What follows are extractions cut/pasted from Food &
Agricultural Organization (FAO), United Nations, by Katherine
Warner, Romer, 19991
Executive Summary
Integral swidden has
been, and continues to be, practiced throughout the tropics. Integral
swidden is a land use
system based on a "traditional, year-round, community-wide, largely
self-contained and ritually sanctioned way of
life" that is still prevalent among tribal minorities in Southeast Asia
and South America and a small, declining
percentage of African farmers (Conklin 1957:2). Swidden agriculture is
one component, albeit the major one, of
the larger agroecosystem. This agroecosystem includes not only
agriculture, but also forest collection, hunting,
fishing and, in some areas, cash cropping.
All too often in the past swidden was perceived as exploiting, not
managing, the natural resources of
the humid tropics. However recent research, and reinterpretation of
past research, has shown that natural resource
management does occur. The natural resource management of the integral
swiddener is focused on maintaining
the highly valued diversity of the forest ecosystem. Although the
forest may be cut, the swidden practices of
small dispersed clearings, selective weeding, and planting and
protection of trees actually aid the forest in its
return. Other resources, such as animals and fish, are also managed
within a worldview that looks beyond
immediate needs to future sustainability. Such swidden/fallow systems
are not rigid in their adaptation, but show
flexibility in response to changes in the environment or to shifts from
one locale to another.
Analysis of numerous examples of traditional practices suggests that
the integral swiddener succeeds by
accepting and working within the constraints of the natural processes
associated with the year-round growing
season and rapid ecological succession in the humid tropics. The
utilization of natural processes, combined with
an intimate knowledge of the microenvironments of forest and field and
the microsite needs of specific crops,
enables swidden/fallow to succeed where other land use systems have
failed.
Although successful in the past, swidden-based agroecosystems cannot
serve as the model for the future
of the tropics. The tropical forest, so crucial for the swidden/fallow
agroecosystem, is precipitously declining in
area as it falls under increasing pressure from landless settlers,
logging concerns, and national financial needs.
However the local technical knowledge found in integral swidden
societies can contribute to better natural
resource management and the development of sustainable agroecological
systems.
Swiddeners can be active participants in designing new agroecosystems
to meet the challenges of a
constricting resource base. There is a need for on-farm research in
swidden communities to aid in the
development of new cropping systems for intensification of the swidden
system. Such research may also lead to
innovations that can be utilized by non-swidden smallholders in the
tropics.
It is also recommended that agricultural and forestry extension agents
be trained in the general principles
of swidden systems: utilization of microenvironment differences,
integration of trees into smallholder
agroecosystems, and perception of agriculture as being one component in
the larger agroecosystem.
The Natural
Resources of the Humid Tropics: Forest and Soils
When undisturbed, tropical forest ecosystems are stable. The stability
of the tropical forest ecosystem is
the result of its capacity to "withstand climate and other hazards of
the natural environment" (Richards 1977:
230). Several characteristics of the tropical forest create this
stability:
1) The humid tropical forest is rich in the number of species of plants
and animals. It is the high level of
species diversity that provides stability to the forest ecosystem.
2) The tropical forests are highly complex, the most complex of
terrestrial ecosystems (Connell 1978). Plants
and animals are intimately linked within the tropical forest ecosystem.
Animals in the tropical forest
fulfill the role played by wind in the temperate forest for seed
dispersal and pollination (Hadly and Lanly
1983: 5). Since the tropical forest is far more diverse in species and
the animals not far ranging, this
reestablishes and maintains local diversity.
3) Since tropical soils are generally poor in nutrients, the tropical
forest ecosystem depends on a self-contained,
almost closed, nutrient cycle. The nutrients that are cycled in the
system are in the biomass, which
serves as a form of vegetative storage. The forest itself acts like a
giant "sponge" in its recovery and
recycling of nutrients, with 65 - 85% of the vegetation's root system
found within the topsoil layer
(Hadly and Lanly 1983; Uhl 1983; Moran 1981).
The tropical forest ecosystem depends on a self-contained, almost
closed, nutrient cycle.
Amazon studies have shown the importance of the root "mat" of the trees
in the nutrient cycle. The root
mat, made up of the extended roots of trees intermixed with organic
matter and mycorrhizal fungi, lies on the top
of the soil and covers the forest floor. When leaf litter, twigs, or
even fallen trees fall to the forest floor and start
to decompose, the root mat absorbs the dissolved nutrients before they
can be leached down into the soil (Stark
and Jordon 1978). Since 10 -20% of the total biomass dies off and drops
to the ground each year, the amount of
nutrients recycled through the system is large (Moran 1981).
