Transcript Poster Presentation

CROPS, TREES, AND BIRDS: BIODIVERSITY CHANGE UNDER
AGRICULTURAL INTENSIFICATION IN UGANDA’S FARMED LANDSCAPES
Simon Bolwiga, David Mushabeb, David Nkuutuc, Derek Pomeroyb, and Herbert Tushabeb
A
Danish Institute for International Studies, Copenhagen (at time of study: International Food Policy Research Institute). b Makerere University Institute of Environment and Natural Resources, Kampala.
c Botany Department, Makerere University, Kampala.
ReNED Conference on Ecosystem Services and Biodiversity in Developing Countries
17 – 18 August 2005, Eigtveds Pakhus, Copenhagen.
INTRODUCTION
Agricultural change is an important driver of biodiversity loss in developing countries: the expansion of human populations and commodity markets causes the conversion of
natural vegetation into farmland and its intensifying use, which in turn renders habitats for wild flora and fauna smaller, more fragmented, and less diverse. For example, an analysis
of BirdLife International’s World Bird Database indicated that farming is the major current and likely future threat to globally Threatened and Near-Threatened bird species, especially
in developing countries where 1726 out of all 1923 birds in these threat categories are found (Green et al, 2005). Farming is at the same time the major source of food and income for
most poor households in developing countries. This will necessarily result in conflict in agricultural landscapes between the conservation of wild biodiversity and the provision of
ecosystem services that directly benefit the poor – food, fuel, and fibre.
Global patterns such as the above mask significant variations among different regions and species with respect to the determinants and rate of biodiversity loss, which are important
for the design of policies that minimize the trade-offs between nature conservation and provision of ‘pro-poor’ ecosystem services in specific environmental and socio-economic
settings. To add to the global pool of knowledge on farming-biodiversity linkages, a study was carried out to improve the understanding of how agricultural intensification in a poor
and densely populated developing region in southern Uganda (Fig 1) affects the abundance and species richness of woody vegetation and birds.
THE LOCAL CONTEXT
The study area straddles the equator in an area that was mainly tropical moist forest in the past. Except for protected areas, most of this has been converted into
agricultural lands, with the majority covered in various mixtures of crops such as bananas, sweet potatoes, cassava, coffee and maize. Mono-crop commercial
plantations, mainly of tea, cotton and sugar, cover the rest of the farmlands. Trees are often abundant on and around farms, and in some areas, patches of natural
forest still exist. Natural habitats are characterized by a high abundance and species richness of birds and trees, while populations of large mammals have been
largely eliminated over the past century. The following characteristics suggest a very high current and future pressure on biodiversity resources:
Human population densities are high and increasing rapidly (around 3% p.a.): in 2015 most localities will have more than 100 persons per square kilometre and
many above 400 persons, according to predictions reported in Bolwig et al (2005). Urban markets for food and wood products (timber, charcoal) are expanding and
are easily accessible in most places. Crop yields per unit area are low and generally stagnant. Non-farm income is less important for rural livelihoods than in many
other African regions, implying high dependence on local natural resources.
DATA AND METHODS
Data were collected on land use, woody plants, and birds in 14 study sites in crop-based farming systems in the western and central regions of Uganda (Fig 1). The
sites differ with respect to the intensity of land use (share of total farm land occupied by crops) and the scale of farming (smallholder farms versus commercial
plantations). Most were selected among existing long-term monitoring sites but a few were new sites. This design allowed for both across-site and time-series
analyses. A novelty of the study was the use of data collection methods from both geography and biology: surveys of agricultural land use and land cover,
combined with surveys of woody vegetation and birds. Agricultural intensification affects different species of birds and trees in different ways, and they had to be
classified accordingly. Trees were classified into native and exotic species, while birds were grouped according to specialisation (particularly with respect to their
dependence on trees/forest) and conservation status.
Figure 1: Location of
Uganda, and that of
the Study Sites
Agricultural land use was characterized principally through different measures of cultivation intensity and secondarily through crop diversity and cropping patterns. Biodiversity was assessed by the occurrence of different tree and bird
species. Data on tree species were captured from 20m radius plots, placed 50m apart along transects, while the occurrence of birds and their relative abundance were surveyed by Timed Species Counts (Pomeroy and Tengecho, 1986).
We used predictive modelling (Tushabe et al, 2001) and scatter plots (regression analyses of across-site data were of limited use due to the small number of study sites) to examine the relationships between land use and biodiversity
variables.
