Forestry Technologies

– A Complete Value Chain Approach

K.T. Parthiban
R. Seenivasan
Forest College and Research Institute
Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Mettupalayam – 641 301
&
Tamil Nadu Newsprint and Papers Ltd
Kagithapuram, Karur – 639 136
CONTENTS

A.
BASIC AND STRATEGIC TECHNOLOGY

1. Forestry Technologies - An Overview 1

– K.T. Parthiban & R. Seenivasan
2. Forest Genetic Resources at TNAU - An Overview 7
– K.T. Parthiban
3. Applications of Nanotechnology in Forestry 20
– S. Marimuthu, Gunasekaran K. & K.S. Subramanian
4. Forest Informatics –S. Sridevy 34
5. Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in Forestry - 55
Applications and Uses
– C. Cinthia Fernandaz, V. Anandhi & P. Priyadharshini
6. Urban Forestry – Design, Development and Management 68
Technologies
– K.T. Parthiban, B. Palanikumaran & N. Krishna Kumar
7. Trees Outside Forests In India: Socio-Economic, Environmental and 84
Policy Issues
– A.S. Dogra & Sanjeev K. Chauhan

B.
PRODUCTION TECHNOLOGY

8. Mini Clonal Technology for Tree Crops 103

– K.T. Parthiban
9. Seed Production Technology for Commercial Tree Crops 111
– P.R. Renganayaki
10. High Yielding Short Rotation (HYSR) Tree Varieties 139
– K.T. Parthiban
xii Forestry Technologies – A Complete Value Chain Approach

11. Land Development Technology 156

– K. Sreenivas
12. Agroforestry Systems and Technologies for Different Agro-Climatic 177
Regions of India
– A.K. Handa & Ram Newaj
13. Precision Technology for Industrial Plantations 194
– R. Seenivasan & K.T. Parthiban
14. Dryland Forestry Technology 217
– M. Siva Prakash, P. Kannan & P. Kathirvelan
15. Silvipastoral Technology 242
– K. Ramah, S. Marimuthu , K. Sivakumar & B. Palanikumaran
16. Short Rotation Forestry : A Path for Economic and Environmental 256
Prosperity
– Sanjeev K. Chauhan, Rajni Sharma, Pankaj Panwar &
Jagdish Chander
17. Pest Management Strategies for Forest Plantations 285
– N. Natarajan
18. Disease Management Technology for Forest Trees 303
– V. Mohan
19. Multifunctional Agroforestry Technologies 333
– R. Jude Sudhagar & K.T. Parthiban
20. Tree Fodder Production and Management Technology 341
– C. Babu, K. Iyanar & A. Kalamani
21. Technology for Thornless Bamboo Cultivation 362
–N. Bharathi
22. Production, Management and Utilization Technology for Sandal 370
wood (Santalum album)
– N. Krishnakumar, S. Umesh Kanna & K.T. Parthiban
23. Technology for Waste Land Development 382
– K. Sivakumar, K.T. Parthiban, K. Ramah, B. Palanikumaran &
P. Priyadharshini
Contents xiii

C.
PROCESSING AND VALUE ADDITION TECHNOLOGY

24. Melia Based Plywood Production Technology 401

– G. Madan Kumar & K.T. Parthiban
25. Application of Tropical Energy Crops for Bioenergy Conversion in 408
India
– S. Pugalendhi, R. Shalini, E. Akila & G. Boopathi
26. Wood Biomass Deconstruction for Cellulosic Ethanol: 419
Technological Perspectives
– U. Sivakumar, I.K. Muniraj, P.V. Anbu & K.T. Parthiban
27. Improvement and Value Chain Management of Jatropha Genetic 437
Resources as a source of Biofuel
– K.T. Parthiban, M. Paramathma, R. Jude Sudhagar & P. Jayamani
28. Forest Based Bioprospecting technologies 454
– S. Murugesan & N. Senthilkumar
29. Forest Based Silkworm Rearing Technology 486
– P. Priyadharshini, S. Maninegalai & G. Swathiga
30. Composting Technologies for Forest Biomass 507
– P. Subramanian
31. Value Addition Technology 527
– B. Paani Kumaran, K.T. Parthiban & I. Sekar
32. Biochar Production Technology from Forest Biomass 535
– G Venkatesh, KA Gopinath, K Sammi Reddy & Ch Srinivasa Rao
33. Machineries for Forestry Operations 551
– K.T. Parthiban, N. Krishnakumar & R. Seenivasan
34. Burlapping Technology for Trees in Urban Landscapes 562
– C. Subesh Ranjith Kumar & K.T. Parthiban

D.
CONSUMPTION TECHNOLOGY

35. Consortium of Industrial Agroforestry (CIAF) 575

– K.T. Parthiban, C. Cinthia Fernandaz,
R. Jude Sudhagar & K.K. Suresh
xiv Forestry Technologies – A Complete Value Chain Approach

36. Tree Insurance – An Innovative Intervention In Agroforestry 581

– K.T. Parthiban
37. Bankable Project Models for Melia dubia 590
– K.T. Parthiban, R. Seenivasan, S. Vennila & A. Vithyavathi
38. Bankable Project for Casuarina plantations (Pulpwood Model) 603
– K.T. Parthiban, R. Seenivasan, S. Vennila & A. Vithyavathi
39. Bankable Project for Ailanthus excelsa (Matchwood Model) 616
– K.T. Parthiban, R. Seenivasan, S. Vennila & A. Vithyavathi
Subject Index 627
 7
TREES OUTSIDE FORESTS IN INDIA:
SOCIO-ECONOMIC, ENVIRONMENTAL
AND POLICY ISSUES
A.S. Dogra & Sanjeev K. Chauhan1
PCCF, Punjab (Retd.), # 256, Sector 37-A Chandigarh 160 036, India
1Department of Forestry and Natural Resources, PAU Ludhiana – 141 004, India

Email: asdogra@[Link]; chauhanpau@[Link]

ABSTRACT
Forests in India cannot meet the demand for timber, industrial wood and fuelwood on a
sustainable basis because of low growing stock, poor growth rates, inadequate financial and
technical inputs, and serious biotic pressures. Agroforestry offers a better livelihood strategy
to farmers for relatively low input costs, flexible labour requirements, higher profitability,
diversity of income sources, and more bargaining power at the marketing stage than with
annual crops. Incorporating trees into farming systems leads to greater prosperity at the farm
level. Trees provide farmers with marketable products – such as lumber, building poles,
firewood, animal fodder, fruits, and medicines – all of which earn extra income. Apart from
all these such trees also help in providing other environmental benefits. However, there are
number of bottlenecks in harnessing the potential of tree outside forest. The need is to frame
friendly policies with regards to foreign trade, multi-stake partnership, Certification of
FRM, etc. Wood based industries status would be sustained only through promoting
plantations outside the forests. Agroforestry Policy 2014 is important decision to gets more
impetus and provides livelihood and environmental benefits through encouraged people
participation in plantations.

