13 ramni-jamnadass-icraf-trees-food-nutrition-tree-diversity-day-2014
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
1 like•1,153 views
Trees, landscapes, restoration, Tree Diversity Day 2014, CBD, biodiversity, invasive species, seedlings, policy, food, diet, medicinal plants, Aichi targets, nutrition
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to 13 ramni-jamnadass-icraf-trees-food-nutrition-tree-diversity-day-2014
Similar to 13 ramni-jamnadass-icraf-trees-food-nutrition-tree-diversity-day-2014 (20)
More from World Agroforestry (ICRAF)
More from World Agroforestry (ICRAF) (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
13 ramni-jamnadass-icraf-trees-food-nutrition-tree-diversity-day-2014
- 1. Trees for Food and Nutrition “Managing Forests for Food” Ramni Jamnadass PhD World Agroforestry Centre http://www.worldagroforestry.org/
- 2. Statistics • 842 million people hungry globally; highest prevalence in Africa and then Asia • Lack of diversity in the diet is associated with deficiency of essential vitamins and minerals -known as hidden hunger; more than 2 billion people worldwide suffer from vitamin and mineral deficiencies, primarily iodine, iron, vitamin A and zinc, with important health consequences • An estimated 80 per cent of the world’s stunted children live in just 14 developing countries. Stunting can kill opportunities in life for a child and kill opportunities for development of a nation due to poor development of cognitive faculties. • Hidden hunger causes nearly 45% of deaths in children under five - 3.1 million annually; 66 million attend classes hungry -23 million in Africa. • Women and children most vulnerable; around half of all pregnant women in developing countries are anemic causing over 200,000 deaths during child birth each year. • Research confirms that in the hands of women, an increase in family income improves children’s health and nutrition
- 3. Proposed SDG goal 2 and 3
- 4. 1.6 billion people depend in part or fully on forests and tree resources for their livelihoods.
- 5. Working title: ‘Managing Forests for Food’ Direct and indirect roles of forests in food systems Indirect roles • Income • Bioenergy • Ecosystem Services Direct • Nutrition and Health – Food and fodder – Medicinals Challenges and opportunities Fertilizer trees FMNR Sustainable use and conservation
- 6. Meta analysis and reviews: Contribution of forest, non-forest and tree crop income to household budget Poverty and Environment Network (PEN) Importance of NTFPs for rural communities in the tropics. Belcher et al., 2005 Examples of tree-species-rich agroforests in Africa, Asia and Latin America, with information on tree uses (with particular reference to possible human food use). Steffan-Dewenter et al., 2007 The management of tree genetic resources and the livelihoods of rural communities in the tropics: non-timber forest products, smallholder agroforestry practices and tree commodity crops. Dawson et al., 2014 State of World’s Forest Genetic Resources FAO 2014
- 7. Function Africa Oceania South America South Central Asia South east Asia West Asia & Middle East Total regions Apiculture 177 (50) 84 (31) 83 (39) 108 (31) 121 (38) 34 (47) 607 (40) Erosion control 175 (54) 70 (29) 57 (40) 120 (48) 117 (48) 32 (53) 571 (47) Fibre 141 (40) 93 (38) 60 (33) 133 (45) 149 (45) 32 (56) 608 (42) Fodder 295 (55) 101 (30) 96 (45) 217 (52) 191 (47) 61 (57) 961 (49) Food 295 (54) 124 (35) 119 (43) 220 (49) 225 (49) 62 (55) 1,045 (48) Fuel 357 (53) 147 (35) 126 (42) 243 (45) 249 (47) 62 (56) 1,184 (47) Medicine 390 (57) 159 (36) 144 (40) 298 (50) 314 (50) 67 (55) 1,372 (50) Shade shelter 281 (51) 131 (40) 104 (42) 193 (44) 202 (48) 46 (57) 957 (47) Fertilize soil 194 (51) 83 (33) 73 (45) 143 (42) 154 (45) 26 (46) 673 (45) Timber 419 (53) 192 (38) 158 (42) 313 (49) 347 (50) 70 (51) 1,499 (48)
- 8. Stunting: chronic malnutrition Highest stunting prevalence: SSA & SA UNICEF Report 2013: Improving child nutrition, the achievable imperative for global progress
- 9. Case Studies : e.g. Western Kenya (i) Document fruit tree species diversity and fruit consumption of farming households; (ii) Understand perceptions of men and women regarding fruit production and consumption 370 households (HHs) (basic data, fruit production + consumption, perceptions); fruit tree inventories in 100 HHs; market surveys; focus groups discussions (separately for males/females) 9 Examples of surveyed farms in humid (left) and dry (right) environments in Western Kenya
