IMPACTS OF AGROFORESTRY ADOPTION ON THE LIVELIHOODS OF SMALL HOLDER FARMERS IN THE NEWLY SETTLED SOLIO RANCH SCHEME IN LAIKIPIA COUNTY.

BY

WINFRED GATHONI KIRUGUMI

A Research Proposal Submitted to the Department of Agriculture and rural development in Partial Fulfillment for the Award of Degree of Masters in Agriculture of Kenya Methodist University.

February, 2022

DECLARATIONThis research proposal is my original work and has not been presented for a degree in any other University.

Signature……………………………………Date………/………/2022

Winfred Gathoni Kirugumi

Admission no: AGR-3-0034-1/2021

This research proposal has been submitted for examination with my approval as the university supervisor.

Signature……………………………………Date………/………/2022

Dr. Mworia Mugambi

Department of Agriculture and Rural Development

Kenya Methodist University

ABSTRACTThe goal of this study is to ascertain the impacts of agroforestry on smallholder farmers in the Solio ranch program. Four research objectives will lead the study: to ascertain the income earned by smallholder farmers through agroforestry adoption in the Solio resettlement scheme, to ascertain the environmental benefits of agroforestry adoption on the livelihoods of smallholder farmers in the newly settled Solio Ranch Scheme in Laikipia County, to ascertain the extent to which food and energy diversification are associated with agroforestry adoption by smallholder farmers in the newly settled Solio Ranch Scheme in Laikipia County, and to ascertain the extent  to which inorganic fertilizer usage has decreased over time as a result of the implementation of agroforestry in Solio ranch scheme The study will use Sloven’s method and simple random sampling to select 368 smallholder farmers from a population of 4,600. A structured questionnaire will be provided to randomly selected farmers in the Solio settlement program in order to collect data. Twelve farmers who will not participate in the actual survey will be chosen for the pilot study. The Statistical Package for Social Sciences will be used to evaluate the findings using descriptive and inferential statistics (SPSS version 25). The study data will be summarized and presented using a variety of descriptive statistical methods, including frequencies, percentages, tables, pie charts, and bar graphs, in order to reach conclusions. The impacts of agroforestry adoption will be determined using correlation and multiple regression analysis, as well as Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and chi-square analysis. This research will adhere to research ethics throughout the data collection process.

TABLE OF CONTENT Page

TOC o “1-3” h z u DECLARATION PAGEREF _Toc95407748 h iiABSTRACT PAGEREF _Toc95407749 h iiiTABLE OF CONTENT PAGEREF _Toc95407750 h ivCHAPTER ONEINTRODUCTION1.0 Background to the study PAGEREF _Toc95407753 h 11.2 Statement of the problem PAGEREF _Toc95407754 h 51.3 General objectives PAGEREF _Toc95407755 h 61.3.1 Specific Objectives PAGEREF _Toc95407756 h 61.4 Research Questions PAGEREF _Toc95407757 h 61.5 Significance of the study PAGEREF _Toc95407758 h 71.5.1 Smallholder farmers PAGEREF _Toc95407759 h 71.5.2 County government and partners PAGEREF _Toc95407760 h 71.5.3 Scholars, academicians and researchers PAGEREF _Toc95407761 h 81.6 Justification of the Study PAGEREF _Toc95407762 h 81.7 Scope of the study PAGEREF _Toc95407763 h 81.8 Study Limitations PAGEREF _Toc95407764 h 91.9 Assumptions of the Study PAGEREF _Toc95407765 h 91.10 Operational definition of terms PAGEREF _Toc95407766 h 10CHAPTER TWOLITERATURE REVIEW2.1 Introduction PAGEREF _Toc95407769 h 112.2 Adoption of agroforestry and livelihoods PAGEREF _Toc95407770 h 112.3 Agroforestry PAGEREF _Toc95407771 h 132.4.1 Agroforestry, income and livelihoods PAGEREF _Toc95407772 h 142.4.2 Agroforestry, Benefits to the environment and livelihoods PAGEREF _Toc95407773 h 162.4.3 Agroforestry and decreased reliance on inorganic fertilizers to increase food and energy production PAGEREF _Toc95407774 h 172.5 Conceptual Framework PAGEREF _Toc95407775 h 192.6 Operationalization framework PAGEREF _Toc95407776 h 202.7 Research gap PAGEREF _Toc95407777 h 20CHAPTER THREERESEARCH METHODOLOGY3.0 Introduction PAGEREF _Toc95407780 h 223.1 Study Design PAGEREF _Toc95407781 h 223.2 Target Population PAGEREF _Toc95407782 h 233.3 Sampling frame PAGEREF _Toc95407783 h 233.4 Sampling methods, sampling design and sample size PAGEREF _Toc95407784 h 243.5 Data collection Tools PAGEREF _Toc95407785 h 253.6 Data Collection Procedures PAGEREF _Toc95407786 h 253.7 Pretesting of Research Instruments PAGEREF _Toc95407787 h 263.7.1 Pilot Study PAGEREF _Toc95407788 h 263.7.2 Validity PAGEREF _Toc95407789 h 263.7.3 Reliability PAGEREF _Toc95407790 h 263.8 Data Processing and Analysis PAGEREF _Toc95407791 h 273.9 Normality Testing PAGEREF _Toc95407792 h 283.10 Study ethics considerations PAGEREF _Toc95407793 h 28