It is an ecosystem that once established is self-sustaining as long as
the rains continue and it is left undisturbed.
Shifting Cultivation
Estimates of the actual number of shifting cultivators vary from 250
million (Myers 1986) to 300 million
(Russell 1988). In a world of 5 billion it might appear to be of no
great concern how 5% of the population
makes its living. But what cannot be ignored is the distribution of
shifting cultivators and the large area under
these agroforestry systems. Shifting cultivation is the most widespread
type of tropical soil management
technique. Various types of shifting cultivation are currently
practiced on 30% of the world's exploitable soils
(Hauck 1974, Sanchez 1976: 346).
What
is shifting
cultivation or swidden farming?
Shifting cultivation represents a response to the difficulties of
establishing an agroecosystem in the
tropical forest.
The tropical forest ecosystem is characterized by generally poor but
varied soils and extremely
diverse flora and
fauna, providing few nutrients, but many potential competitor species
for food crops. By cutting
the forest and
burning the felled trees and litter, the swiddener makes use of an
"artificial energy pulse" that
eliminates
competitor species and concentrates nutrients "in order to briefly . .
. transfer the energy flow into
food crops" (Odum
1971; also Bodley 1976). It is an active manipulation of a patch of the
forest and conversion
to a more open and
useful succession for the cultivator (Rambo 1981: 36; see also Olafson
1983: 153).
There are various
definitions of shifting cultivation. The most commonly used defines shifting
cultivation as any
agricultural system in which the fields are cleared (usually by
fire) and cultivated for shorter periods than they
are fallowed (Conklin 1957). With the development of the
agroecosystem approach and its holistic view of
agricultural systems as part of the greater "natural ecosystem,"
there has been a reconceptualization of shifting
cultivation. The agroecosystem approach attempts to integrate
"the multiplicity of factors affecting cropping systems"
(Gliessman 1985: 18). Whereas many earlier studies
described the swidden system as inherently stable and provided
a checklist of attributes, more recent work based on an
agroecosystem approach has stressed swidden/fallow as
part of an overall subsistence strategy, flexibly
responding to stress as the social, economic or natural environments
change (Gliessman 1985,
Altieri et al
1973).
Reflecting this dynamic view, a more recent definition of shifting
cultivation is "a strategy of resource
management in
which fields are shifted in order to exploit the energy and nutrient
capital of the natural
vegetation-soil
complex of the future site" (McGrath 1987: 223). The emphasis on
strategy and agroecosystem
dynamics makes
shifting cultivation "neither a static nor necessarily stable system of
agriculture" but one that is
flexible in
response to change (McGrath 1987: 223).
Viewing shifting cultivation as a strategy that can be flexible in
response to change places shifting
cultivation on a
continuum with other agricultural systems (which may differ from it in
the length of the fallow
period, the length
of the cropping period, management techniques, etc.) with a movement
from one agricultural
system to another
occurring as a response to changing conditions (Beckerman 1987; Boserup
1965; Raintree and
Warner 1986).
As a subsistence strategy, shifting cultivation has not been popular
with many governments and
international
agencies. It is commonly regarded as a waste of land and human
resources as well as being a major
cause of soil
erosion and deterioration. To clear a forest, use the swidden field for
a year or two, and then move
on to another
patch of the forest does indeed seem wasteful if the forest is
perceived in terms of timber values
alone (Grinnell
1977; Arca 1987). At the heart of the matter is not the cutting of the
forest, which foresters do
all the time, but
the burning of the trees. The concern is not the maintenance
(non-disturbance) of the forest so
much as who should
benefit from its demise. Governments perceive the burning as a
misappropriation of
resources from the
national to the most local (small farmer) level.
Unlike
Sub-Saharan Africa, where everyone belongs to a tribe, in Asia and
Latin America the long
fallow shifting
cultivators have traditionally been ethnic minorities with their own
language, religion, values
and, in some
instances, crops. The government perception of shifting cultivation as
a land use system is
intricately tied
to it being practiced by those who are "outside" the mainstream culture
of the country. People
who are viewed as
being "primitive" since they have a simpler, or merely different,
material culture, are also
perceived as
practicing a "primitive" agriculture, wasteful of resources that could
be better utilized by the national
"mainstream".
Who
are the
shifting cultivators?
In Africa, shifting cultivation is practiced by farmers throughout the
humid zone. However, long fallow shifting cultivation has been
gradually replaced by intensively used fields close to the home site
and long-term rotationally fallowed fields
further away (Chidumayo 1987; Getahun et al 1982). Although there is
some variation in the actual management
practices, crops grown, etc., this intensification of shifting
cultivation is occurring throughout the region.
