practices). Some of them earned Php 3,001 to

Php 5,000 and Php 9,001 and above. Many of the farmers

earned Php 9,001 and above during the adoption of

agroforestry practices. Majority of the respondents have 1

to 2 kilometer - distance from their households to their

farms. To sustain their agroforestry farming activity, most

of them borrow their capital farming from cooperative

present within their community.

2. Almost all of the farmers are engaged in

multistorey farming with tree components of yemane,

mahogany, mango, citrus, rambutan, lanzones and coffee.

The agricultural crops that are integrated are pigeon pea,

banana, corn and eggplant were the integrated/under shade

crops used by the farmers.

3. In terms of benefits of agroforestry farming

practices, the farmers claimed to be moderately benefited

on economic and environmental benefits and they are

fairly benefitted on cultural aspects.

4. The degree of seriousness of the overall

problems/constraints encountered by the farmer-

respondents is fairly serious.

5. Income derived from the adoption of

agroforestry farming practices and educational attainment

is markedly low and negligible positive correlation, while

income from agroforestry farming practices and number of

years engaged in agroforestry farming is markedly low and

negligible negative correlation.

VI. RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on the above findings, the following

recommendations are presented:

1. Agroforestry farmers should be technically and

financially assisted to improve and arrive to a sustainable

production and income.

2. Initiative should be considered among the

community people and the government or non-government

organizations via financial and technical assistance to equip

or empower the farmers by conducting hands-on-training,

seminars and capability building to pursue a more

sustainable agroforestry production and improve the socio-

Ubeña Agroforestry Practices in Kinama, Rizal, Kalinga: A documentation and basis for intervention plan

IJELS-2022, 7(6), (ISSN: 2456-7620)

https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/ijels.76.52 469

economic condition of the farmers in the upland barangays of

Rizal, Kalinga.

3. Provision of post-harvest facilities and

trainings in consideration to the lack of accessibility to

farm and to market roads so as to preserve their perishable

goods and not just go wasted.

4. Monitoring and fast delivery of support

services such as planting materials and farm inputs such as

fertilizers and pesticides be provided to address their

problems on the occurrence of pests and diseases for a

higher production.

5. And since there was an observed increase of

income of upland farmers when they have engaged in

agroforestry farming as compared to their income when

they have not yet adopted agroforestry farming, would

motivate or serve as a welcome opportunity and initiative

in forging partnership between Local Government Units

and the upland farmers of Kalinga in the provision of farm

to market road to ease the burden of transporting their

agroforestry products to the market particularly the

perishable ones. It should be noted that agroforestry

farming has become their source of livelihood and

survival; hence, this should be one of the focus and

concerns of the LGs as part of their plan of

programs/projects.

6. Similar study must be conducted to determine

the income generated from the tree species planted in their

integrated multi-storey farms.

7. Formulate an intervention plan to appropriately

address the problems encountered by the farmer-

respondents in the pursuit of sustainable agroforestry

farming in the upland barangays of Rizal, Kalinga.

REFERENCES

[1] Balbuena, D.N. and Javillonar, J.J. (2018). Technology for

Life: Factors Affecting Agroforetry Technology adoption

among Upland Farmers in Rizal, Kalinga. Unpublished

Undergraduate Thesis. Kalinga State University.

[2] Bayon, A., Bayongan, L. and Barcellano, E.V. (2016).

Callagdao Agroforestry: A Sustainable Strategy for Food

Sufficiency and Environmental Security. A research paper

presented during 2

nd

International Agroforestry Congress.

Kalinga State University, Tabuk, Kalinga, Philippines.

Retrieved on August 2022 from

http://repository.lppm.unila.ac.id/2191/1/Book-of-

Abstracts.pdf

[3] Brown, S.E., Miller, D.C. & Baylis, K. (2018). Evidence for

the impacts of agroforestry on agricultural productivity,

ecosystem services, and human well-being in high- income

countries: a systematic map protocol. Retrieved on August

10, 2022 from Environ

Evid 7, 24.https://doi.org/10.1186/s13750-018-0136-0.

[4] Dai, X., Pu, L., & Rao, F. (2017). Assessing the Effect of A

Crop-Tree Intercropping Program On Smallholders’

Incomes In Rural Xinjiang, China. Retrieved On September

02, 2022 From File:///C:/Users/Dell/Downloads/

Sustainability-09-01542.Pdf.