INTRODUCTION
India has about 2.5% of the world’s geographical and 1.8% of the forest area.
The country supports 16% of the world human population and 18% of the
domestic cattle population, amounting to about 500 million. India has diverse
geographical features and varied climates making it one of the twelve-mega
diversity countries of the world. Forestry is the second-largest land use in India
after agriculture with a forest and tree cover of 79.42 million ha or 24.16% of
the geographical area and area under forest cover has increased by 3775 km2 in
last two years (FSI, 2015). The forests of the country (from tropical rain forests
in the south and the north-east to the dry alpine forests in the north-west
Himalayas) have been classified into 16 types on the basis of climatic and
edaphic conditions (under revision due to changes over the years for varied
reasons). Forestry and logging accounted for just 1.1 per cent of India’s Gross
Trees Outside Forests in India: Socio-Economic, Environmental and Policy Issues 85

Domestic Product (GDP) in 2001; adding non-market benefits of environmental

services, subsistence fuelwood, fodder, and many other non-timber forest/
products, doubles the GDP contribution (World Bank, 2006). Some of the
principal commercial species are highly valued and are becoming increasingly
costly, e.g. teak (Tectona grandis), sal (Shorea robusta), Dipterocarpus spp., and
conifers (pine, deodar, fir, spruce, etc.). Forests are also the most important
source of fibre for paper and pulp industries, with bamboo occupying the key
position (NFC, 2006). The main species under social and agroforestry include
Eucalyptus, Acacia, Populus, Ailanthus, Melia, Salix, Dalbergia, Leucaena, Gmelina,
Casuarina, Robinia, etc. (Chauhan et al., 2008) covering approximately 8 million
hectares area, which is further gaining importance due to increased pressure on
forest based products, restriction on green felling and practical realization of
ecological benefits of forests for livelihood/environmental security. Forests are
required to be managed sustainably to obtain productive, protective and social
benefits for long term. The objective of contribution of forests to GDP has
changed to conservation and sustainable development due to environmental
concerns. Forests are looked as single entity including all forms of life existing in
the forest (Chander et al., 2015) on ecosystem basis and forests have to play a
significant role in meeting the objectives of UN Sustainable Developmental
Goals (Chander and Chauhan 2016; CIFOR, 2016). In recent years number of
initiatives have been taken up by the Government of India to increase the
plantation area i.e., the National Action Plan on Climate Change – 2008;
National Mission on Greening India - 2008; National Biofuel Policy – 2009;
Green Tribunal Act - 2010; World Congress on Agroforestry - 2014; National
Agroforestry Policy - 2014; Regional Consultation on Agroforestry: Way
forward - 2015; National Mission on Agroforestry and Bamboo - 2015; and
National Forest Policy - 1988 revision has also been initiated to seek feedback
from stakeholders and the process is at final stage. The Intended Nationally
Determined Contributions (INDCs) stressed for creating a carbon sink of 2.5 -
3.0 billion tonnes of CO2 equivalent through additional forest and tree cover by
2030 and commitment to realize the vision of 175 Giga Watts of clean energy by
2022.
The increasing human population and rapid economic growth have put
immense pressure on forests and other natural resources. In India, forest
situation is the net result of different happenings i.e., degradation, deforestation,
afforestation, conservation, etc. at different scale during different temporal
phases (Table 1). 93 per cent of the forests are naturally regenerated, about 41%
of the forest cover in the country has already been degraded and dense forests
are losing their crown density and productivity continuously (only 2.61% are
rated very dense forests with canopy density more than 70% equivalent to 85904
km2). At present, 70% of forests have no natural regeneration, 73% forests are
affected by grazing and 50% are prone to fire (NFC, 2006). 54% forests have
human habitation and inspite of Forest Conservation Act 1980 restrictions, land
use of forest land is changed for developmental activities including construction
of roads, mining, industrialization, etc. (Forest Survey of India recorded a loss of
86 Forestry Technologies – A Complete Value Chain Approach

2,511 sq km of very dense and mid-dense forests that have been completely
wiped out, and become non-forest areas since 2013 (FSI 2015). Mizoram,
Uttarakhand, Nagaland, Arunachal and Telangana has shown considerable
negative growth, while Tamilnadu, J&K, Kerala, Karnataka and Uttar Pradesh
has shown positive changes in forest cover. FSI 2016 also reveal that about 40
per cent forest cover is contained in nine big size patches in the states of
Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Goa, Tamil Nadu, Chhatisgarh, Madhya
Pradesh, Maharashtra, Karnataka, and north-eastern states.
Table 1. Phases of Indian forest transition
Deforestation phase - 1900-1970
Agricultural stabilization - 1970-1980
Afforestation phase - 1980-2000
Conservation and sustainable management - 2000-----
* Singh et al. (2014)