CHAPTER ONEINTRODUCTION1.0 Background to the studyAgroforestry is the deliberated consortia of trees with crop plants and/or livestock, in determined space arrangements and sequences, presenting varied interactions among them (Coelho, 2017). The practice of agroforestry includes attempted integration and management of a consortia of forest and agricultural resources on the same landscape, where farmers grow trees on their farms, pasturelands and homesteads (Kinyili,2021; PEVERI, 2021; Wanjira & Muriuki, 2020). According to Shidiki, Ambebe & Awazi (2020), agroforestry can either be a spatial arrangement of plants and livestock with an integration of forests at the same time or time-sequence where trees and shrubs are planted on a fallow to enhance fertility.

Agroforestry has traditionally been connected with positive livelihood development, appropriate land management, and long-term development (Asaaga & Malhi, 2020; Tiwari, 2017). These include the availability of a range of things for use (Temu, 2013), such as energy in the form of firewood, building materials in the form of posts and timber, food such as farm-crop grown; beans and maize, fruits, and medication (Sharma & Singh, 2016; Wafuke, 2012). A study by Muir (2021) adds to prior studies by stating that in various rural regions, there are other non-timber goods such as wax and honey from bees, safe to eat fruits, nutritious insects, vegetables, herbal remedies, brooms, and fibers that can be generated through agroforestry. Trees and shrubs have numerous benefits such as trapping carbon from the atmosphere, tapping nutrients and water deep into the ground, providing fodder for livestock, creating microclimates, and serving aesthetic purposes (Uphoff, (Ed.). 2013; Recha, Shames, & Heiner, 2014). Further, trees and shrubs are recognized to provide the habitat and food for the majority of wild animals (Mojo & Alebachew, 2014).

Globally, adoption of agroforestry is advocated to small holder farmers and rural households to provide food security, diversify income through tree seedlings business, selling of firewood and sales of surplus food crops and to bring back ecological systems (Leach & Mearns, 2013; Carsan, 2012). Subsequently, several international bodies including the United Nations (UN) and World Bank (WB), governments and Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) have provided inputs to push in adopters or farmers to agroforestry and who reside in the tropical region of the world where conditions are favorable (Miller, Ordonez, Baylis & Rana, 2017).

