CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 13African Botany and Ecology StudiesForest Ecology and ConservationFood Security and Socioeconomic Dynamics

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Agroforestry: Challenges and Opportunities in Rhino Camp and Imvepi Refugee Settlements of Arua District, Northern Uganda

Open access
Grosrenaud, Evangeline, Okia, Clement Akais, Adam-Bradford, Andrew, Trenchard, Liz·2021·Sustainability
DOI 10.3390/su13042134
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

In the past, the environment has been a low priority in humanitarian operations for refugee agencies and implementing partners because of the emergency context. However, actions to safeguard the environment can be undertaken concurrently with emergency interventions and organisations should take responsibility for conserving the environment in refugee settlements in the same way that they are responsible for the welfare of refugees. Tree-based interventions, such as agroforestry, have been demonstrated as a viable option for resilience and sustainability in landscapes with increasing human pressure. Refugee settlements are subject to intense human pressure and suffer environmental degradation as a consequence. The potential benefits of agroforestry in refugee settlements though are not well researched. This study explores the implementation of agroforestry schemes in refugee settlements in the Arua district of Uganda. Using semi-structured interviews with the beneficiaries of the International Centre for Research on Agroforestry (ICRAF) agroforestry projects in Imvepi and Rhino camps, the study identifies key benefits for participants and the environment. These include improved livelihoods and nutrition. However, there are challenges to overcome before agroforestry can be made more widely available in refugee camps. Key barriers include insufficient land, limited water availability and lack of local knowledge, which limits productivity. This research shows how relief, rehabilitation and development can work hand in hand to reduce social and environmental pressure in the targeted refugee settlements and host communities and improve the well-being of beneficiary households by creating opportunities for income generation, improving nutrition and contributing to social cohesion.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/su13042134

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 Location of the study area in Uganda [37]. Figure 1. Location of the study area in Uganda [37].
Figure 1 Location of the study area in Uganda [37]. Figure 1. Location of the study area in Uganda [37].CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 2 Rhino Camp, Refugee household (E. Grosrenaud, 2018). Figure 2. Rhino Camp, Refugee household (E. Grosrenaud, 2018).
Figure 2 Rhino Camp, Refugee household (E. Grosrenaud, 2018). Figure 2. Rhino Camp, Refugee household (E. Grosrenaud, 2018).CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 4 Agriculture in challenging conditions, a summary of key opportunities and challenges identified by the participants taking in the agroforestry projects. Figure 4. Agriculture in challenging conditions, a summary of key opportunities and challenges identified by the participants taking in the agroforestry projects. Figure 4. Agriculture in challenging conditions, a summary of key opportunities and challenges identified by the participants taking in the agroforestry projects.
Figure 4 Agriculture in challenging conditions, a summary of key opportunities and challenges identified by the participants taking in the agroforestry projects. Figure 4. Agriculture in challenging conditions, a summary of key opportunities and challenges identified by the participants taking in the agroforestry projects. Figure 4. Agriculture in challenging conditions, a summary of key opportunities and challenges identified by the participants taking in the agroforestry projects.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 5 Woman carrying firewood for selling or cooking in refugee settlement in northern Uganda (E. Grosrenaud, 2018). Figure 5. Woman carrying firewood for selling or cooking in refugee settlement in northern Uganda (E. Grosrenaud, 2018). Figure 5. Woman carrying firewood for selling or cooking in refugee settlement in northern Uganda (E. Grosrenaud, 2018).
Figure 5 Woman carrying firewood for selling or cooking in refugee settlement in northern Uganda (E. Grosrenaud, 2018). Figure 5. Woman carrying firewood for selling or cooking in refugee settlement in northern Uganda (E. Grosrenaud, 2018). Figure 5. Woman carrying firewood for selling or cooking in refugee settlement in northern Uganda (E. Grosrenaud, 2018).CC-BY · From the PDF
Image 5
CC-BY · From the PDF

