A primary objective of Alternatives to Slash and Burn (asb) research is to identify new combinations of policies, technologies, and institutions capable of simultaneously promoting three fundamental development objectives: poverty reduction, economic growth, and environmental sustainability (Vosti and Reardon 1997; Tomich et al. 1998b; World Bank 2001). To be successful in this effort, we must first understand why the currently predominant land use systems (luss) are more attractive to smallholders than existing alternatives. We must then measure the environmental and other consequences of each lus. Then, if currently predominant luss are judged to be unsatisfactory with respect to one or more of the three objectives, alternative luss must be identified or developed. Finally, policymakers will need guidance regarding how to promote alternative luss: which policy instruments and institutional mechanisms should be used, how much policy action probably will be needed, and for how long this action will be needed to achieve and sustain desired changes. Research aiming to address these issues must focus on the concerns of resource users, that is, farmers or farm managers charged with allocating scarce resources to best achieve household or firm objectives (Vosti and Witcover 1996; Reardon and Vosti 1997). Therefore, for a subset of the asb metalus , this chapter shifts the focus from environmental and agronomic issues to economic issues and the incentives and constraints faced by agriculturalists who manage and depend on the lus for household food security, livelihoods, and profit.
Année de publication
2005
Auteurs
Vosti S A; Gockowski J; Tomich T P
Langue
English
Mots clés
shifting cultivation, slash disposal, slashing
Géographique
Brazil, Cameroon, Indonesia