According to Brown, Miller, Ordonez, and Baylis (2018), agroforestry used to be poorly established in East Africa throughout the past decades, with farmers participating in the activities always being less than 8%, but has been increasing since the turn of the millennium. Smallholders in Ethiopia practice various agroforestry practices based on socioeconomic and biophysical conditions, which has livelihood implications (Madalcho & Tefera, 2016; Alambo, 2020) the atmosphere, tapping nutrients and water deep from the ground, providing fodder for livestock, creating a microclimate, and aesthetic purposes (Uphoff, (Ed.). 2013; Recha, Shames, & Heiner, 2014). The deliberate retaining of naturally occurring trees on farmlands, provision of incomes, prevention of soil erosion that result to a reduction in inorganic fertilizer usage and ecological systems are some of common land use purposes carried out by these smallholder farmers (Iiyama et al. 2017). However, the practice of farmland agroforestry is declining in many agricultural landscapes in Ethiopia due to increase in fuelwood demand and degradation of nearby forests, agricultural intensification, the increasing popularity of exotic tree species which generate larger economic benefits for farmers and the fact that land proclamations do not specify clear instructions for farmers on how to manage and conserve indigenous trees (Amare, Wondie, Mekuria & Darr, 2019; Elagib & Al-Saidi, 2020).

In Kenya, numerous agroforestry techniques have been employed over the years. The shamba system is the oldest, in which peasants are allowed to pursue agricultural in government gazetted woods in exchange for caring for the trees and bushes. The alternative option is the Plantation Establishment and Livelihood Improvement Scheme (PELIS), under which farmers are permitted to undertake agriculture during the early stages of afforestation or reafforestation and are required to stop when the canopies cover the underlying vegetation (Chabeda-Barthe & Haller, 2018; Wanjira & Muriuki, 2020; Achungo, 2015). On the other hand, farmers plant trees and bushes on their fields in addition to crops and keeping animals (Njue, Koech, Hitimana, &Sirmah, (2016).

According to Kenyan researchers, if agroforestry is integrated at the home level, it has the potential to give economic, social, and environmental benefits capable of addressing household income, fuel, food supply, and environmental concerns (Catherine ,2021). There have been numerous campaigns in Kenya to direct and encourage farmers to adopt agroforestry practises in their farmland (Maina , 2020), and notably, agroforestry in Kenya, with multiple designs, is being adopted in private small-scale and government-owned farms for multiple objectives such as food, energy, and environmental benefits, including climate change mitigation (Sharma at el., 2016; Renzaho, Kamara & Toole, 2017). Despite this, the rate of agroforestry adoption in Kenya remains low due to a variety of constraints. As a result of the poor adoption status of agroforestry, several recommendations have been proposed that advocate for agroforestry adoption in various locations throughout the country (Kimaro, 2019; Bisong & Larwanou, 2019).

Solio is a new resettlement ranch scheme that was established in 2009 (Gakuru, 2017). The scheme, which is located in the shadow of Mt Kenya, is characterized by 400-750mm annual rainfall, hence classified as semi-arid. It was a desolate area until the squatters brought from central Kenya were relocated on it . However, great progress has been made in reclaiming the land by the County Government of Laikipia (CGL) (2020), through the planting of trees and shrubs. Residents are also interested in livestock keeping and crops production, according to CGL (2020). As a result, this is a great place for establishing human-environment interaction, particularly in agriculture and tree planting. With the majority of the population being smallholder farmers, they stand to benefit greatly from agroforestry. This is due to the fact that agroforestry produces a varied range of products and services while employing tiny plots of land (Muschle , 2016). The county government of Laikipia has made attempts to stimulate the use of agroforestry in the Solio Ranch programme in order to improve smallholder farmers’ livelihoods, economic development, and resilience (Laikipia County Development report,2020). However, there has been minimal attempt to assess the trade-off between agroforestry adoption and its impacts on the livelihoods of these Solio ranch resettlement programme small holder farmers. According to Benjamin (2018), the frequent pronounced livelihood components recognized in agroforestry adoption include income expansion, ecosystem benefits, increase in output owing to reduction in inorganic fertilizer usage, and diversity of food and energy. Unfortunately, there are minimal studies that identify the impacts of agroforestry adoption on livelihoods. This study will examine the impacts of agroforestry adoption to the livelihood of small holder farmers in the Solio ranch scheme, with a particular emphasis on income, food and energy diversification, environmental benefits, and reduction in inorganic fertilizer usage, as well as how these benefits act as a catalyst for and sustain the practice of agroforestry adoption in the ranch

