Hum Ecol (2012) 40:315325
DOI 10.1007/s10745-012-9481-8
From Shifting Cultivation to Cinnamon Agroforestry:
Changing Agricultural Practices Among the Serampas
in the Kerinci Seblat National Park, Indonesia
Bambang Hariyadi & Tamara Ticktin
Published online: 31 March 2012
# Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012
Introduction
The traditional resource management practices of many indig-
enous communities are in transition as they adapt to new social,
economic and political realities (Cox 2000; Gmez-Baggethun
et al. 2010). We investigate the changing shifting cultivation
practices of the Serampas, an indigenous group whose ancestral
territory now lies within Kerinci Seblat National Park (KSNP),
one of the most important protected areas in Indonesia. We
address the following questions: (1) How do the Serampas
classify land within their shifting cultivation systems and how
have land-use patterns changed over time? (2) What land tenure
arrangements do the Serampas have and how have these
changed over time? (3) How has Serampas shifting cultivation
as it is practiced today been transitioning into cinnamon agro-
forestry? (4) What are the potential implications of the above
for conservation in KSNP?
The Serampas inhabit the northeastern area of Jangkat Sub
District, Merangin District, Jambi, Sumatra, Indonesia
(Fig. 1). Their name refers to both the people and the region
they occupy. They are considered descendants of Minang
Kabau (West Sumatra) as they share some socioeconomic
and cultural similarities (Cholif 1971). Bonatz et al. (2006)
estimate that the Serampas have inhabited their current terri-
tory from about the eleventh to the thirteenth century AD.
B. Hariyadi (*)
Graduate School for Science Education, University of Jambi,
Jambi, Indonesia
e-mail: bahariyadi@yahoo.com
T. Ticktin
Botany Department, University of Hawaii,
Honolulu, USA
In Sumatra shifting cultivation is based on rice farming
and, as has occurred globally, some systems have developed
to incorporate cash crops and other economically valuable
species, forming a complex agricultural or agroforest system
(Mary and Michon 1987; Gouyon et al. 1993; Angelsen
1995; Burgers 2004). In the case of the Serampas, shifting
cultivation has evolved over the past 40 years to include the
cultivation of cinnamon (Cinnamomum burmanii [Nees &
T. Nees] Bl.).
There has been widespread debate about the benefits and
consequences of shifting cultivation for both local people
and the environment. Some scholars have pointed out that it
makes sense both economically and environmentally for
tropical farmers (Fox et al. 2000; Ickowitz 2006; Iskandar
2007; Rerkasem et al. 2009) as it employs the process of
succession to produce resources, and can improve and con-
serve soil and reduce pest and weed problems (Denevan and
Padoch 1988; Alcorn 1990). In addition, the traditional
ecological knowledge and resource management practices
of shifting cultivation systems can provide insight on sus-
tainable forest management (Warner 1991; Kleinman et al.
1995; Berkes 2008), restoration (Douterlungne et al. 2008),
and local economic development and biodiversity conserva-
tion (de Jong 1997; Pelzer 1978; Tacconi and Vayda 2006;
Rerkasem et al. 2009). At the same time however, changes
in shifting cultivation systems, including the shortening of
fallows, the incorporation of cash crops, and the influence of
outside capital can also have negative impacts on both the
environment and local people (Myers 1993; Varma 2003;
Cramb et al. 2009; Fox et al. 2009; Rerkasem et al. 2009).
An understanding of Serampas shifting cultivation, how
it is adapting over time and its potential implications for
conservation is critical because of its location within the
316
Fig. 1 Location of Serampas in the Southwestern, Sumatera, Indonesia
KSNP. This 14,847 km2 protected area (Aumeeruddy 1994),
established in 1999, extends into four provinces, including
Jambi, West Sumatra, Bengkulu and South Sumatra and
borders nine districts, 43 sub-districts and 468 villages.
The population in the regions bordering the park numbers
about 1.75 million (World Bank 1996). KSNPs massive
forest coverage provides essential shelter for many endan-
gered animals, notably the Sumatran rhino, Sumatran tiger,
wild Sumatran goat, tapir and elephant (Departemen
Kehutanan 2010). Importantly, the park contains the source
springs for the largest rivers in Southern Sumatra, primarily
the Batang Hari, Musi and Merangin (FAO 1982), which
irrigate million hectares of rice fields. By understanding
land-use practices and associated knowledge and traditions
of traditional farmers such as the Serampas and how they
relate to biodiversity conservation, scientists and policy-
makers can develop culturally appropriate resource manage-
ment plans that can be compatible with conservation.