SELECTED RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS
Crop Diversity and Cropping Patterns
All large-scale sites were mono-cropped. Mixed cropping dominated most smallholder sites; the proportion of mono crop in
the total cultivated area ranged between 0.20 and 0.78 for these sites. Land use in the smallholder sites was dominated by a
few staple foods, notably bananas and root crops (cassava and sweet potatoes) that together made up between 25% and 83%
of total cropland. Maize was important in two sites.
120
100
80
60
40
20
Tree density .
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Tree density
700
120
600
100
500
80
400
60
300
40
200
20
100
0
0
(a)
0
(b)
Figure 2. Number of Woody Species (a) and Tree Density (stems/ha) (b) in relation to cultivation intensity in the study
sites. There is a general negative relationship for both.
Encounter Rates (Lambda) vs. Cultivation Intensity for
'Tree Species'
50
40
44
36
30
26
20
33
28
10
10
0
Woody Plants
10
ALL SPECIES
Coffee, Uganda’s largest export crop, on average only covered 10% of cropland, while cotton dominated one site. This
confirms the common observation that Ugandan smallholders are mainly subsistence-oriented, although some of the food
crops may also be sold.
0.7
0.6
Lambda
3
0
PERCENTAGE OF SPECIES
Forest generalists (F)
50
40
41
30
30
28
20
16
10
0
0.5
Forest
Specialists
8
1
We recorded a total of 270 woody plant species in the 14 sites, of which about 70% were native species. As expected, largescale agriculture was associated with a considerable loss of woody plant species richness compared to smallholder farming,
especially for native species Fig 2a). Results also indicated that woody biodiversity is not only affected by the scale of
farming but also by farm ownership: large blocks of cotton fields operated by small farmers thus showed higher species
richness than commercial plantations. For the other smallholder sites, a negative relationship between cultivation intensity
and woody species richness was only found at the extreme ends of the cultivation intensity gradient. We found similar
patterns for woody canopy cover. Tree density (stems/ha) too, decreases with increasing cultivation intensity (Fig 2b).
Cultivation intensity
Cultivation intensity (%) ..
Cultivation intensity
Lu
ga
z
Lu i Su
N ga ga
K a s im z i r
se be Tea
se H
Co or t
Bu tto
ja n
M ga
pa li
ng
a
M K if
ub u
Ka u ku
M tu
Ka uk go
n o
Ky yaw no
eg a r
eg a
Hi
m Z wa
a i
pa ika
st
ur
e
The large-scale farming systems had very uniform land uses, while there was considerable variation in land use variables
among smallholder sites. The cultivation intensity (defined as: area with crops / area with crops and fallow) on a scale of 0.00
to 1.00 (the large-scale sites all scored 1.00) ranged between 0.26 and 0.98 in the eight smallholder sites. Land in smallholder
sites in central Uganda is more intensively exploited than in the west, probably due to the differences in market access and
population density between the two regions. Most sites exhibited other indicators of high land use intensity such as short
fallow periods, low proportions of natural vegetation and dominance of mono-cropping.
Indigenous
Lu
ga
zi
Lu Sug
a
g
Ns azi r
Ka imb Tea
se e
se Ho
Co r t
tt
Bu on
ja
g
M a li
pa
ng
a
K
M ifu
ub
u
Ka ku
tu
M go
Ka uk o
ny no
a
Ky wa
eg ra
eg
w
a
Hi
m Zi
a
i
pa ka
st
ur
e
Number of species ..
Exotic
Cultivation Intensity (%) ..
Cultivation Intensity
6
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0
3
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
Cultivation Intensity
70
60
63
66
60
50
40
A total of 241 bird species were recorded, representing 24% of the total for Uganda and 40% of the birds living in that part of
the country. All the bird species recorded were indigenous. The Angola Swallow, Common Bulbul, African Thrush, Greybacked Camaroptera, and Bronze Mannikin were found at every site, while 69 species were recorded from only a single site.
There was a very low presence (ten or 5%) of Uganda’s forest specialist species, and mostly in very small numbers. This
confirms other observations (e.g., Naidoo, 2004) that these species are, as expected, unlikely to survive outside forests.
Predictive modelling helped us assess the extent of loss of bird species with increasing cultivation. The model (Tushabe et al,
2001) uses natural vegetation and rainfall. In areas of higher cultivation intensity, the percentages of species actually
recorded compared to those predicted were lower than in low agricultural intensity areas, indicating a considerable loss of
species with intensified agricultural activity (Fig 3). This was much more significant for forest specialists species, and a much
larger negative impact of large-scale agriculture is evident. The effect was bigger for high-intensity smallholder farms
compared to low-intensity farms, except in the case of generalist species. Large, charismatic species such as the Longcrested Eagle, hornbills and parrots, were scarce or absent from high-intensity cultivations.
