Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
Agroforestry vs Permaculture
Transcript of Agroforestry vs Permaculture
“land use system that involves the deliberate retention, introduction or mixing of trees or other plants into crop and animal production systems in order to increase profitability, sustainability, protection of the environment and social acceptance. Agroforestry is:
Intentional – designed and managed for a planned result
Intensive – all components are intensively managed
Integrated – a blend of agriculture, forestry and environmental science
Interactive – designed to minimize negative and maximize positive interactions between trees, other crops and livestock.”
British Columbia, the Ministry of Agriculture
“an intensive land management system that optimizes the benefits from the biological interactions created when trees and/or shrubs are deliberately combined with crops and/or livestock,”
Association for Temperate Agroforestry (AFTA)
“agroforestry intentionally combines agriculture and forestry to create integrated and sustainable land-use systems. Agroforestry takes advantage of the interactive benefits from combining trees and shrubs with crops and/or livestock.”
USDA’s National Agroforestry Centre (NAC)
There are many other published definitions that are minor variations on these themes of the deliberate integration of agriculture and forestry (silviculture) to optimize social, economic or environmental benefits that result from managing the interactions.
On the global stage the only overt difference from these temperate examples is the inclusion of the concept of integrating practices in time in addition to sharing the same physical space (so as to include various traditional swidden agricultural practices.
“land use systems and practices in which woody perennials are deliberately integrated with crops and/or animals on the same land management unit. The integration can be either in a spatial mixture or in a temporal sequence. There are normally both ecological and economic interactions between woody and non-woody components in agroforestry”.
World Agroforestry Centre
“a technique where tree and crops are grown together so as to optimize the productivity in a given space and time.”
International Union of Forest Research Organizations (IUFRO)
Agroforestry as a defined field of endeavor is relatively new, emerging from international development efforts and literature in the early 1970s, and entering the formal lexicon in the mid 1970s (e.g. Webster’s dictionary added an entry for agroforestry in 1977).
Permaculture has a more focused origin from the mindspace of Australians David Holmgren and Bill Mollison in their 1978 publication “Permaculture One“.
Their original concept of permaculture encompassed agroecological systems to achieve “permanent agriculture” but it has evolved over time and it now generally accepted to denote design and practices for “permanent culture” as a means to achieve sustainability.
Permaculture practitioners attempt to replicate growth patterns observed in “nature” through production systems of food plant configurations that resemble their “wild” origins.
‘Design permaculture’ moves beyond food systems to use the connections and underlying ecological principles observed in naturally functioning ecosystems as a basis for planning all manner of human systems (habitation, waste recovery and recycling, transportation, etc.) .
The two fields of endeavor are most certainly complementary, with the modern interpretation on permaculture being more broadly applied to all human activities, and agroforestry confined within the realms of natural resource management.
Both rely heavily on incorporating woody perennial plants into their systems; all agroforestry practices involve the production of trees and/or shrubs, and it is common, but not a necessary component of permaculture.
For example, permaculture has embraced the concept of the
(a form of
in the agroforestry realm), but you can have permaculture food systems without a tree/shrub component, as long as it mimics some other natural plant community or process.
Permaculture limits it’s design to arrangements that occur in natural systems.
Agroforestry includes some practices that are completely a human construct but that still generate valuable ecosystems services.
For example the
created through narrow shelterbelts, living fences or fenceline plantings of trees and shrubs do not occur in nature, but they are a pragmatic approach for increasing the protective benefits (from wind erosion), the structural and species diversity, carbon sequestration and water and nutrient cycling in agricultural landscapes with displacing conventional production.
There is also a marked difference in the
of agroforestry and permaculture.
has permeated the global lexicon to greater extent (though not necessarily in North America) and is embedded institutionally in government and academic programs and institute names all over the world.
Search any large library catalog (e.g. US Library of Congress) and you will find many more academic papers and books tagged to ‘
’ than ‘
Permaculture institutes are also found around the world (in at least 100 countries), but they remain more as a ‘grassroots’ organization.
This is likely a product of it’s ‘multilevel marketing’ approach to disseminating information.
is also more demanding of it’s practioners as a holistic philosophical approach agriculture and society. It is a more all-encompassing lifestyle approach than
which as a group of activities can be applied as a means to diversify or complement any existing forest or agricultural system without replacing them.
To summarize, both systems have foundations in
to achieve social and environmental goals, and even share common practices.
They differ however, in scope, depth of the philosophical approach and applications.