- 10. Results: Consumption data • Availability: 78% have a homegarden, 85% grow vegetables, 80% fruits, 89% have livestock • Only 28% of HHs had fruit the day before (8% vitamin A-rich fruit) • Typical diet: Cereals, oil/fat, beverages, vegetables, sweets/sugar 0 20 40 60 80 11000 Organ meat Eggs Vit A rich vegetables/tubers Flesh meats Vitamin A rich fruits White tubers Other fruits Legumes, nuts, seeds Fish Milk and milk products Dark green leafy vegetables Sweets Other vegetables Spices, condiments, beverages Oil and fats Cereals % of HHs that consumed the food the day before
- 11. Fruit tree portfolio for vitamin supply Vitamin A and C supply possible year-round English name Species name Jan Feb Mar Hunger gap Apri l May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Vit C Vit A Tickberry Lantana camara Pawpaw Carica papaya + +++ Mango Mangifera indica + +++ Banana Musa x paradisiaca Loquat Eriobotrya japonica +++ Mulberry Morus alba (+) Tamarind Tamarindus indica Waterberry Syzygium spp. +++ Custard apple Annona reticulata (+) Guava Psidium guajava +++ + Pomegranate Punica granatum White sapote Casimiroa edulis (+) Wild medlar Vangueria madagascariensis Lemon Citrus limon + Orange Citrus sinensis + Chocolate berry Vitex payos +++ Avocado Persea americana Passionfruit Passiflora edulis + Jacket plum Pappea capensis Desert date Balanites aegyptiaca (+) Bush plum Carissa edulis Available species 2 4 6 4 4 5 4 2 3 1 2 2 By cultivation of 8-13 fruit tree species on each farm
- 12. Sources: Freedman (1998) Famine foods.
- 13. Fodder for livestock systems • Protein supplementation • Supplement shortages in times of extreme climatic conditions e.g. droughts as they are deep rooted. • Fodder trees are easy to grow, require little land, labor or capital, • Can sequester carbon through biomass and improve soil carbon • Evidence on increased milk yields and income
- 14. Seré and Steinfeld (1996)
- 15. Review would be appropriate as there are no comprehensive reviews or statistics on the use of fodder trees. FAO has a database on forages, including some fodder trees, but it is very incomplete. Animal Feed Resources Information System (AFRIS) and has been rechristened as Feedipedia – Animal Feed Resources Information System.
- 16. INCOME FROM FORESTS/ AGROFORESTRY PRODUCTS The global export values of tree/AF-based products stood at US $228 billion in 2011 (FAO), growing on average 15%/year. The figure still may under-estimate the smallholder contribution – over 90% smallholder contribution in coffee, cocoa production in Indonesia. In turn, unlike PEN on forest/NTFP, systematic studies on HH income contribution of AF products are lacking, except separate reports - 30% by mango AF in Bangladesh, 32% horticulture income in Kenya.
- 17. 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Global Latin America Asia Africa relative income (% of total) natural forest plantation forest non-forest environment Forest/non-forest income contribution to total income (Anglesen et al.2014) Income contribution to household budgets of rural people is widely varied from 10%-80%, depending on contexts, with the higher contribution among the poorer groups. PEN systematic study reveals on average 22% of incomes from forest and 6.4% from non-forest wild lands is mainly f or food, woodfuel, structure & fiber.
- 18. Benefits of woodfuel in sub-Saharan Africa 2.5 billion people depend on biomass energy for cooking -87% is wood based (IEA 2006). In SSA, 90% of the population rely on woodfuel (firewood and charcoal) (IEA, 2006). Charcoal industry annually in Africa is worth >US$ 11 billion employing >7m people in 2030 will be US$12 billion and 12 million people (World Bank, 2011, FAO, 2014,) In Kenya >Ksh32 billion (US$427m), compares -Ksh35 billion (US$467m) from tea industry
- 19. Impacts of woodfuel on health and enviroment Negative health effects (i) household IAP- 4 million annual deaths globally from respiratory infections affecting mostly women and children. (Lim et al, 2012). Traditional cooking practices in India & Kenya and sourcing firewood in Kenya (ii) sourcing firewood -head, spinal injury to women and children, time and calorific energy expenditure.