Tree cover and trees outside forests

The Forest Survey of India started estimating tree cover in the country in the
year 2001 to have a complete picture of forest and tree cover to compare with
the national goal of 33% forest and tree cover. Tree cover estimate comprises
tree patches outside the recorded forest area, which are not captured by remote
sensing satellite during forest cover assessment. This area is less than the
minimum map able area (1 ha) and comprises block and linear patches having
upto 1.0 ha area, as well as scattered trees. Trees outside forests (TOF) refer to
all trees growing outside recorded forest area. However, there are tree crops and
woodlots outside forest area that are larger than 1 ha in extent and are captured
by the resources survey satellite used for forest cover assessment in present
methodology (Anonymous, 2015). Such trees are deemed to have been included
in the forest cover assessment. The residual trees outside forest cover and less
than 1 ha in area are not captured by satellite constitute the tree cover. Thus,
trees included in the tree cover constitute only a part of TOF, albeit a large part.
The productivity of trees outside forests is very high in comparison to
natural forests and in-addition trees grown have market demand. TOF supplies
approximately 49% of the fuelwood and 48% of the timber annually (Rai and
Chakraborty, 2001). With too high productivity, it may be assumed that an area
of 3 m ha planted with superior material with rotation of 8 yrs can meet all the
national wood demands. The Agroforestry Policy 2014 and initiatives of
Honourbale Prime Minister Sh Narinder Modi for trees of-farm bunds would
not only meet the immediate requirements but transform the landscape as well.
Multiple benefits of on-farm trees in terms of improvement in livelihood
through simultaneous production of timber, fodder, fuel, etc. as well as
improvement in soil quality and mitigation of changing climate effects have been
realized (Pandey, 2007). These changes in ecology and economics through on-
farm trees are well documented and traditionally been followed but presently
there are divergent views on present area under agroforestry, which need to be
ascertained for ecosystem services (Dhyani, 2014) and in future more area is
Trees Outside Forests in India: Socio-Economic, Environmental and Policy Issues 87

expected to shift from agriculture to trees due to poor productivity, high labour
cost, shifting of rural people to urban area due to poor infrastucture, uncertain
climatic conditions, etc.

Socio-economic issues
People are employed in forest management and conservation – but many more
are directly dependent on forests for their livelihoods. Trees and tree based
products have a significant potential for providing jobs as well as a range of
forest products such as fuelwood, edibles, fodder, pulpwood, building materials
and medicines (Biswas, 2006). Trees play an important role in contributing
towards sustainable livelihoods of rural poor. Roughly 275 million poor rural
people in India (27% of the total population) depends on forests for at least part
of their subsistence and cash livelihoods, which they earn from fuelwood,
fodder, poles, and a range of non-timber forest products such as fruits, flowers,
and medicinal plants. Half of India’s 89 million tribal people live in forest fringe
areas, and have close cultural and economic links with the forest.
Trees not only provide socio-economic development but also have a special
role in the ethos of the people of India. A number of tree species are revered as
sacred trees and sacred groves and are found all over the country (Pandey, 2007).
The great poet Kalidasa has penned verses in praise of the fragrance of siris
(Albizzia lebbeck) and Kadam (Anthocephalus cadamba). Similarly all religious
literature endow the trees and their worship for direct and indirect benefits t the
humanity. The history of Sikh religion is replete with references to the glory of
the flora of Shivalik hills (Kaler, 2006). India has a long tradition of growing
trees on farms and around homesteads. Such traditions have a positive impact
on the ecologic, economic and social well being of people. Traditional onfarm
tree wealth and knowledge has given shape to the modern field of agroforestry,
which is basically following the traditions on scientific lines for the social and
ecological benefits.

Demand and supply of forest products in India

India is facing a severe scarcity of wood and a major portion is supplied by the
plantations. Jürgensen et al. (2014) assesses the production of industrial
roundwood from planted forests and revealed that planted forests have become
a substantial component of the productive and protective forest resources and
play an ever more important part in securing both industrial roundwood and
wood fuel. India 43.1 million m3 from the plantation forests and globally
plantations contribute 83 per cent of the global industrial roundwood. However
in India, this change was realized only after the third national forest policy and
trend would increase in future for shortfall in supply against increasing demand
(approximately 34% demand gap) and cost escalation in imported wood due to
principles of certification in forest based products. Table 2 explains a big gap in
import bill against the export of wood and wood products, which would
probably be bridged through plantations only because of restriction in green
88 Forestry Technologies – A Complete Value Chain Approach

felling from government forests. India is a big market for wood and plantations
have to play a significant role to meet the growing industrial and domestic
demands. However, at present the import is contributing substantially to bridge
the gap in demand and supply (Table 3).
Table 2. Shift in demand of industrial wood from SR and LR species (million m3)
Source of wood/year 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Wood from SR species 27.87 37.30 50.18 68.76 87.70
Wood from LR Species 29.85 36.62 44.92 54.40 65.10
Total* 57.72 73.92 95.10 123.16 152.80
(5.52) (5.68) (5.89) (4.88)
* % growth in parentheses

Table 3. Import and export* of wood and wood Products

Year Quantity Value
Wood Wood products Woods Wood Total
(cum) (ton) (Rs million) products (Rs million)
(Rs million)
2010-11 4856486 15105.74 62765.15 738.71 63503.86
(43822) (24162.29) (892.93) (137.99) (1030.92)
2011-12 6662807 17488.22 100675.70 794.33 101470.03
(43822) (911.433) (1126.96) (140.57) (1267.53)
2012-13 7035808 21865.55 123243.11 1029.60 124272.71
(43822) (3149.883) (1808.45) (269.51) (2077.96)
2013-14 6603482 313782.7 132268.87 4327.44 136596.31
(43822) (1756.964) (1903.74) (463.56) (2367.30)
2014-15 671557 412874.3 128462.31 5212.52 133674.82
(31586) (1914.791) (2047.32) (361.19) (2408.51)
*Export values in parentheses (FSI, 2015)

Over the years, alternative sources of energy have been generated but still
the wood energy is a prime energy source in domestic sector. Biomass
contributes 14% of the world energy and 38% energy in developing countries
(Woods and Hall, 1994). In India, biomass fuels contributed 90% energy in the
rural areas and over 40% in the cities. According to this report, twigs accounted
for 75% of household energy needs. The annual fuelwood requirement in the
country is estimated to be about 250 million tons and likely to increase due to
increasing demand, increasing prices of oil and limited supply of fuelwood.
Availability of fuelwood from forests on a sustainable basis is reported to be
about 17 million tonnes. The market for renewable energy systems in India is set
to grow exponentially with the emphasis to generate 175Gigawatt renewable
energy by 2022. Thus, supply will have to be supplemented from other sources
such as agroforestry, trees growing on wastelands, biogas, solar energy etc. The
paper industry in particular is plagued by raw material shortage. The deficit is
being met by imports. Midgley et al. (2007) report gross and net imports valued
at USD 2.75 and 2.20 billion, respectively. Even our forests at the optimum level
of conservation and productivity would find this task impossible. More than
50% of the industrial wood/industrial timber is being contributed by
Trees Outside Forests in India: Socio-Economic, Environmental and Policy Issues 89

agroforestry in the private sector. A large portion of the annual 250 million
tonnes of fuelwood consumption also comes from community lands. With
forests under increasing pressure, agroforestry is the only segment that can
record growth in production of timber, fuelwood, industrial timber, fodder and
grass, medicinal plants and the rest. The growing importance of the farm and
agroforestry sub-sector is also evident from the fact that by the end of the
millennium wood production outside forests surpassed that from India’s forests
(Singh, 2008). Therefore, the country’s needs of timber, fuelwood, fodder,
industrial wood and medicinal plans must be met from private lands and
community lands (NFC, 2006).