1.2 Statement of the problemThe Kenyan government has spent the last two decades collaborating with smallholder farmers across the tropics to find and create improved agroforestry practices that build on indigenous knowledge and deliver major benefits to households and the environment. Throughout history, the Kenyan government has endeavored to implement ambitious agricultural policies with initiatives targeted at increasing agricultural production and performance in order to improve the livelihoods of the majority of farmers (Kampmann & Kirui, 2021). Among the practices that have followed from these attempts are new resettlement schemes designed at generating income, addressing climate change, boosting food production, and improving energy efficiency among rural smallholder farmers. Despite these efforts, research indicates that farmers continue to endure widespread poverty even when they adopt agroforestry (Catherine, 2021). Farmers who implement agroforestry, on the other hand, gain from increased environmental benefits, income, food, and energy diversification (Kassie, 2018). It is vital to examine the impact of agroforestry on smallholder farmers’ livelihoods in order to acquire a better understanding of how it affects them. As a result, agroforestry must play a greater role in meeting the demand for trees, as well as the resources and expertise necessary for their adoption by smallholder farmers. Agroforestry advancement has been extremely limited as a result of its adverse effects on the environment, livelihoods, and reduction in inorganic fertilizer use development, resulting in low acceptance among practitioners, farmers, and policymakers (Brown et al., 2018). This issue is becoming more obvious as environmental consciousness grows, with more recommendations targeted at strengthening agroforestry’s role in providing ecosystem services, livelihoods, and reducing inorganic fertilizer use (Crous-Duran et al., 2018). To encourage farmers to adopt agroforestry, it is necessary for them to understand how agroforestry contributes to these suites of advantages Ospina (2017). There is mounting evidence that agroforestry plays a significant role in diversifying household incomes, increasing food and energy production, and modifying the climate. This role can be effectively utilized to improve the livelihoods of smallholder farmers in many parts of Kenya with sparse forest cover. However, there is limited study on the influence of agroforestry adoption on the lives of smallholder farmers in Laikipia county’s newly established Solio ranch scheme. As such, the researcher is motivated and encouraged to undertake this study in the Solio resettlement scheme in order to close this information gap.

1.3 General objectivesThe study seeks to evaluate the impacts of agroforestry adoption on the livelihoods of small holder farmers in the Solio Ranch Scheme in Laikipia County.

1.3.1 Specific ObjectivesTo ascertain the income earned through agroforestry adoption by smallholder farmers in Solio resettlement scheme.

To determine the environmental benefits of agroforestry adoption on the livelihood of small holder farmers in the newly settled Solio Ranch Scheme in Laikipia County.

To measure food and energy diversification associated with agroforestry adoption to small holder farmers in the newly settled Solio Ranch Scheme in Laikipia County

To ascertain the extent to which inorganic fertilizer usage has decreased over time as a result of the implementation of agroforestry in Solio ranch scheme.

1.4 Research QuestionsHave the small holder farmers been able to diversify their incomes since adoption of agroforestry in the newly settled Solio Ranch Scheme in Laikipia County?

What are the environmental benefits that results from agroforestry adoption to small holder farmers of the newly settled Solio Ranch Scheme in Laikipia County?

Has the agroforestry provided food and energy diversification to the small holder farmers in the newly settled Solio Ranch Scheme in Laikipia County?

To what extent has inorganic fertilizer usage reduced over the years due to improved Reduction in inorganic fertilizer usage associated with agroforestry adoption?

1.5 Significance of the study1.5.1 Smallholder farmers

The findings of this study will provide insights on the impacts of incorporating agroforestry into settlement projects. Farmers will be notified about the degrees of diversification of their household earnings from fodder sales, crop sales, energy in the form of firewood, and sales of building posts and timber. Furthermore, farmers will benefit from the study by understanding how the trees and shrubs they plant serve to improve the overall landscape, improve food security, increase output, and overall livelihood sustainability.