- 20. Resource degradation Woodfuel scarcity Inferior cooking practice Food insecurity/malnutrition More time for collection Preliminary result* of a mini-review on literature on bioenergy/food security energy-food security/ nutrition hypotheses discussed ? by SIANI (SEI-CIFOR-ICRAF) if discussed, main focus? if discussed, mainly woodfuel? if discussed, empirical evidence? if discussed, income/ wealth differentiation considered? if discussed, gender perspective considered? 29% 50% 67% 33% 67% 83% At the same time, more literature on health/nutrition without energy links Serious knowledge gaps on woodfuel-food security/nutrition links!
- 21. Environmental Services: Forests/Agroforests and Income 20% increased coffee yields within 1 km Ricketts, 2004. Conservation Biology 18, 1262-1271
- 22. Soil Fertility: Trees and shrubs for increased crop production In terms of planting of trees and crops, more than 160,000 Zambian farmers now grow food crops under Faidherbia trees. More than 200,000 farmers in Malawi have recently been testing tree-maize intercrop systems.
- 23. Public Private partnerships Income generation and nutrition sensitive value chains
- 24. Challenges and Opportunities: Biological, Economic and Social Lack of information/data (common methodology): – Nutritional quality of tree food products – Consumption – Income in informal and formal markets – Knowledge gaps on woodfuel-food security/nutrition links! – Building on data on geneflow, pollinators, physiology..etc. – No comprehensive reviews or statistics on the use of fodder trees, fuelwood with respect to nutrition. – Etc. Attention required – Improved management of tree genetic resources i.e. paying attention both to domestication if local nutritious tree foods; development of cultivars for farming lands – Nutrition sensitive value chains….private and public sector – Supporting systems by which improved germplasm is delivered to farmers and hence communities ( market systems) – For tree commodity crops, more attention is needed on the valuation of wild and semi-wild genetic resources so that better methods for conservation that recognise value can be implemented. – Interdisciplinary and systematic research that deals with different scales and perspectives – Policies to promote dietary diversity where local/national tree foods are considered as well – Etc.
- 25. Ian Dawson Katja Kehlenbeck Miyuki Iiyama Stepha McMullin Sammy Carsan Daniel Ofori Mary Njenga Jens-Peter Barnekow Lillesø
Editor's Notes
- Giving women farmers more resources could bring the number of hungry people in the world down by 100 - 150 million people. Surveys in a wide range of countries have shown that 85 - 90 percent of the time spent on household food preparation is women’s time. In some countries, tradition dictates that women eat last, after all the male members and children have been fed.
- No one can deny that the Millennium Development Goals have focused the world’s attention on critical issues and have saved lives. But most of the successes have been unrelated or indirectly related to achievements in improving the nutritional status of the worlds’ most vulnerable—and improving nutrition is one of the most powerful ways to advance health and development. As global leaders move toward the Sustainable Development Goals, we need to invest in leadership and capacity development for improved nutrition - See more at: http://globalnutritionreport.org/tag/global-nutrition-report/#sthash.av2srSmD.dpuf As the SDGs are potentially the major accountability mechanism for the post 2015 era we are particularly interested in them as they aims to promote accountability in nutrition. The elemental role played by trees in the lives of rural people in the tropics appears obvious through the many uses made of tree products, in construction, fencing, furniture, foods, medicines, fibres, fuels and in livestock feed, and in their cultural value. Indeed, in a World Bank report published a few years ago, forests and trees-outside-forests were reported to contribute to the livelihoods of more than 1.6 billion people worldwide (World Bank, 2008). In 2015 world leaders will agree on a set of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and set targets for simultaneous progress on poverty reduction, security of water, energy, food, diet and nutrition, climate resilience, livelihoods, governance and gender equity. In 2015 world leaders will agree on a set of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and set targets for simultaneous progress on poverty reduction, security of water, energy, food, diet and nutrition, climate resilience, livelihoods, governance and gender equity. The term "food system" is used frequently in discussions about nutrition, food, health, community economic development and agriculture. A food system includes all processes and infrastructure involved in feeding a population: growing, harvesting, processing, packaging, transporting, marketing, consumption, and disposal of food and food-related items. It also includes the inputs needed and outputs generated at each of these steps. A food system operates within and is influenced by social, political, economic and environmental contexts. It also requires human resources that provide labor, research and education. Food systems are either conventional or alternative according to their model of food lifespan from origin to plate.[1][2][3]
- An estimated 1.6 billion people depend in part or fully on forests and tree resources for their livelihoods. More than 800 million (30% of the global rural population) live in the 9.5 million km2 of agricultural lands (45% of total area) with >10% tree cover; 180 million in the 3.5 million km2 agricultural lands with >30% tree cover; and about 350 million within or near 40 million km2 of dense forests.