Our ethnographic data for this research were collected
with informed consent, using a combination of in-depth
interviews, structured interviews and participant observa-
tion. The in-depth interviews were carried out with 51
respondents, consisting of 15 and 21 respondents from the
villages of Tanjung Kasri and Renah Kemumu respectively,
Hum Ecol (2012) 40:315325
and 15 respondents from outside both villages. Respondents
were selected using the snowball method, starting with the
kepala desa (village leader). The structured interviews were
carried out with 29 households, representing 1820% of the
total number of households in both villages. Participant
observation was carried out with in homes, umo (shifting
cultivation rice fields), sawah (irrigated rice fields), and
during local cultural events, such as selamatan ruso, negak
rumah, and kenduri psko. All fieldwork was carried out in
Indonesian by B.H., from July 2005 to March 2006.
Participant observation covered much of, but not all, the
annual cycle of Serampas shifting cultivation. The plants
elicited from the above methods were collected from each
village, and vouchers were identified by plant taxonomists
at the Herbarium Bogoriense, Bogor Indonesia. Taxonomic
grouping and scientific naming of the voucher was in ac-
cordance with Index Kewensis under the International Plant
Name Index available online at www.ipni.org.
Serampas Land Classification and Use
The Serampas originally inhabited hamlets on hilltops
throughout the region (Fig. 1) and practiced shifting culti-
vation by slashing and burning primary or secondary forests
Hum Ecol (2012) 40:315325 317

to develop umo, the upland rice-based farming system.
Later they sought fertile valley wetlands to develop more
permanent sawah, rice paddy fields. However, the valleys
were too small to meet the needs of the Serampas population
and they continued to rely on shifting cultivation to produce
rice, fruit, vegetables, and spices.
In Serampas today there are three main land use catego-
ries: forest, umo, and ladang kulit (cinnamon agroforest).
Most land is covered by forests, both KSNP forests and
community forests. Serampas recognize three different types
of forests: primary forest (rimbo gano), customary forest,
and secondary forest. Some older secondary forests, usually
more than 30 years, are difficult to distinguish from primary
forest. Villagers identify the rimbo gano through the pres-
ence of some species that commonly grow in this type of
forest, such as surian rimbo (Toona sureni [Blume] Merr.)
(Table 1).
Customary forests that are mainly used to protect water-
shed areas and most steep, forested lands prone to landslides
are termed ulu aye have been declared ulu aye. The term of
hutan adat (customary forest) has come to be widely used to
refer to ulu aye, especially after a KSNP initiative to pro-
mote forest zoning in Serampas and the terms are used
interchangeably to refer to the same forest type.
Serampas categorize secondary forests into sangkan and
rapohen. Sangkan refers to primary forest (rimbo gano) that
has been cleared and has regrown into secondary forest
without having been cultivated. In many cases, lack of
manpower and/or engagement in other more profitable op-
portunities lead to villagers leaving a piece of cleared rimbo
gano to regrow into sangkan. Villagers reported that sang-
kan is mostly dominated by fast growing species, such as
mendarung (Trema orientalis [L.] Bl.), tutup (Macaranga
tanarius Muell. Arg.), and kulit angin (Mallotus paniculatus
Mull. Arg.) (Table 1), which some actively manage.
Rapohen is fallowed land from shifting cultivation that
regenerates into secondary forest. Serampas further divide
rapohen into sesap jerami (land fallowed up to four years
dominated by fast growing shrubs), blukar mudo (secondary
forest on land fallowed between four and ten years), and
blukar tuo (old secondary forest on land fallowed more than
ten years). The presence of some cultivated plants such as
durian in blukar tuo distinguishes it from rimbo gano.
Villagers identify rapohen by the presence of some pioneer
species including molesaten (Villebrunea rubescens Bl.),
semloen (Homalanthus giganteus Zoll. & Mor.), and kelu
(Nicolaia speciosa Horan) (Table 1). Some domesticated
plants are also commonly found in rapohen including durian
(Durio zibethinus Murr.), petai (Parkia speciosa Haask.),
and kepayang (Pangium edule Reinw.). Wild plant indica-
tors of fertility, successional stages, and seasonal changes
are used also by shifting cultivators elsewhere (e.g., Allan
1965; Fujimoto 2009).
In Serampas villages where inhabitants livelihoods de-
pend highly on shifting cultivation, umo mostly refers to
upland rice fields. In contrast, in villages where local live-
lihoods are dominated by irrigated rice farming, the term
umo is commonly used to refer to both wetland and upland
rice fields. In these villages, people also use the term sawah
interchangeably with the umo to refer to wetland rice fields.