1.5.2 County government and partnersThe findings of this study will be particularly valuable to the Laikipia County Government and other climate change partners since they will inform the contributions that smallholder farmers who practice agroforestry will benefit. They will use this document as a guide when developing a policy that will lead to the reclamation of other degraded areas, thereby boosting their productivity and enhancing their food supply.

1.5.3 Scholars, academicians and researchersThe study will motivate other academics to perform additional research on the impact of agroforestry adoption on livelihood of smallholder farmers of resettlement schemes across the board and nationalism.1.6 Justification of the StudyThe majority of those residing in the Solio resettlement plan came from roadside camps and other informal settlements (County Government of Laikipia, 2020). As a result, these people must make use of the available resources (land and water) to improve their lives. Because the region is semi-arid, agroforestry is a viable option for them. Studies on the impact of agroforestry on smallholder farmers have highlighted the social, economic, and environmental benefits (Kinyili & Ndunda, 2021). However, little has been done to identify the unique impacts of agroforestry adoption on the livelihood of smallholder farmers in the newly established ranch system in Laikipia county, resulting in a knowledge gap. As a result, it is reasonable to expect that this study will provide pertinent information about the impacts of agroforestry adoption on smallholder farmers in the solio ranch system.

1.7 Scope of the studyThe research will be conducted at the solio resettlement ranch scheme, which is located in the shadow of Mt Kenya and is characterized by 400-750mm annual rainfall, making it a semi-arid environment. The study will focus on this solio ranch plan to conduct the research since the land was dry and had almost no trees when the residents were relocated to it, but this has changed over the last twelve years and the area has experienced an increase in the number of trees and shrubs.

As a result, the small holder farmers in this scheme are in an excellent position to highlight the benefits they have received through agroforestry adoption.

1.8 Study LimitationsThis study will be devoted solely on the Solio resettlement plan in Laikipia County. The study’s limitations include the fact that the features of smallholder farmers in the Solio scheme may distinguish them from other smallholder farmers, and thus the study’s findings may not be generalizable to other counties and boards in terms of agroforestry adoption. Another study limitation is determining whether smallholder farmers will disclose accurate data on the actual income earned by agroforestry, given the sensitive nature of the subject. This barrier will be overcome by giving respondents with a letter of introduction from Kenya Methodist University saying that their information will be used solely for academic reasons and would be held in the highest confidence.1.9 Assumptions of the Study

During the study, the researcher will assume the following:

The respondents will freely express their opinions and feelings about the study variables.

That the farmers will be unbiassed and provide correct and honest data to the questions.

Variables not used in this study will not affect the it’s outcomes

1.10 Operational definition of termsScheme: A scheme is a plan for promoting rural development by establishing farmers in impoverished areas with the goal of increasing their income (Awulachew, 2019).

Income: Incomes generated from agroforestry adoption by small holder farmers

Agroforestry: This refers to a simultaneous integration of trees, cultivable crops, and livestock in fields (Jose, Gold, & Garrett, 2012).

Ecosystem services: In the context of this study, “ecosystem services” refers to the benefits received from the use of agricultural practices (Ziter & Turner, 2018).

Income: Amount of money earned by farmers from any activity both inside and outside the farm (Bellemare & Lim, 2018).

Livelihoods: Livelihoods are the circumstances in which the majority of people live and are able to meet their basic necessities (Dinku, 2018).

CHAPTER TWOLITERATURE REVIEW2.1 IntroductionThe chapter discusses prior research on the effects of agroforestry adoption on small-holder farmers’ livelihoods. It will also explore pertinent empirical reviews on the impact of agroforestry to the lives of smallholder farmers, as well as the conceptual framework, operational framework, and research deficit.