Productivity of forests
Productivity of India’s forests is less than half the world average i.e., 1.0 m3 ha-1
yr-1 as compared to the world average of 2.1m3 ha-1 yr-1. On the other hand,
productivity of genetically superior clonal plantations of fast growing species is
of the order of 20-50 m3 ha-1 yr-1 (Lal et al., 2006). Research at ITC,
Bhadrachalam (A.P.), WIMCO Seedling Limited (part of ITC now), West Coast
Paper Limited, Tamilnadu Paper Limited, Tamilnadu Forest Plantation
Corporation Limited, etc. has laid the foundation for large-scale commercial
clonal agroforestry plantations in many states including Andhra Pradesh, Orissa,
Maharashtra, Punjab, Tamilnadu, Karnataka, Gujarat, Haryana and Madhya
Pradesh. The most successful tree improvement programmes are those in which
proper seed sources and provenances are used. Willan (1988) reported the
results of provenance trials in the tropics and sub tropics. The trials involved a
fairly large number of species viz., Cedrela, Cordia, Eucalyptus, Gmelina, Pinus
caribaea, P. kesiya, P. patula, Tectona grandis and Terminalia. Considerable
improvement in productivity was observed in most species.
Globally, clonal eucalypt plantations have been raised on very large scale in
many countries including Brazil, China, South Africa, Vietnam, Thailand, etc.
Clones of Eucalyptus grandis and its hybrids with Eucalyptus urophylla have been
extensively planted in many tropical countries with productivity often more than
50 m3 ha-1 yr-1 Tropical pines have been extensively planted in many countries
including USA, New Zealand, and Chile (Chauhan et al., 2008). Some Acacia
species native to Australia and neighbouring countries are significant in the rural
economy of many countries. Just a few species, mainly Acacia mangium, A.
auriculiformis, A. mearnsii and A. saligna cover almost 2 million ha (Midgley and
Turnbull, 2003). Acacia mangium and hybrids of A. mangium x A. auriculiformis
have been planted extensively in many tropical countries. The APRIL group in
Indonesia plants nearly 143 million seedlings and rooted cuttings of acacias and
E. grandis, and hybrids of E. grandis with E. pellita or E. urophylla annually,
covering more than 50,000 ha yearly. Sabah Forest Industries in Sabah province
of Malaysia have plans to plant 5,000 ha this year and 10,000 ha next year with
A. mangium and E. grandis. It is estimated that close to 10,000 ha are being
planted to Acacia mangium in the high rainfall areas of Malaysia, Indonesia, India,
Sri Lanka and Vietnam both for pulp and timber production (Lal et al., 2008).
90 Forestry Technologies – A Complete Value Chain Approach

The report of the ‘Task Force on Greening of India for Livelihood Security
and Sustainable Development’ 2001 provides valuable data on agroforestry
models for different agro climatic zones with associated costs and benefits. The
species like poplar, eucalyptus, casuarinas, bamboo, kikar, pahari kikar were
recommended for adoption in different agro-climatic and edaphic conditions.
The report gives the potential of wood production according to land capability
class. The estimates of productivity given in the report are feasible given the
current state of technology (Singh, 2008). In north-west India because of good
soil and availability of irrigation, yield is typically over 40 m3ha-1yr-1. If forest
productivity is to be increased only improved seed and planting material should
be used. In fact subsidized or free supply of seedlings indirectly encourages low
productivity. In north-western plains, productive clones of both poplar and
eucalypts have been identified and are being propagated on a large scale. ITC
clones of eucalypts are also being tested against Punjab selections. Punjab has
identified superior clones of shisham (Dalbergia sissoo), and research to discover
better clones is on. Shisham, which is valued for heartwood probably has
discouraged farmers from adopting for its long rotation but with proper efforts
even the soft wood of shisham may find good export market for its good quality
wood which can be treated for its longevity. Seed orchards of important
plantation species have been established. High potential for growing teak and
agarwood in farm forestry systems has been highlighted in India. Profitable
agroforestry models have been proposed through painstaking research but its
future is not clear due to quality of wood and products at short rotation
(Chaturvedi 1995 and Balooni 2000). Private company Shivshakti from Andhra
Pradesh introduced good quality stock in many states but could not find good
response for poor productivity and profitability results among the growers.

Farm and agroforestry

Agroforestry is now providing powerful technological and policy innovations
that are rapidly spreading in Africa, Asia, Latin America, and more recently, in
several developed countries. It is one key path to prosperity for poor people
suffering from hunger, malnutrition, poverty and the deterioration of the
environment in the areas that have been bypassed by the “Green Revolution”.
Government of India is weighing more emphasis on this sector for enhanced
livelihood security and ecological services.
By far, the vast majority of trees are grown under agroforestry systems.
Agroforestry offers a better livelihood strategy to farmers due to relatively low
input costs, flexible labour requirements, higher profitability, diversity of income
sources, and more bargaining power at the marketing stage than with annual
crops. Incorporating trees into farming systems leads to greater prosperity at the
farm level. Trees provide farmers with marketable products – such as lumber,
building poles, firewood, animal fodder, fruits, and medicines – all of which earn
extra income. In north-western India, in the states of Punjab, Haryana,
Uttarakhand and U.P. tree-crop combinations have the potential to give better
economic returns than trees or crops alone. In these areas, clonal poplar and
Trees Outside Forests in India: Socio-Economic, Environmental and Policy Issues 91

