FOREST MANAGEMENT AND DIVERSIFICATION
The role of multistrata agroforestry in the UK’s agroecological transition Why use costly manufactured infrastructure when vertical farming is available naturally with multistrata agroforestry? Karina Ponton, MSc Environmental Forestry Graduate of Bangor University, asks the question. Transformation for the future we all want To meet the needs of current and future generations, a paradigm shift – of our goals, values, technology, social and economic systems – is necessary. The combination of Brexit, the end of the Common Agricultural Policy and declaration of a Climate Emergency by the UK government may be the largest trigger event to our land-use systems. Thus, we have an incredible opportunity to transform the way we do things. I therefore decided to research the role of agroecological practices such as multistrata agroforestry during this transformative period we are bearing witness to. Agroforestry can be practiced in many ways to meet current and future demands for sustainable food, fuel and fibre. Many forms of agroforestry are compatible with woodland creation grants, carbon sequestration opportunities, innovation funding, Basic Payment Scheme and the incoming Environmental Land Management. I am exceptionally grateful to the Forest Industries Education and Provident Fund for providing a grant towards my site visit travel costs, soil testing and interactive video subscription to process the data.
Multistrata agroforestry (MSA) research The research project focused on the rapidly growing practice of multistrata agroforestry (MSA): multi-layered perennial polycultures (aka food forest / forest garden). In multistrata agroforestry, systems are designed to emulate or mimic natural forest systems, by planting or encouraging three or more perennial layers across a site (Table 1).
Perennial Egyptian walking onion
Multistrata Agroforestry Layers (table 1) Layer
2. Diversity and abundance surveys identified planting densities. Woody plant surveys identified >4000 shrub and canopy plants. Abundance and density varied widely across sites and layers (Figure 1). 3. Ethnobotanical surveys identified species richness and utilisation. Floristic species richness totalled 520 species across sites despite a mean size of 0.5 ha. This is higher than large-scale organic and conventional agricultural systems – and is extremely likely an underestimate. Over 1800 plant uses were recorded, including food, biodiversity, timber/firewood, animal feed, natural fertilisers and medicine. 4. Creation of MSA virtual tours as an education and design tool. Virtual tours have already had over 3500 views. They can be accessed using the QR code (below) via mobile phones, tablets and computers to aid education, inspiration and overall MSA uptake.
Example species
The range of benefits of Multistrata agroforesty
Upper Canopy pine, alder, cherry Lower Canopy apple, hawthorn Shrub
gooseberry, autumn olive
Herbaceous
saffron crocus, Solomon’s seal
Groundcover
comfrey, strawberry, wild garlic
Root
Chinese yam, mashua, oca
Fungal
oyster, wine cap
Climbing
chocolate vine, grape, wisteria
Aquatic
lesser spearwort, water mint
Productivity Multistrata agroforestry is highly productive. Participant and expert Graham Bell’s crop yield records equate to 8700-15600 tonnes ha. This is comparable or higher than yields of wheat, barley and oats in the UK (Defra, 2019). Climate benefits Multistrata systems are second only to >>
Research methods and key findings The research project included a mixedmethod survey of thirteen MSA sites aged 10-30 years, including: 1. Interviews with site owners identified difficulties and successes. Interviews revealed that temperate forest gardens are human-centred systems. Activities contribute to on-site and off-site agroecological transformations. Site managers’ difficulties in establishment or maintenance (lack of resources, biotic or logistical setbacks) lessened over time.
CONFOR.ORG.UK
Figure 1. Number of stems (ha) across sites compared to UK broadleaf low-, average- and high stocking densities (Kerr & Evans, 1993) for upper (UC), lower (LC), shrub (SH) and SP (sapling) layers.
FORESTRY & TIMBER NEWS • February 2022 47