2.2 Adoption of agroforestry and livelihoodsAgroforestry is practiced by smallholder farmers worldwide with the primary purpose of increasing indoor food, energy, and revenue (Mume & Workalemahu, 2021). Farmers in Latin and Central America replicated the floral diversity of tropical forests by planting crops with a range of growth types (Altieri, Nicholls, Henao & Lana, 2015). According to Dagar and Tewari (2016), agroforestry was conducted in Asia through a complex system of shifting cropping, with some trees purposefully left standing to create a partial shade for new foliage to emerge before the rice growing season ended.

In Africa, (Amonum and Bada, 2019) discovered an extensive mixture of herbaceous plants and trees in Katsina State, Nigeria, whereas in Malawi, (Coulibaly, Chiputwa, Nakelse, & Kundhlande, (2017) discovered crops were cultivated in combination with tree species to produce food and timber. These examples from across the globe demonstrate that previous households were more concerned with food production and the integration of trees into farms for other purposes. Agroforestry rarely reaches 9% of farmland in the majority of countries (Kamoto, Sills, Mutta & Kabwe, 2021). Thus, agroforestry productivity in numerous countries continues to be insufficient to make a sustainable contribution or to meet the general population’s need for trees and their associated goods (Sharma and Sharma, 2017). As a result, the majority of agroforestry is always abandoned in favor of other food cropping systems (Muschler, 2016).

According to studies, the proclivity for agroforestry development in Kenya has always been associated with a strong demand for food, energy, and medicine, as well as the possibility to produce cash through the sale of firewood, seedlings, poles, and timber (Jerneck & Olsson, 2013). Another study (Kinyili, Ndunda, & Kitur, 2020; Catherine, 2021; Jha, Kaechele, & Sieber, 2021) claims that smallholder farmers in Kenya and Ethiopia employ agroforestry to provide timber and poles for construction. As a result, agroforestry is considered as a means of diversifying production, mitigating the risk of global warming, and reducing inorganic fertilizer use, all of which contribute to augmenting limited household incomes (Kinyili & Ndunda, 2021), as well as relieving strain on natural forests (Lin, 2014). However, it is disputed if these aims have been realized in a large number of developing countries. According to Nyaga, Barrios, Muthuri, Born, Matiru, and Sinclair (2015), roughly 1.2 million Kenyans practice some type of agroforestry on their farms and in rural communities. While these farming communities have long practiced agroforestry, there is a dearth of awareness about agroforestry’s contribution to their livelihoods, economic development, and environmental advantages (Meijer, Ajayi & Sileshi, 2015). Smallholder farmers in Kenya utilize agroforestry because it is a cost-effective method of simultaneously growing trees, crops, and cattle (Benjamin & Sauer, 2018).

2.3 AgroforestryTraditional to modern agroforestry practices exist (Zerihun, 2021). Agroforestry in various temperate and tropical locations is grouped into eight groups based on its nature, complexity, and purpose (Sultana & Bari, 2021). To begin, this is where homestead gardens come into play. Homestead gardens are practices that incorporate an intimate, multistory arrangement of a variety of trees, crops, and likely livestock rearing (Kumar, 2015). Second, the term “agroforestry” refers to crops grown on mountain slopes during the early stages of forest plantation establishment (Dhakal & Rai, 2020). Thirdly, improved fallow refers to fast-growing woody plants, preferably leguminous, that are planted during the fallow phase of shifting agriculture (Nair at el., 2021). The fourth is the synthesis of agricultural and plantation crops, which includes multistory combinations of trees and crops, shade trees and crops (Sultana & Bari, 2021; Nimbolkar, 2016). Fifth, multifunctional trees are fruit and other trees that are planted randomly or in a planned manner in cropland or pasture to supply fruit, fuel wood, fodder, and timber on farms and rangelands, among other functions (Zerihun, 2020). The sixth agroforestry practice is combining trees with fodder and animal production, such as grazing in existing forests, utilizing trees to form living fences around pasture, or providing shade and erosion control, a practice dubbed’silvopasture’ agroforestry (Nair at el., 2021; Elevitch, Mazaroli & Ragone, 2018). Seventh, windbreaks and shelterbelts are rows of trees planted and managed around farms and fields as part of crop or livestock operations to protect crops, cattle, and soil from natural threats such as wind, severe rain, seas, or flooding (Nair, 2012; Bhardwaj, Navale & Sharma, 2017). Finally, alley cropping involves the cultivation of fast-growing, typically leguminous woody species in single or grouped rows that are mulched into agricultural production alleys to add organic matter and nutrients and/or collected for various reasons such as animal fodder (Boinot, Barkaoui, Lauri & Meziere, 2019)