In this article we use umo to refer exclusively to upland rice
farmland, and sawah to refer exclusively to irrigated farming
lands.
Since the early 1970s, the Serampas have been incorpo-
rating cinnamon (Cinnamomum burmanii) into their shifting
cultivation. As a result, shifting cultivation sites have spread

Table 1 Plants used by the Serampas to recognize stages of forest succession

Rimbo Gano (primary forest) Sangkan (never cultivated secondary forest) Rapohen (secondary forest)

Kiro (Ficus sp., Moraceae)
Surian rimbo (Toona sureni [Blume]
Merr., Meliaceae)
Kelat (Helicia rostrata D. B. Foreman,
Proteaceae)
Bawang (Aporusa lucida [Miq.] Airy Shaw,
Euphorbiaceae)
Nulang (Glochidion obscurum Blume,
Euphorbiaceae)
Terap (Artocarpus elasticus Reinw.,
Moraceae)
Lalan nasi (Zingiber sp.), Zingiberaceae
Manau (Calamus mannan Miq., Arecaceae)
Narung (Trema orientalis (L.) Bl., Ulmaceae)
Tutup (Macaranga tanarius Muell. Arg.,
Euphorbiaceae)
Kulit angin (Mallotus paniculatus Mull.
Arg., Euphorbiaceae)
Terap (Artocarpus elasticus, Reinw.,
Moraceae)
Lalan nasi (Zingiber sp.), Zingiberaceae
Molesaten (Villebrunea rubescens Bl.,
Urticaceae)
Semloen (Homalanthus giganteus Zoll. & Mor.,
Euphorbiaceae)
Mentaleten (Acalypha caturus Blume,
Euphorbiaceae)
Puar (Alpinia sp, Zingiberaceae)
Kelu (Nicolaia speciosa Horan., Zingiberaceae)
Lolo (Hornstedtia spp.), Zingiberaceae
Durian (Durio zibethinus Murr., Bombacaceae)
Petai (Parkia speciosa Haask., Fabaceae)
Payang (Pangium edule Reinw.,
Flacourtiaceae)
318
away from local settlements while the fallowed areas close
to the settlements have gradually shifted into mature cinna-
mon gardens. Although cinnamon is an important commod-
ity for Serampas and the surrounding areas, it is not possible
to determine the exact area under cinnamon cultivation since
no records were kept in the local statistical office. In the
District of Merangin as a whole, palm oil and rubber are the
main agricultural commodities and the contribution of cin-
namon is insignificant. However, in the neighboring district
of Kerinci cinnamon is one of the most important cash
crops. In Serampas, the total area planted with cinnamon is
included in the category of umo, In the Jangkat region
improvement of the road connecting Serampas to the capital
of the sub-district has led to greater integration into the
market economy and areas of umo and horticultural crops
have increased alongside a decrease in the total area of
sawah and other crops (sweet potato, corn, cassava, and
soybean) reflecting a gradual shift from subsistence farming
to low diversity cash crops, mainly potatoes and chilies
(Fig. 2) (Dendi et al. 2005; Abdoellah et al. 2006). The rate
of forest conversion to horticultural crops is very high in the
two Serampas villages under study and they have the least
forest cover in the area.
Serampas Land Tenure Practices
Ostrom (1985) argues that small groups of people who have
depended on moderately scarce resources over a long period
of time commonly have developed institutional systems to
manage the resource as common property. The Serampas
land use categories described above are associated with
different land tenure arrangements. With the exception is
the sawah, which is treated as private property, land is
controlled by adat and regarded as common property. Adat
is commonly translated as indigenous customary law
(Picard 1997), but it can also be understood as an entire
Total Area (ha)
Sawah
2500 Umo
Horticulture
2000 Other Crops
1500
1000
500
0
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Fig. 2 Total farming area by land use type in Jangkat Sub District3,
Sumatra, Indonesia. (Source: Statistics Office of Merangin 19962008). 3)
Horticultural crops include potato, chili, cabbage, red kidney bean, snake
bean, peanut, and mungbean. Other crops include corn, soy, cassava, and
sweet potato
Hum Ecol (2012) 40:315325
worldview in which customary law constitutes just one
element. From this wider perspective, adat becomes the
basis not only of ethical and legal judgments, but also a
reference point for social expectations (Abdullah 1966). In
Serampas, adat is used to ensure equitable distribution of
land for farming as well as for housing. Households have the
right to use the land they are allocated, but do not own it and
cannot sell it. All abandoned land, including fallows from
shifting cultivation, automatically becomes common prop-
erty. In Serampas, the process of securing farm land is
initiated during the wedding ceremony when local elders
and adat executives perform the ritual of ajum arah, advis-
ing the new couple on various aspects of married life and
guiding the new couple to suitable vacant land, mostly
secondary forests. Outsiders are eligible to settle on and
use Serampas lands if they undertake ngisi adat, a ritual to
bless and culturally register a new inhabitant.