- (Evidence chapter) Partners: FTA and others from national institutes. Sources of information: Examples extraction of relevant systematic reviews and meta-analyses describing the importance of NTFPs for rural communities in the tropics. Case Studies Extraction of information from global databases
- Examples of systematic reviews and meta-analyses describing the importance of NTFPs for rural communities in the tropics. In a recent initiative, the Poverty Environment Network (PEN) gathered the most comprehensive comparative socio-economic data set to date on tropical forest use and poverty alleviation, with information collected from approximately 8,000 households in 24 low-income tropical nations (Angelsen et al., 2011; PEN, 2013). Completed syntheses of the PEN data have not yet been published, but preliminary analyses provide results that are consistent with those of earlier NTFP studies The data from these studies indicate that appropriate NTFP-policy support could preferentially benefit the most marginalised households in societies and women in particular because of the significant income benefits they receive from NTFPs Tis first volume of The State of the World’s Forest Genetic Resources constitutes a major step in building the information and knowledge base required for action towards better conservation and sustainable management of forest genetic resources at the national, regional and international levels. One way to obtain an estimate of the value of agroforestry trees to tropical rural communities is to consider the range of species that smallholders consider important for planting and the recorded uses of these species, as illustrated in Table 2 (based on our compilation of information from the World Agroforestry Centre’s Agroforestree Database, the AFTD [AFTD, 2013
- One way to obtain an estimate of the value of agroforestry trees to tropical rural communities is to consider the range of species that smallholders consider important for planting and the recorded uses of these species, as illustrated in Table 2 (based on our compilation of information from the World Agroforestry Centre’s Agroforestree Database, the AFTD [AFTD, 2013 Data collection …eg from the AF database… to showing the numbers of AF species that contribute to direct and indirect uses of trees. a The AFTD is an open-access database that contains information on a wide range of products and services provided by trees that are of interest to farming communities in the tropics (AFTD, 2013). Data are presented on the number of species given in the database as used for a particular purpose that can be found in particular geographic regions. b The AFTD contains global data on species distributions, summarised here into regions according to en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_dependent_territories_by_continent for Africa, Oceania and South America, and www.nationsonline.org/oneworld/asia.htm for South Central Asia, Southeast Asia, and Western Asia and the Middle East. A factor determining the greater number of total references to the African continent is the focus given in the AFTD to documenting species found there.
- Chronic undernutrition a big problem in SS Africa and S Asia, particularly of vitamin A and minerals such as iron, resulting in high stunting rates in these countries Low fruit/vegetable consumption among the reasons only 36 g fruits per person and day in Eastern Africa (about 200 g recommended by WHO) Cultivated and wild food trees can address the problem Challenges: low productivity (lack of quality planting material, poor tree management), seasonality, poor marketing pathways, very little processing and value addition, low farm gate and high consumer prices, lack of consumer awareness on health value of fruit consumption, little scientific knowledge (‘orphan crops’)
- Case Studies for direct consumption and opportunities for tree foods. Aim: (i) document fruit tree species diversity and fruit consumption of farming households; (ii) to understand perceptions of men and women regarding fruit production and consumption Methods: interviews of 370 households (HHs) (basic data, fruit production + consumption, perceptions); fruit tree inventories in 100 HHs; market surveys; focus groups discussions (separately for males/females) Very small farm sizes (mean 0.9 ac), high food insecurity (77% experience hunger last 12 months, 28% went to bed hungry last 4 weeks) 26 fruit tree species documented on farms, most frequent mango (82%), guava (63%), avocado (60%) Only 28% of HHs consumed fruit the day before (typical diet: cereals, oil, sweet beverages, vegetables) Reasons for not eating fruits every day: too expensive (61% of respondents), not available (35%) 97% know that fruits are healthy for children, 82 % state that fruits from their farm help to cope with food shortages, but perception on wild fruits is less
- Low availability of high quality feed resources- farmers complain that milk production has declined and butter fat content on milk is poor- the quality of commercial feed is also poor High cost of commercial feeds; Farmers /women spend more time on drudgery of feed collection . Most of the evidence on milk yields and income involves calliandra. A farmer in East Africa needs about 500 calliandra trees to feed a dairy cow throughout the year at a rate of 2 kg dry matter per day. One kilogram of dried calliandra (24% crude protein and digestibility of 60% when fed fresh) has about the same amount of digestible protein as 1 kilogram dairy meal (16% crude protein and 80% digestibility) Two kilograms of dried calliandra provides an effective protein supplement to the basal feed of napier grass and crop residues, according to on-farm feeding trials from Embu District, Kenya and Masaka District, Uganda Under farmers’ management, milk production increased by 0.6-0.75 kg milk kg-1 dried calliandra Net returns in 2002 and 2003 ranged from $US 62 year-1 to $US 122 year-1 across 4 sites in Kenya and Uganda for a farmer with 500 trees. An economic analysis from Chikwaka District, Zimbabwe found that the use of fodder trees in smallholder dairy had gross margins of $US 13 to $US 334 and Benefit-cost ratios of 1.12 to 3.03.
