Since there are no currently active contests, we have switched Climate CoLab to read-only mode.
Learn more at
Skip navigation
Share conversation: Share via:

Ajay Gajanan Bhave

Jun 18, 2014


1 |
Share via:
Your zeal and interest in the agroforestry approach to deal with climate change comes out very nicely through the description and it is admirable. However there are a few issues in the proposal that you could address. One is that agroforestry is already being implemented through several national and international programmes and you should clarify whether your proposal is a supplement to existing mechanisms or if you propose a new one. In either case you should discuss actual actions rather than just planning. Second is that there are tradeoffs when farmers pursue agroforestry. Land availability, impact on soil moisture, tree harvesting and market for timber and other products. Also the choice of tree species determines the scale of impact. Thirdly, I believe you should give a realistic estimate of project costs for a region or for the level of agroforestry that you want to achieve.

Helio Laubenheimer

Jun 18, 2014


2 |
Share via:
Hi, Agroforestry systems are really a very intersting sustainable land use approach with inumerous benefits. I agree with ajaybhave, you could suggest specific actions for a specific region (Nepal for example as you mentioned) which would strenghten your proposal. Best regards

Paulo Borges De Brito

Jun 20, 2014


3 |
Share via:
Could you elaborate more on the trained and skilled human resources plan you said in the action plan? I mean how would you transfer the necessary knowledge to farmers? Paulo

Charley Quinton

Jun 28, 2014


4 |
Share via:
A better link for the USDA's agroforestry site -

Climate Colab

Aug 6, 2014


5 |
Share via:
Novelty: 3/5 Agroforestry is broadly known. Workability: 1/5 This proposal calls for a number of general actions to promote agroforestry, but includes no details on how the actions may be accomplished. Effectiveness: 3/5 Agroforestry is acknowledged as a potential climate change mitigation technique. Thoroughness: 1/5 The proposal lacks information on specific actions, locations, actors and costs. Presentation: 2/5 Well intended but incomplete. -- This is not really a proposal, just a call to action. Who will do what, and what's the cost, and what are the actual deliverables? Not supportable.