The role of adat in controlling access to land is similar in
other cultures in Indonesia, for example Western Sumatra
(Dendi et al. 2005). However, there is a great variation
among adat arrangements in terms of land tenure. In the
past, land tenure practices varied among Serampas villages
according to the specific context. For example, in Tanjung
Kasri village the lack of sawah means that villagers rely
entirely on shifting cultivation for rice. To ensure that every
household acquires enough land for sustainable agriculture,
the adat banned people from growing dense tree crops in
their umo, thus allowing fallowed lands to regrow into
secondary forest and to recover fertility.1 This is similar to
a regulation reintroduced in Nagari Lubug Gadang and
Silayang in West Sumatra, which prohibits the planting of
trees in some areas dedicated to shifting cultivation (Dendi
et al. 2005), following a general trend of reviving traditional
systems of governance in the region that is resulting in
decentralization (e.g., von Benda-Beckman and von
Benda-Beckman 2001).
Recent Changes in Serampas Land-Tenure
Since cinnamon began to be more widely cultivated, land-
tenure has gradually shifted from largely common property
towards more privately-held property. Villagers use cinna-
mon stands as a claim to land entitlement allowing transfer
between individuals, a practice not recognized by earlier
generations. Belcher et al. (2005) suggest that this type of
practice is a common strategy in forest garden systems to
bestow long-term use rights on particular land. Changes in
land tenure have created a few local land capitalists who
may buy cinnamon agroforest from poor households that
1
According to local elders, a parcel of umo land needs to be fallowed
for at least four years. However, in practice most villagers leave the
lands for at least ten years before resuming cultivation.
Hum Ecol (2012) 40:315325
urgently need cash for basic needs or for childrens school
fees. However, instead of using the term menjual (selling),
villagers refer to such transactions as ganti rugi (compensa-
tion fees for land clearing and cinnamon planting).
Nevertheless, to refer to this land private property is
misleading since the land is in the KSNP and owned by
the government.
In contrast, sawah has always been considered private
poverty and is passed down through generations (see also
Watson 1992; Neidel 2006). Sawah as well as houses are
recognized as harta berat (heavy wealth) inherited through
the female line. A son will only inherit harta ringan (light
wealth), which includes crops in agroforests and umo as
well as tools for farming and other purposes.
Most existing sawah were developed by early Serampas
settlers and remain the private property of their descendents,
who generally keep the land intact. According to local
elders, the total area of sawah has remained relatively stable
while the population of Serampas has grown. Serampas
have adopted ganti gilir (a rotational system) that regulates
the right to cultivate a piece of sawah among its inheritors
from the neighboring subdistrict. Each heir has access to
cultivate the land, usually once every two or three years,
depending on the number of heirs, and they usually practice
shifting cultivation in the intervening years.
The ganti gilir system appears to offer a fair distribution
of sawah among heirs. The system also keeps the land from
ownership fragmentation and therefore eases overexploita-
tion. Burgers (2004) argues that such a traditional resource
management system is an effective way to manage the
sawah on a sustainable basis.
There is growing conflict over land ownership in this area
between the KSNP, which was established in 1999, and
local Serampas villagers who have occupied the region for
centuries. The government of Indonesia originally urged the
development of a people-free park and planned to remove
Serampas from KSNP territory (Neidel 2006). Citing a
number of national agrarian and park-related laws (e.g.,
UU No.5/1967, UU No.41/1999), the government accused
the Serampas of encroaching on forest lands. After a long
and complicated debate, the Serampas have now been in-
corporated into KSNP. However, no clear plans have been
made for dealing with their land and their future. Today the
Serampas are in the ambiguous position of paying annual
tax on their lands (Pajak Bumi dan Banguan) without re-
ceiving secure tenure.
Serampas Shifting Cultivation Practices
Shifting cultivation is still widely practiced in Serampas,
mainly in the villages of Tanjung Kasri, and Lubuk Mentilin
where sawah is limited and mostly owned by the local elites,
and thus the ganti gilir system cannot be applied. Villagers
319
initiate shifting cultivation by clearing secondary forests
(rapohen) and occasionally old growth forests (rimbo gano)
working in groups of three to five households, usually
closely related. Working in groups greatly benefits villagers
by reducing the risks of pest and wildlife attack, sharing
labor and providing social networks in case of emergencies.