- Tree forages contribute to livestock systems 2, 3 and 4 SSA–sub-Saharan Africa; CA–Central Asia, WANA–West Asia and North Africa, LAC– Latin America and the Caribbean. √ - Indicates that both the production systems and animal species are equally important within the region. Major issues: those currently merit R&D attention. Across regions, the issues are broadly similar as is the case of dairying. Dairy production includes buffaloes and cattle, especially in Asia. Seré and Steinfeld (1996) defined a widely used global livestock production classification system. In referring to a livestock production system as a subset of farming systems, they identified 11 broad categories of systems based on the first three classification criteria. Two main groups of livestock production systems were identified from all the categories – those based solely on animal production and those that mix cropping and livestock. In the production systems based solely on animal production, 90 percent of dry matter fed to animals comes from rangelands, pastures, annual forages and purchased feeds, with less than 10 percent coming from non-livestock farming activities. In mixed-farming systems, or where 10 percent of the total value of production comes from non-livestock farming activities more than 10 percent of the dry matter fed to animals comes from crop by-products such as stubble. Mixed systems are mostly rainfed and are widespread in semi-arid and sub humid areas of the tropic and temperate zones. Other systems include the following. Landless livestock systems (LLs) are a subset of the pure livestock systems in which less than 10 percent of the dry matter fed to animals is farm produced and in which annual average stocking rates are above ten livestock units per hectare of land. Grassland-based systems (LGs) have more than 10 percent of the dry matter fed to animals produced from farm and average stocking rates are less than ten livestock units per hectare of agricultural land. A distinction is made between temperate zones and tropical highland, humid/sub-humid tropics and subtropics, and arid/semi-arid tropics and subtropics. Rainfed mixed-farming systems (MRs) are a subset of the mixed systems in which more than 90 percent of the value of non-livestock farm production comes from rainfed land use. These systems can be subdivided into the same agro-ecological sub classes as given above. Irrigated mixed-farming systems (MI) are a subset of the mixed systems in which more than 10 percent of the value of non-livestock farm production comes from irrigated land use. It also includes the same subclasses. The systems are found throughout the world in relatively small size. Exceptions are the eastern parts of China, northern India and Pakistan where they extend over large areas. The worlds 1.5 billion bovine and 1.7 billion ovine are well distributed across the land-based systems, but average densities increase sharply from grazing systems to mixed-irrigated systems. Mixed-irrigated systems have greater livestock supporting capacities per unit area. Some 70 percent of ruminants are found in grazing systems and over 80 percent of large ruminants in grazing systems are located in developing regions (Steinfeld et al., 2006). Table 2 shows the ruminant populations and animal production in the different production system groups, both globally and for the developing regions.
- I think a larger review would be appropriate. There are no comprehensive reviews or statistics on the use of fodder trees. For example in FAO’s “Livestock’s long shadow” tree fodder is completely ignored (as well as in the literature on East Africa Dairy systems that has not been published by ICRAF). Nepal and northern India are the only places for which much material has been published and where coincidently smallholder dairy is important. Tree fodder is used in many other places in Asia, but only scantily reported on. I find it very strange that ILRI does not work on fodder trees – ILRI publications hardly mention fodder trees, which is very strange. The one (former) ILRI person who mentions tree fodder is C. Devendra, who provides very unreliable information – see attached - (as he did, when he reviewed our Nepal project) FAO has a database on forages, including some fodder trees, but it is very incomplete. Animal Feed Resources Information System (AFRIS) and has been rechristened as Feedipedia – Animal Feed Resources Information System.
- Dear Ramni, I put Indonesian figures. I meant systematic studies like PEN – standard household income data collection methodologies across developing countries ---for tree crops/AF, export/production stats may be indicators, but sporadic reports on income contribution. (as you see from the table I summarized for the most updated draft on income, compared to NTFP/Forest income (natural/wildlife), fewer studies on AF income contribution (domesticated ones.). In turn, AF where adopted, has high incentives for farmers to intensify production through integrated management, so possibly sustainable pathway in view of growing demand, while NTFP/Forest income (timber, woodfuel, construction materials from forests or non-forest wildlife) may have trade-offs – extraction faster than regeneration.