eucalypts are fast emerging as the preferred species for agroforestry. Of late
subabul (Leucaena leucocephala), ghmar (Gmelina arborea), dek (Melia composita),
Bamboo, etc. are also being seriously considered.
Farm and agroforestry have been accepted as a viable alternative for
diversification of agriculture in these states. Dogra et al. (2007) reported data that
clearly established the profitability of agroforestry systems involving poplar and
eucalyptus clones. The data are presented in tables 4, 5a and 5b.
Table 4. Yield and net economic returns of Poplar with inter-cropping
Agroforestry Agricultural crop
Poplar + Wheat + Fodder Wheat +Fodder
Age Site Spacin MAI NPV 5% SEV 5% ALR NPV5% SEV% ALR
(yrs) quality g t/ha (Rs. in (Rs. in lac) (Rs. in (Rs. in (Rs. in (Rs. in
lac) lac) lac) lac) lac)
6 Excellent 5x4 m 35.4 6.07 23.93 1.20 1.95 7.69 0.385
7 (SI = 28 5x4 m 35.8 7.32 25.30 1.27 2.23 7.69 0.385
8 m at 6 5x4 m 36.2 8.58 26.55 1.33 2.49 7.70 0.385
years
6 Good 5x4 m 26.8 4.53 17.83 0.89
7 (SI = 24 5x4 m 27.2 5.40 18.67 0.93
8 m at 6 5x4 m 27.5 6.40 19.80 0.99
years
6 Moderate 5x4 m 19.3 3.13 12.35 0.62
7 (SI = 20 5x4 m 19.6 3.89 13.43 0.67
8 m at 6 5x4 m 19.8 4.40 13.62 0.68
years
Source: Dogra et al. (2007)

Table 5a. Yields and net economic returns per ha of clonal eucalyptus
Age Agroforestry Spacing MAI NPV 5% SEV ALR
(Yrs) Model (m) (t/ha) (Rs. in lac) (Rs. in lac) (Rs. in lac)
4 Eucalyptus + 3 x 1.5 50.0 1.33 7.52 0.38
Barseem
4 Eucalyptus + 3x3 30.7 1.29 7.28 0.36
Sugarcane
6 Eucalyptus + 3x3 37.0 2.81 11.08 0.55
Barseem
6 Eucalyptus + 3x3 37.0 3.32 13.11 0.65
Sugarcane
Source: Sapra (2005) of Haryana Forest Department and prices of timber INR at Yamunanagar
during April, 2006

Table 5b. Yield and net economic returns per ha of clonal eucalyptus
Age Spacing (m) MAI (t/ha) NPV SEV ALR
3 4x2 30.0 0.23 1.66 0.08
4 4x2 36.0 0.83 4.67 0.24
Source: Trials at Semi near Jalandhar Prices: April 2006 in INR at Yamunanagar
92 Forestry Technologies – A Complete Value Chain Approach

Further opportunities to enhance farm incomes on a sustainable basis from

adoption of suitable agroforestry systems compared to monocultural practices
have been highlighted extensively in literature though major bottleneck remain
the long gestation period to realize the profit of perennial tree component in the
system. Agroforestry is being gainfully practiced on a large scale by medium and
large farmers in the country under irrigated conditions in India but its potential
is yet to be fully realized by small farmers without an irrigation facility. However
traditionally on unit scale, the number of trees on un-irrigated land remains
higher than irrigated land.

Environmental issues
Trees in rural and urban landscapes
Trees outside forests are found in a wide variety of land use systems from trees
on farms, along roads and canals, in and around settlements and in urban
forestry setting. Trees improve soil fertility by fixing nitrogen from the air and
recycling nutrients from the soil, thereby helping to increase crop yields and
providing stability of future production. Trees on farms help to hold moisture
where it is needed, reduce soil erosion and keep valuable topsoil in place, reduce
the intensity of downstream flooding and maintain watershed-building materials.
They serve as live fence in semi-arid regions, protecting vegetable and cereal
gardens that would otherwise be overrun by livestock. Boundary plantations in
the form of windbreaks and shelterbelts help protect lands and crops from harsh
winds and increase agricultural production. Global warming and associated
problems of climate change has pressed the need for change in land use that are
more dependable in production and more sustainable in terms of resource
conservation to ensure food security and adapt to the changes. The agroforestry
practice, which works on the principle of sustainability in terms of all the three
dimensions viz. economic (profitability, productivity), ecological (environ-
mentally sound) and social (food security, health and safety) make it an
unparallel land use system and area is expected to increase in near future to meet
material requirement and ecological security.
The value of trees in urban environment is now generally recognised not
only aesthetically but also functionally in helping to make towns and cities
agreeable places to work and live. A number of studies have shown that people
are willing to pay more for a property located close to an urban open space than
for a house that does not offer this amenity, a finding known as the “proximate
principle”. The studies include parks and open spaces usually containing trees
and forests (Wolf, 2007).

Price Increase Condition

10% inner city home located ¼ mile (0.4 km) of a park
20% home adjacent to or fronting a passive park area
32% residential development adjacent to green belts
Trees Outside Forests in India: Socio-Economic, Environmental and Policy Issues 93

Property values are also reported to rise in retail and commercial areas with
established tree planting programmes by 7 to 23% (Wolf, 2007). In another
study, Wolf (2005) concluded that images having well-tended large trees received
the highest preference ratings in a business district.
Chaudhury (2006) has quantified the recreational benefits of urban forestry
of Chandigarh city, which was built after 1947 and is known for its urban
forestry. On the basis of ‘willingness to pay’, he estimated the annual recreational
value of Chandigarh’s urban forestry assets at INR 27.50 million at 2002-03
prices. If other non-market benefits such as the amount of carbon sequestered
and ability to absorb pollutants are added, and the estimate is inflated to current
prices the value of Chandigarh’s urban forests would increase several folds.
Trees in urban landscape help cleanse the air of suspended particulate matter
and a number of them also have the ability to absorb toxic chemicals (Srinidhi et
al., 2007). Short rotation trees i.e., Eucalyptus, Poplar, willows, etc. are the most
commonly employed trees for combating toxic chemicals and keep them away
from the food chain. Other important trees are Azadirachta indica, Albizias, Cassia
siamea, Grevillea robusta, etc.