Unlike Sub-Saharan Africa, where everyone belongs to a tribe, in Asia
and Latin America the long
fallow shifting cultivators have traditionally been ethnic minorities
with their own language, religion, values
and, in some instances, crops. The government perception of shifting
cultivation as a land use system is
intricately tied to it being practiced by those who are "outside" the
mainstream culture of the country. People
who are viewed as being "primitive" since they have a simpler, or
merely different, material culture, are also
perceived as practicing a "primitive" agriculture, wasteful of
resources that could be better utilized by the national
"mainstream".
This prejudice has discouraged the emergence of a more objective view
of shifting cultivation in many
countries. Thus, a land use system becomes judged on the basis of who
is practicing it, rather than on its own
merits and limitations.
In Asia and Latin America the perception of
shifting cultivation is
further complicated by
the fact that it is currently being utilized not just by the "tribos"
(tribal minority) or "indos"(local populations),
but also by the landless peasant and the frontier migrant. Again, there
is indifference, at best, concerning what
low status groups are doing, unless it is judged as infringing on the
national resources. Both the peasant and the
tribos might be perceived as being shifting cultivators, but their
respective land use systems are radically
different.
The tribos are usually practicing integral swidden, a land use system
based on "a more traditional, year-round,
community-wide, largely self-contained, and ritually sanctioned way of
life." When integral swiddeners
enter a new area as pioneers significant portions of climax vegetation
may be cleared each year. When the
community is well established and little or no climax vegetation is
cleared annually they are practicing
established integral swidden (Conklin 1957: 2, 3).
The peasants are practicing partial swidden, which, rather than being
based on a way of life, reflects
"predominantly only the economic interests of its participants"
(Conklin 1957: 2). Peasants practicing partial
swidden have strong sociocultural ties outside the immediate swidden
area and their goals in terms of ownership
and productivity differ from the integral swiddener. Rather than being
part of a stable community that has
historical and cultural ties to the area the partial swiddener may be
there only for the purpose of obtaining a crop
for a year or two. Such partial swiddeners are primarily permanent
field cultivators who make a swidden in
addition to cropping permanent fields. In these cases the partial
swiddener is practicing supplementary swidden
and uses the swidden to supplement the permanent field.
A common pattern in Southeast Asia is for the
permanent field to be in the valleys and the swidden fields on the
hillsides. Another partial swidden system
occurs when the cultivator migrates into the forest. Often with little
prior knowledge of swidden techniques, this
swiddener devotes all his agricultural efforts to making a swidden.
This partial swiddener is making an incipient
swidden, but in most instances does not have the knowledge to develop a
swidden system that can be sustained
(Conklin 1957: 3).
These distinctions have been used extensively in the literature,
although there is a tendency, especially
in South America, to confuse incipient with pioneer swidden. Rather
than use the term pioneer as it was
originally developed (a tribal integral swidden community becoming
established in a new area), the term pioneer
swidden is incorrectly used to refer to the swidden practices of
peasant migrants who move into the forest,
swidden, and later abandon or sell a degraded field and/or establish
permanent field cultivation (UNESCO/UNEP
1978: 324; Moran 1987). According to Conklin's original definitions
these peasant migrants are not pioneer
swiddeners, but incipient swiddeners who degrade because they do not
have enough knowledge of the forest
ecosystem to do otherwise. Nevertheless, since it has become in recent
years the most common usage, for the
remainder of this note pioneer swidden will be used to distinguish the
practices of migrants from the integral
swidden of established, self-contained communities.
With reference to the millions of shifting cultivators mentioned above,
it can now be asked how many
are pioneer and how many are integral swiddeners? Unfortunately, many
governments do not make a distinction
between swiddeners as to which are pioneer and which are integral (also
referred to as traditional). Since the two
swidden systems have very different impacts on the environment, this
distinction should be made (Watters 1971).
When destruction of the tropical forest occurs, it is the pioneer, not
the integral swiddener, who is usually the
cause. "Land hungry" migrants, without a background of integral swidden
that would give them the knowledge to
manage the forest ecosystem, are entering, farming and degrading the
forested areas (Olafson 1981: 3; see also
Moran 1987: 227; Moran 1983; Watters 1971). A population that resides
in an area for one or more generations
will have a far more precise knowledge of the local environment than
the "dislocated" migrant, who is far more
likely to practice a pioneer system, using agricultural methods from
the area of origin rather than those suited to
the area of resettlement (Moran 1987: 227).