[5] Desmewati, D. et al. (2021). Contribution of agroforestry

systems to farmer income instate forest areas: A case study

of Parungpangjang, Indonesia. Forest SocietyRegular

Research paper. Vol. 5(1):109-119, April 2021 Regular

Research Article

Retrieved from http[://dx.doi.org/10.24259/fs.v511.11223

on September 1, 2022.

[6] Dulay,M.P.(2015), Indigenous Agroforestry Systems of

Ifugao, Philippines, Resources and

Environment, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 45-51. Retrieved from:

http://article.sapub.org/10.5923.j.re.20150501.04.html on

February 16,2022.

[7] Fern, K. (2022). Tropical Plants Database. Retrieved on

March 2022 from https://tropical.the.fern

[8] Finley, K. A. & Ryan, M. R. (2018). Advancing

Intercropping Research and Practices in Industrialized

Agricultural Landscapes. Retrieved on September 02, 2022

from File:///C:/Users/Dell/Downloads/Agriculture-08-

00080%20(1).Pdf.

[9] Franzen, B. (2020). What is Agroforestry? An article

published in Eco Matcher. Retrieved on September 2022

from https://www.ecomatcher.com

[10] Gacutan, E. (2012). Adoptability of Five (5) Dragon Fruit

Plant Varieties Planted in Calamansi-Based Agroforestry

System at DMMMSU-NLUC, Bacnotan, La Union.

Unpublished MS Thesis, DMMMSU-NLUC, Bacnotan, La

Union.

[11] Gangadharappa, N.R., Shivamurthy, M., Ganesamoorthi, S.

(2003). Agroforestry-A Viable Alternative for Social,

Economic and Ecological Sustainability. A paper submitted

to the XII World Forestry Congress, 2003. Retrieved on

September 2022 from https://www.fao.org/3/xii/0051-

b5.htm.

[12] Helfand, S. M. and Taylors, M. P. H. (2020).The inverse

relationship between farms sizesand productivity:

Refocusing the debate. Retrieved from

https:doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2020.101977 on April2,

2022.

[13] Iduma, F.O., Awe, F., Owombo, P.O. (2020). Factors

Influencing Farm Output and Income among Agroforestry

Farmers of the fringe Communities of Sapoba Forest, Edo

State Nigeria. Tanzania Journal of Agriculture Sciences Vol.

19 No. 2, 107-115.

[14] Iduma, F.O., Awe, F., Owombo, P.O. (2020). Factors

Influencing Farm Output and Incomeamong Agroforestry

Farmers of the fringe Communities of Sapoba Forest, Edo

State Nigeria. Tanzania Journal of Agriculture Sciences Vol.

19 No. 2, 107-115.

[15] Latap, N.S. (2015).Documentation of Agroforestry Farming

Systems in Ifugao, Philippines Volume 4, Issue 7, pages

2309-2318, International Journal of Science and Research

(IJSR). Published July 2015.

Ubeña Agroforestry Practices in Kinama, Rizal, Kalinga: A documentation and basis for intervention plan

IJELS-2022, 7(6), (ISSN: 2456-7620)

https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/ijels.76.52 470

[16] Leaky, R. (2017). Definition of Agroforestry Revisited. In:

Multifunctional Agriculture-Achieving Sustainable

Development in Africa. RRB Leaky, 5-6, academic Press,

San Diego, California, USA. Research gate. Retrieved on

January 2022 from

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/284100284_Defini

tion_of_agroforestry_revisited.pdf

[17] Sobola, O,O., Amadi, D.C., & Jamala, G.Y. (2015). The

Role of Agroforestry In Environmental Sustainability.

Retrieved on January 28, 2019 from

File:///C:/Users/Dell/Downloads/2015amadiroleofagroforest

ry%20(1).Pdf.

[18] Shin, S., Soe, K.T., Lee, H., Kim,T.H., Lee, S. & Park, M.S.

(2020). A Systematic Map of Agroforestry Research

Focusing on Ecosystem Services in the Asia-Pacific Region.

Retrieved on March 10, 2022 from Forests 2020, 11, 368;

doi:10.3390/f11040368 www.mdpi.com/journal/forests

Forests 2020, 11, 368 2 of 23.

[19] SEARCA. (2021). Agroforestry Status, Trends, and Outlook

in Southeast Asia. Retrieved on August 10, 2022 from

https://www.searca.org/pubs.

[20] Yasin, G., Nawaz, M.F., Martin, T.A., Niazi, N.K., Gul, S.,

Yousuf, M.T. (2019). Evaluation of Agroforestry Carbon

Storage Status and Potential in Irrigated plains of Pakistan.

An article published in Forests. MDPI.