Carbon sequestration
A key advantage of agroforestry is that it provides private benefits for poor
farmers in developing countries and global environment payoffs. Trees increase
ecosystem biodiversity above and below ground and they can help ameliorate
global climate change by sequestering carbon – in their live biomass as well as in
the soil – that otherwise would be added to the earth’s atmosphere.
Carbon sequestration refers to the provision of long-term storage of carbon
in the terrestrial biosphere, underground, or the oceans so that the buildup of
carbon dioxide (the principal greenhouse gas) concentration in the atmosphere
will reduce or slow down. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC) defines it as the “amount of carbon absorbed from the atmosphere by
plants (equivalent to net photosynthesis), but which can then be lost in part to
the atmosphere through subsequent decomposition of dead residues”. It plays
an important role in the global carbon cycle. The fact that we have temporarily
thrown the global cycle out of balance suggests that we can also rebalance the
system by improving vegetation management and natural sequestration of
atmospheric carbon through photosynthesis. Obviously, the more trees and
plants we have on earth, the more carbon sinks we have.
Several studies have shown that the inclusion of trees in the agricultural
landscapes often improves the productivity of systems while providing
opportunities to create carbon sinks. An average carbon storage by agroforestry
land use system has been estimated to be around 9, 21, 50 and 63Mg C ha-1 in
semi-arid, sub humid, humid and temperate regions, respectively (Schroeder,
1994). The amount of C sequestered largely depends on the agroforestry
system/model put in places, the structure and function of which is to be a great
extent determined by environmental and socio-economic factors. Carbon
94 Forestry Technologies – A Complete Value Chain Approach

sequestration potential of afforestation/reforestation is specific to the species,

rate of growth and management involved, and it is, therefore, variable. Carbon
sequestration potential for agroforestry practices is even more variable,
depending on the planting density and production objective of the system. It has
been estimated that globally approximately 38 Gt (1Gt = 1 billion tons) of
carbon could be sequestered over next 50 years i.e., 30.6 Gt by afforestation/
reforestation and 7Gt through the increased adoption of agroforestry practices.
The prominent role of forestry and agroforestry systems in carbon sequestration
has increased global interest in these land use options to stabilize green house
gases emission. Agroforestry system especially agri-silvicultural/horti-
silvicultural system can be carbon sinks and temporarily store carbon, while
other systems (ruminant based) are purely green house gas emission systems. If
the entire area of feasible land is used for forestry, the mean estimate of carbon
sequestration by natural forests along with newly afforested plantation is around
153 TG (tera gram = 1012gm) carbon per year by 2030, equivalent to the 1990
fossil fuel emission of India. In a study in Uttar Pradesh, approximately 20
million tonnes of carbon has been estimated to be sequestered by farm forestry
plantations.
The carbon content of poplar and Eucalyptus trees in Punjab has been
estimated on the basis of oven dry weight density. The figures are 0.47 and 0.45
times the respective oven dry weights. The estimates are in line with the figure
of 0.45 given by IPCC (2000). The potential of long rotation species is higher,
yet the potential of poplar and eucalyptus plantations at short rotation is
substantial (Fig. 1). For the same tree dimensions, eucalyptus can sequester
comparatively more carbon than poplar. It is important to mention that the
locking of sequestered carbon in short rotation forestry is essential otherwise it
would become a source than a sink of carbon.

Fig. 1. Comparison of carbon stock in different land use systems

Com25 = Complex agro-forest duration 20-40 yr., Sim 15 = Simple Agro-forest duration.,
15y r., Safeda8 = Eucalyptus agro-forest duration 8 yr., and Poplar8 = Poplar agro-forest
duration 8yr. Source: IPCC (2000) and Punjab data.
Trees Outside Forests in India: Socio-Economic, Environmental and Policy Issues 95

Constraints to growing of trees outside forests

Farmers in India have made significant contribution toward production of wood
and improvement of tree cover outside forests. However, there are a number of
constraints, which inhibit the growth and development of farm and agroforestry
to its full potential. The major constraints are:
x Long gestation period of tree crops along with market uncertainties.
x Difficulties in getting long term bank credit and insurance for
plantations.
x Absence of regulated timber markets for transparent trading.
x Non-availability of genetically improved/certified forest reproductive
material and absence of efficient extension services
x Limited choice of profitable agroforestry models in order to maximize
the total farm income from combined farming and forestry in highly
variable cultural and ecological conditions.
x Over regulation often restricting access to markets for farmer-grown
timber and tree products, partly because of rules intended to curb illegal
logging from natural forests and government plantations.
x Lack of strategic directions (supply-demand forecasts) for agroforestry
linking potential production with market demand.
x Marketing and price support system to ensure right prices and
smoothen market fluctuations.
x Unfavourable export and import policy of the Government, etc.

Government Policies
In the light of the above, the important policy initiatives that are required to
reform the forestry sector in India in the 21st Century and unlock opportunities
for the rural poor and small farmers are as follows.

Foreign Trade
The price of timber in India has been increasing at the rate of 15 % per annum
thereby making imports more attractive (Mahapatra et al. 2005). The current
import policy allows duty free import of timber under the open general license
(OGL). On the other hand, export of logs of farm grown timber is not allowed.
This not only puts an unnecessary strain on India’s foreign exchange reserves
but also jeopardizes the interests of tree growers who now have to settle for a
smaller share of the market. It must be said to the credit of the farmers that
despite tough competition from imports, they are still contributing more than 50
per cent of wood supplies. Farm and agroforestry have the potential to do away
with imports and generate additional employment opportunities for weaker
sections of society. This is in line with the 11th Five Year Plan’s commitment to
“faster, more broad-based and inclusive growth”. In many cases, imported
timber may come from forests that have not been managed sustainably. Such
management practices eventually turn out to be a source rather than being a sink
96 Forestry Technologies – A Complete Value Chain Approach

of carbon. Government should, therefore, impose a reasonable import duty on

softwoods and fast grown plantation timbers to support farm and agroforestry.

Multi-stakeholder partnerships
National Environment Policy, 2004 identified deforestation in the country as
one of the reasons for climate change. The policy emphasized the need to
develop a strategy to meet the goal of 33 % forest and tree cover. To this end,
multi stakeholder partnerships have been recognized as an important strategy.
The key elements of the partnerships include (i) involvement of Forest
Departments, local communities, and investors with clearly defined obligations
and entitlements for each partner to derive environmental, livelihood and
financial benefits from reforestation of degraded lands, and (ii) rationalization of
restrictions on cultivation of forest species outside notified forests where returns
from their cultivation are more favourable than cropping. The ownership of land
in question will remain with the Forest Department and the status of such lands
would remain unaltered. This is a laudable objective and must be rationalized as
soon as possible.