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 26

  1. Minang, 2014, REDD+ Readiness progress across countries: Time for reconsideration, Clim. Policy, 14, 685, 10.1080/14693062.2014.905822 · DOI
  2. Young, A. (1997). Agroforestry for Soil Management, CAB International. [2nd ed.]. · DOI
  3. Jose, S., and Gordon, A.M. (2008). Ecological Knowledge and Agroforestry Design: An Introduction. Toward Agroforestry Design an Ecological Approach, Springer. · DOI
  4. Coe, 2014, Scaling up agroforestry requires research ‘in’ rather than ‘for’ development, Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain., 6, 73, 10.1016/j.cosust.2013.10.013 · DOI
  5. Luedeling, 2014, Agroforestry systems in a changing climate—Challenges in projecting future performance, Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain., 6, 1, 10.1016/j.cosust.2013.07.013 · DOI
  6. Sinclair, 1999, A general classification of agroforestry practice, Agrofor. Syst., 46, 161, 10.1023/A:1006278928088 · DOI
  7. Torquebiau, E.F. (2000). A Renewed Perspective on Agroforestry Concepts and Classification, Editions Scientifiques et Medicales Elsevier SAS. · DOI
  8. Ahuja, M.R., and Mohan Jain, S. (2017). Native Trees and Shrubs for Ecosystems Services and the Redesign of Resilient Livestock Production Systems in the Mexican Neotropics. Biodiversity and Conservation of Woody Plants, Springer. · DOI
  9. Thrupp, 2000, Linking agricultural biodiversity and food security: The valuable role of agrobiodiversity for sustainable agriculture, Int. Aff., 76, 265, 10.1111/1468-2346.00133 · DOI
  10. Johansson, 2013, Mapping the relationship of inter-village variation in agroforestry tree survival with social and ecological characteristics: The case of the Vi agroforestry project, Mara Region, Tanzania, Sustainability, 5, 5171, 10.3390/su5125171 · DOI
  11. Tumwebaze, 2016, Soil organic carbon stocks under coffee agroforestry systems and coffee monoculture in Uganda, Agric. Ecosyst. Environ., 216, 188, 10.1016/j.agee.2015.09.037 · DOI
  12. Udeinya, 2006, Fractions of an antimalarial neem-leaf extract have activities superior to chloroquine, and are gametocytocidal, Ann. Trop. Med. Parasitol., 100, 17, 10.1179/136485906X78508 · DOI
  13. Gianotti, 2008, Efficacy of local neem extracts for sustainable malaria vector control in an African village, Malar. J., 7, 138, 10.1186/1475-2875-7-138 · DOI
  14. Özerdem, A., and Roberts, R. (2012). Challenging Post-Conflict Environments, Routledge. [1st ed.].
  15. Tumwebaze, 2012, Soil organic carbon under a linear simultaneous agroforestry system in Uganda, Agrofor. Syst., 84, 11, 10.1007/s10457-011-9448-6 · DOI
  16. Mbow, 2014, Achieving mitigation and adaptation to climate change through sustainable agroforestry practices in Africa, Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain., 6, 8, 10.1016/j.cosust.2013.09.002 · DOI
  17. Jacobsen, 2002, Livelihoods in conflict: The pursuit of livelihoods by refugees and the impact on the human security of host communities, Int. Migr., 40, 95, 10.1111/1468-2435.00213 · DOI
  18. Mukadasi, 2007, Gender mainstreaming and community participation in plant resource conservation in Buzaya county, Kamuli district, Uganda, Afr. J. Ecol., 45, 7, 10.1111/j.1365-2028.2007.00730.x · DOI
  19. Oduol, 1990, The banana (Musa spp.)—Coffee robusta: Traditional agroforestry system of Uganda, Agrofor. Syst., 11, 213, 10.1007/BF00045900 · DOI
  20. Akwango, 2017, Efect of drought early warning system on household food security in Karamoja subregion, Uganda, Agric. Food Secur., 6, 1, 10.1186/s40066-017-0120-x · DOI
  21. Bakewell, 2002, Refugee aid and protection in rural Africa: Working in parallel or cross-purposes?, Refug. Surv. Q., 21, 228, 10.1093/rsq/21.1_and_2.228 · DOI
  22. Devereux, 2001, Livelihood insecurity and social protection: A re-emerging issue in rural development, Dev. Policy Rev., 19, 507, 10.1111/1467-7679.00148 · DOI
  23. Tidball, K.G., and Krasny, M.E. (2014). Reforestation activities at the Chadian refugee camp in Northern Cameron. Greening in the Red Zone: Disaster, Resilience and Community Greening, Springer. · DOI
  24. Frank, 2014, The Self Reliance Strategy and Refugee Livelihoods: Evidence from Oruchinga Refugee Settlement, South Western Uganda, Int. J. Res. Soc. Sci., 4, 59
  25. Nduwamungu, 2012, Agroforestry practice in villages surrounding Nyamure former refugee camp, Nyanza District: Tree species and purpose, Rwanda J., 74, 64
  26. Kidd, C.V., and Pimentel, D. (1992). Integrated resource management systems—definition and assessment. Integrated Resource Management: Agroforestry for Development, Academic Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 13

Metadata

Authors
Grosrenaud, E., Okia, C. A., Adam-Bradford, A., & Trenchard, L.
Affiliations
  • Coventry University (GB)
  • World Agroforestry Centre (KE)
  • Centre for Agroecology, Water and Resilience, Coventry University, Coventry CV8 3LG, UK
Corresponding author
Grosrenaud, Evangeline
ORCID
Trenchard, Liz
Venue
Sustainability
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2021-02-17
Volume
13
Issue
4
Pages
2134
ISSN
2071-1050 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3390/su13042134
OpenAlex
W3130308955
Cited by
13
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1
FWCI
2.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Sustainability (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • Pure (Coventry University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Coventry University
  • Department for International Development
  • Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit
  • World Agroforestry Centre
  • FP7 International Cooperation
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Forestry › African Botany and Ecology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Forestry › Forest Ecology and Conservation
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › General Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Security and Socioeconomic Dynamics
Keywords
agroforestry, refugee settlement, Arua District, livelihoods, nutrition, land scarcity, water availability, local knowledge, social cohesion, income generation, environmental degradation, ICRAF

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review