2.4.1 Agroforestry, income and livelihoods 

Globally, 42% of landmass is made up of dryland and semi-arid zones, which have a low moisture content due to low rainfall and high evaporation rates (Deng, Luo, Chen & Lu, 2020). Innumerable issues such as climate unpredictability, frequent droughts, degradation of natural resources, and decreased agricultural production have exacerbated the situation in dryland areas, resulting in high rates of poverty (Syano, Wasonga, Nyangito, Kironchi, Egeru, Mganga & Elhag, 2016). Agroforestry, which involves the integration of trees on farms and in agricultural landscapes, has recently been considered as a means of generating revenue in dryland regions (Syano et al., 2016)

Agroforestry’s numerous perceived benefits and merits for supplying ecological services, economic goods, and social services are well-known and generally accepted (Meijer at el., 2015). Agroforestry has been recognized for its ability to generate money by emphasizing the system’s increased economic return, which has a significant impact on rural incomes (Kinyili at el., 2020). With rising food prices, rising energy costs, and payments for environmental commodities, the economic benefits of agroforestry have maintained an incomprehensible level of interest among research communities, particularly in underdeveloped nations (Kinyili, 2021).

Agroforestry is currently used by a large number of smallholder farmers in Africa (Awazi & Tchamba, 2019; Amare et al., 2019; Quandt, Neufeldt & McCabe, 2017) and has seen a significant increase in adoption by farmers in a number of regions of the continent, most notably Sub-Saharan Africa (Nkonya, Johnson, Kwon & Kato, 2016; Meijer et al., 2015). The idea of integrating and managing trees alongside crops and livestock on the same terrain is viewed as a potential source of additional revenue (Mbow at el., 2014).

Numerous scholars have investigated and studied the income generated by various agroforestry adoption strategies, and the results indicate a wide range of diversity in terms of the overall socioeconomic and livelihood implications (Meijer at el., 2015). Nonetheless, research on the contribution of agroforestry on socioeconomic status and rural livelihoods is limited in numerous drylands of Sub Saharan Africa, and hence may be inconclusive. As a result, additional research on agroforestry uptake and socioeconomic conditions is required.

Smallholder farmers’ tree planting creates an opportunity cost for other possibilities (Van Der Meer Simo, Kanowski & Barney, 2020; Benjamin & Sauer, 2018). As a result, the goal of smallholder tree nursery enterprises is to optimize output and, ultimately, tree yields, which translates into increased earnings. There are fixed expenditures related with the purchase of land, nursery building, heavy equipment and machinery, as well as land charges, in smallholder tree nursery enterprises (KINYILI, 2021). Additionally, variable expenses such as fertilizers, seedlings, labor, transportation, and the procurement of fertilizers and pesticides, as well as other operating overheads like as power, must be considered during economic analysis. This suggests that the revenue earned by these smallholder farmers’ tree nursery operations is highly dependent on the cost of these inputs. Additionally, smallholder farmers earn money through the sale of firewood, honey, and cattle folders (Kinyili & Ndunda, 2021).

Numerous studies have evaluated the profitability of smallholder tree nursery establishments using gross earnings, net profit margins, and a cost-benefit analysis (Kassa, 2015; Adeleke, 2007). Nonetheless, such appraisals continue to be scarce among Kenya’s smallholder farmers.

From the preceding discussion of the relationships between tree seedlings, tree yields, and income generated, it is clear that the relationship is never straightforward, and that when designing tree nursery establishments that are most likely to be adopted by smallholder farmers, it is frequ