Certification of Forest Reproductive Material

The absence of a system of certification of forest reproductive material and
registration of nursery encourages production of poor quality FRM that reduces
yield considerably. The National Forestry Action Programme (NFAP) of India
makes a similar point as follows:
“The annual increment (MAI) of forest plantations varies from about 2m3
ha yr-1 for valuable timber to about 5-8 m3 ha-1 yr-1 for eucalypts and other fast
-1

growing species. This may be compared to an MAI of over 10 m3ha-1yr-1

generally and about 50 m3ha-1yr-1 for good industrial plantations in other
countries” (MOEF, 1999).
Research has shown that if forests are to be of increased value including the
aspects of stability, adaptation, resistance, productivity and diversity, it is
necessary to use reproductive material, which is genetically superior and
phenotypically suited to the plantation site and must be of high genetic quality
EU (2007). Lal et al. (2008) have proposed a comprehensive scheme for
certification of FRM, compulsory registration of nurseries, the institutional
mechanism that may be required and the draft law for enforcement. The object
of the certification of tree seed and plants (FRM) is to maintain and make
available to the practicing forester as well as agro-forester sources of seed, plants
and other propagation materials of superior provenances and cultivars so grown
and distributed as to insure the genetic identity and high quality of seed and
plants.
The proposed elements of a comprehensive seed certification scheme for
forest seed and plants are:
(a) Inspection of the seed source by a qualified professional forester.
Trees Outside Forests in India: Socio-Economic, Environmental and Policy Issues 97

(b) Assessment of cone/fruit crop by a qualified professional forester

before seed collection begins.
(c) Collection of cones/fruits by a registered seed collector.
(d) Testing of an adequate sample at an official seed-testing laboratory.
(e) Sowing of seed in a registered nursery where labels and records satisfy
minimum requirements.
The certification of FRM and registration of nurseries would make quality
plant material available to foresters as well as farmers, and would also prevent
duping of farmers by unscrupulous elements. It is recommended that the
Government of India should accord a high priority to this important task so that
quality FRM becomes available. Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare,
Govt. of India has initiated the process of planting stock certification, which
would be implemented shortly to ensure quality of the stock for the growers.

Integration of wood based industries with agroforestry

The principle of forest conservation applied in recorded forest areas has now
been extended to agroforestry as well. With a view to conserve forests and
prevent illicit cutting of wood, all wood based industries including saw mills,
veneer industries, plywood industries and other industries such as paper mills
and katha factories have now been brought under a licensing regime in the
country. Essentially, this means that all wood based industries would need a
licence to operate and the licence would be contingent upon the availability of
raw material, i.e. wood following the principle of sustained yield. Thus, in the
predominantly agroforestry states where earlier there were no such restrictions
and regulations, setting up of wood using units based on produce from
agroforests would now require a licence.
The licensing regime has been brought in with the laudable objective of
forest conservation and development. As a matter of fact the revenue generated
through collection of licence fee and other charges is sought to be utilized for
the development of forestry. Implicit in this objective is the belief that the wood
using industries would support tree-growing efforts with a support price or buy
back arrangements. In practice this may not happen, and may in fact hamper the
integrated development of farm forestry and wood based industries when tree
growers are already facing a number of constraints. If the issue is not handed
imaginatively, it may further encourage imports to the detriment of agroforestry
and the objective of greening India. The new agroforestry policy envisages the
coordination among the stakeholders to boost the adoption of plantations. The
efforts of TNAU Coimbatore has been found successful for stakeholder
collaboration (farmer, scientist, industry and financial institutions) for extending
area under onfarm tree plantations (Parthiban et al., 2010) and hopefully the
process would be replicated in other parts of the country to realize the
implementation and benefits of agroforestry policy in true sense.
98 Forestry Technologies – A Complete Value Chain Approach

CONCLUSION
Forests in India cannot meet the demand for timber, industrial wood and
fuelwood on a sustainable basis because of low growing stock, poor growth
rates, inadequate financial and technical inputs, and serious biotic pressures. The
growing shortage of industrial wood has hampered the growth and
modernization of wood-based industries and employment opportunities in the
forestry sector. A way forward lies in improving productivity of degraded forests
and encouraging farm and agroforestry by using genetically superior FRM. It is
being increasingly realized that Central and State Governments do not have
sufficient resources to reforest and rehabilitate degraded forests. The Ministry of
Environment and Forests has been getting only a small proportion of the
estimated requirements for funds as elaborated in the National Afforestation
Programme (1999). It is high time that State Forest Departments, rural
communities, wood-based industries and financial institutions join hands to
transform forest productivity, especially in the above areas, through genetically
improved plant material. An area of 3 million ha planted with superior material
over a rotation of 8 years would be sufficient to meet almost all of our
requirements for wood of various descriptions. Apart from savings in foreign
exchange, such plantations would help in greening of India, conserve our natural
forests, provide vast employment opportunities, promote local processing and
value addition, generate sustainable incomes for local communities, help mitigate
the green house gases and waste management.
Based on the SWOT analysis, the genuine concerns of tree growers should
be addressed on priority. The important issues of concern are:
x Strengthening farm forestry research and extension services to develop
profitable and replicable agroforestry models. All research organizations
of Central Government and the States, universities as well as the private
sector may be involved in this important endeavour. Digital support
system regarding good cultivation practices may be provided to the
growers.
x Promotion of investments in the sub-sector by making institutional
funds available to the growers on concessional terms on long term basis
including insurance cover.
x Certification of FRM and registration of nurseries to facilitate
availability of quality planting material.
x Operationalization of the strategy for multi-stakeholder partnerships
involving forest departments, communities and the investors for
undertaking plantations on degraded forests, wastelands and private
lands. Leasing of waste lands would be a practical option for ecological
benefits including restoration and conservation of natural resources.
x Grant of incentives for growth and development of farm forestry and
simplification of rules for timber transit and felling of trees for farm
grown timbers. Agro-based status to cottage industries on value
Trees Outside Forests in India: Socio-Economic, Environmental and Policy Issues 99

addition may boost the enterprise with added rural employment

generation.
x Increased support to R&D projects which contribute to livelihood
security and conservation of natural resources.