Time-series analysis provided little evidence for a decline in birds, at least over the last 8–15 years, in the agro-ecosystems
with highest biodiversity (less intensively cultivated smallholder farms). Yet when comparing across study sites, we found
strong evidence that species are progressively lost (with only a few gains) as agriculture is intensified. Analyses of encounter
rates (Freeman et al, 2003) for tree birds, which represent the probability of species occurrence at the sites, again showed a
progressive decline with increasing cultivation intensity (Fig 4). Losses are greatest amongst the more specialized species,
which are also those of greater conservation concern. Large-scale plantations had much lower levels of biodiversity than
smallholder farms. (Time-series data were not available for large-scale systems).
Which Trees are Important on Agricultural Lands and in What Patterns?
Whilst all trees are important for birds, we found strong evidence that native species support a larger numbers of birds than
exotics. It is likely that native trees provide more food for birds, while exotics may be just as good for roosting, and possibly
nesting. Farmer preference for planting exotics, especially eucalyptus and pine, seems likely to cause a decline in many
important bird species.
We were not able to examine the importance to birds of different spatial patterns of woody vegetation, but higher degrees of
patchiness – i.e. clumping – are likely to be beneficial.
40
30
20
32
22
10
0
Commercial Cotton
Large scale
Most intense………………..Least
Small scale
pasture
Non –forest tree birds (f)
Birds
Fig. 4 The relationship between ‘encounter
rates’ for tree birds and cultivation
intensity.
Fig. 3 The bird species actually recorded
expressed as a percentage of the numbers
predicted, for large and small-scale agricultural
sites, and pasture.
CONCLUDING REMARKS
Interventions relating to agricultural intensification should follow a ‘species-sensitive’ landscape
approach, involving improved incentives to conserve/plant trees (including tree crops) and other
woody plants on farms. This will reduce the trade-offs between wild biodiversity conservation and
the provision of ‘pro-poor’ ecosystem services – especially food and fuel.
Native trees are especially important for birds and their conservation should therefore be
promoted, particularly in large-scale plantations where the impact on biodiversity is very negative.
Conservation of wild biodiversity on agricultural lands is essential, but this can only complement
an effective protected area system, which is especially critical to the conservation of specialised
species (and large mammals). There is need to integrate the two.
A limitation of the study is the small number of study sites surveyed, another the basic
characterization of larger-scale land use patterns around the sites. An ongoing research project
modelled on this one is developing these and other elements of the research design (BTO, 2005).
SELECTED REFERENCES
Bolwig, S., S. Wood, and J. Chamberlin. 2005. An Economic and Social Evaluation of Strategic Options for Sustainable, Smallholder-lead Rural Development in Uganda. International Food Policy Research Institute,
Washington, D.C.
British Trust of Ornithology (BTO). 2005. Conserving biodiversity in the modernising farmed landscapes of Uganda. Funded research proposal submitted to the Darwin Initiative, 21 January 2005.
Green, R.E., S.J Cornell, J.P.W. Scharlemann, and A. Balmford. 2005. Farming and the fate of wild nature. Science Magazine, Vol. 307.
Freeman, S., Pomeroy, D. & Tushabe, H. 2003. On the use of Timed Species Counts to estimate avian abundance indices in species-rich communities. African Journal of Ecology. 41:4, 337-348.
Naidoo, R. 2004. Species richness and community composition of songbirds in a tropical forest-agricultural landscape. Animal conservation 7, 93-105.
Pomeroy, D. and B. Tengecho. 1986. Studies of birds in a semi-arid area of Kenya. III – The use of ‘Timed Species-counts’ for studying regional avifaunas. Journal of Tropical Ecology 2:231-247.
Tushabe, H., J. Reynolds, and D. Pomeroy. 2001. Innovative aspects of the Bird Atlas of Uganda. Ostrich. Supplement No. 15: 183-188
Poster based on: Bolwig, S., D. Mushabe, D. Nkuutu, D. Pomeroy, and H. Tushabe. 2004. Biodiversity in Uganda’s Farming Systems in Relation to Agricultural Intensification. Research report submitted to the Strategic Criteria for Rural Investment in Productivity program. International Food Policy Research Institute,
Washington, D.C. and Makerere University Institute of Environment and Natural Resources, Kampala. Downloadable from http://www.diis.dk/sw8663.asp. The study was carried out with support from the Uganda Mission of the U.S. Agency for International Development.