REFERENCES
Balooni, K. (2000) Teak investment programmes: an Indian perspective. Unasylva 201: 22-28.
Chaturvedi, A.N. (1995) The viability of commercial teak plantation Projects. Indian Forester 121:
550-553.
Biswas, R.K. (2006). Trees outside forests : Opportunities for socio-economic and cultural development.
Presented at National Seminar on Trees outside forests: Potential for socio-economic and
ecological development. Department of Forests and Wildlife Preservation, Government of
Punjab, Chandigarh.
Chander, J., Chauhan, S.K. and Yadav, S. (2015). Requirements for forest health management in
21 century. Journal of Tree Sciences 34: 77-81.
Chander, J. and Chauhan, S.K. (2016). Sustainable developmental goals: food security, climate
change and forests. Souvenir, IES International Conference on Natural Resource Management-
Ecological Perspective 18-20 February, 2016) at SKUAST Jammu, 24-27pp.
Chaudhury, P. (2006). Valuing recreational benefits of urban forestry – a case study Chandigarh
city. Ph.D. Thesis, FRI (Deemed University), Dehra Dun, India.
Chauhan, S.K., Chauhan, R. and Saralch, H.S. (2008). Exotics in Indian Forestry. Exotics in Indian
Forestry (Eds. Chauhan, S.K., Gill, S.S., Sharma, S.C. and Chauhan, R.). Agrotech Publishing
Academy, Udaipur, pp. 24-56.
CIFOR 2016. CIFOR Strategy 2016–2025: Stepping up to the new climate and development
agenda. Bogor, Indonesia, 31p.
Dhyani, S.K. (2014). National agroforestry policy 2014 and the need for area estimation under
agroforestry. Current Science 107: 9-10.
Dogra, A.S., Upadhayay, A., Sharma, S.C. and Chauhan, S.K. (2007). Potential of agroforestry as a
land use option in Punjab, India. Indian Forester 133(11): 1437-1448.
FAO 2010. Global forest resources assessment 2010. Main report. FAO Forestry Paper 163. Rome,
FAO. 378p
FSI (2015). State of Forest Report 2015. Forest Survey of India, Dehra Dun, Ministry of
Environment and Forests, Government of India. 300 pp.
Ganguly, B.N. (2003). Private sector participation on public forestlands: challenges and policy
issues. In: Forest policy for private forestry: Global and regional challenges. CAB International.
Jürgensen, C., Kollert, W. and Lebedys, A. 2014. Assessment of industrial roundwood production from
planted forests. FAO Planted Forests and Trees Working Paper FP/48/E. Rome, 30p.
Kaler, P.L. (2006). Trees outside forests: Potential for socio-economic and ecological
development with special reference to historical and religious places in Punjab and their
impact on society. Presented at National Seminar on Trees outside forests: Potential for
socio-economic and ecological development. Department of Forests and Wildlife
Preservation, Government of Punjab, Chandigarh.
Lal, P., Dogra, A.S. and Dabral, S.L. (2008). Need for an institutional and regulatory mechanism
for certification of forest reproductive material in India. Report prepared for Director
General, Indian Council of Forestry Research, Education and Extension, Dehra Dun.
Available at [Link] under Directorate of Education.
Lal, P. (2004). Integrated development of farm-forestry plantations and wood based industries.
Indian Forester 130(1): 71-78.
100 Forestry Technologies – A Complete Value Chain Approach

Lal P., Dogra, A.S., Sharma, S.C. and Chahal, G.B.S. (2006). Evaluation of different clones of
Eucalyptus in Punjab. Indian Forester 132(11): 1383-90.
Mahapatra, S.P., Bhattacharjee, N.K., Soumitri Das and Upadhaya, P. (2005). Scope of
production forestry in enhancing carbon Mitigation in India. Ashoka Trust for Research in
Ecology and the Environment (ATREE), New Delhi.
Midgley, S.J., Lal, P., Bhojvaid P.P. and Brown, A. (2007). A Strategy for Developing Market
Opportunities for Australian Forest Products in India. A Report to the Forest Industries
Branch. Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry. Salwood Asia Pacific Pty Ltd.
Services in Forestry, 35 Steinwedel St, Farrer, ACT 2607, Australia. 50pp.
Midgley, S.J. and Turnbull, J.W. (2003). Domestication and use of Australian acacias: case studies
of five important species. Australian Systematic Botany 16: 89–102.
MoEF (1999). National forestry programme, volumes I and II with executive summary. Ministry of Forests
and Environment, Government of India, New Delhi, India
NFC (2006). Report of the National Forest Commission. Government of India, Ministry of
Environment and Forests, 2006. 421pp.
Pandey, D.N. (2007). Multifuntional agroforestry systems in India. Current Science 92(4):455-461.
Parthiban, K.T., Seenivasan, R. and Govinda Rao, M. (2010). Contract Tree Farming in Tamil
Nadu - a Successful Industrial Farm Forestry Model. Indian Forestry 136: 187-197
Rai S.N. and Chakraborty S.K. 2001. Demand and supply of fuel wood and timber in India. Indian
Forester 127: 263-279.
Schroeder, P. (1994). Carbon storage benefits of agroforestry system. Agroforestry Systems 27: 89-
97.
Singh, K.D. (2008). Forests, farms and trees: recent trends and future prospects. International
Forestry Review 10(2):103-115.
Singh M.P., Bhokvaid, P.P., Reddy, S.R. and Ashraf, J. (2014). Evidences and aspects of forest
transition in India. Indian Forester 140: 737-746.
Srinidhi, H.V., Datta, S.K., Chauhan R. and Gill, M.K. (2007). Dendroremediation: use of trees to
cleanup environment in different land use systems. Environment and Ecology 25(2): 245-54.
Willan, R.N. (1988). Economic returns from tree improvement in tropical and sub-tropical conditions. TSSN
0902 3224 Danida Forest Seed Centre, Krogerup vej 3A. DK-3050 Humlebaek, Denmark.
36pp.
Wolf, Kathleen L. (2007). City trees and property values. Arborist News, August, 2007.
Wolf, Kathleen L. (2005). Business District Streetscapes, Trees and Consumer Response. Journal
of Forestry 103(8): 396-400.
Woods, J. and Hall, D.O. (1994). Bioenergy for Development: Technical and Environmental Dimensions,
FAO Environment and Energy Paper 13, Rome.
World Bank (2006). India: Unlocking opportunities for forest- dependent people. Agriculture and Rural
Development Sector Unit, South Asia Region. The World Bank. Oxford University Press,
New Delhi 96pp.