A farmer usually secures a block of forested land that allows
for two to four phases of shifting cultivation. Given that
each phase takes about two years to complete, he may
remain working on the particular forest block for four to
eight consecutive years. Since the weakening of adat some
villagers occupy inherited fallowed lands passed down by
their parents and/or inlaws.
To identify a suitable plot for shifting cultivation, farmers
assess biophysical characteristics of the soil and vegetation.
For example, flat and black soil is preferred for farming,
whereas white and steep lands are always avoided due to
their lower fertility. The presence of some plants, such as
jelatang (Laportea spp.) and dadap duri (Erythrina subum-
brans Merr.), indicate fertile land. Villagers also consider
proximity to a stream and a settlement in selecting a location
for shifting cultivation and avoid cultivating fragile lands,
instead delineating such land as customary forest.
Occasionally villagers clear young secondary forest (blu-
kar mudo) where rumput bungo (Eupatorium inulaefolium
H.B&K.) dominates the vegetation, indicating the land has
reached a successional stage suitable for shifting cultivation.
A dominant vegetation of rumput kinat (Paspalum conju-
gatum Berg.) indicates additional fallowing is necessary
before cultivation will produce satisfactory yields.
Villagers initially establish a plot of about 10 m by 10 m
on a block of old growth forest (rimbo gano) at a point
easily seen by passers-by, and clear the plot of all understo-
ry. The establishment of this cleared block (melambeh)
indicates that a surrounding parcel of forested land has been
claimed and will be cleared and cultivated usually within
three months. If the forested land around the melambeh is
not cleared within three months, the farmer loses the cus-
tomary entitlement to secure it, and it automatically reverts
to common property available to all villagers. Farmers cul-
tivate umo for two years before moving to another site.
Traditionally they left the old site fallow for a number of
years, and might or might not comeback to exactly the same
site to reestablish umo.
At the outset of establishing a new plot, according to the
Serampas worldview, the farmer expects to receive signs
from the spirits of agreement or objection to his intention,
usually allowing three months for a response. During this
period, a bad dream or an undefined illness may be inter-
preted as resistance from bad spirits who occupy the land
and the farmer can either abandon the land and seek another
potential plot or he can ask a local shaman to perform ngisi
tanah, a ritual to chase the bad spirits away from the land.
320
Rice harvesting is initiated by a ritual of jemput padi. The
undried harvest, including stalks, is then loaded directly into
a bilik, a traditional rice barn. Villagers always put the
newest rice on top and eat it first (first in last out) since
it is much tastier than the old rice. As a result, a bilik may
hold many layers of rice; some local elders have rice that
was harvested more than 50 years ago. Villagers usually use
this older rice to feed large numbers of people at traditional
gatherings such as kenduri psko, an annual cultural festival,
and wedding parties.
Serampas Shifting Cultivation and Conservation
Worldwide, there is ongoing debate about the ecological
effects of shifting cultivation. Some scholars, as well as
some national governments, point to shifting cultivators as
the main driving forces behind deforestation (e.g., Dove
1985; Myers 1993; Rambo 1996; Fox et al. 2009). Other
scholars believe that shifting cultivation can be an environ-
mentally sound technology that fits with the local natural
and social conditions (Mackie et al. 1986; Alcorn 1990;
Colfer and Dudley 1993; Kleinman et al. 1995). The
Serampas are fully conscious of the negative impressions
of outsiders, especially the government, of their practice
of shifting cultivation, and they are uncertain as to whether
they will be able to continue this practice since they are now
located within the KSNP
However, the ecological impacts of Serampas shifting
cultivation practices may be low for four reasons. First, they
prefer to make use of secondary rather than old-growth
forest not only because it has less root debris and they thus
save significant time and effort in clearing, but also because
the soils are more fertile (see Soedjito 1985, for East
Kalimantan). Second, unlike shifting cultivators in many
areas of Southeast Asia (e.g., Conklin 1957; Dove 1985;
Colfer et al. 1997), the Serampas do not consistently use fire
to establish an umo. Since the Serampas follow the Islamic
calendar (based on the lunar cycle) for agricultural activities,
the period of land preparation does not always occur at the
beginning of the dry season. Prior to the introduction of
Islam in this region, the planting schedule was regulated by
stellar cycles, especially the appearance of the Pleiades
(Marsden 1966). Farmers may use fire if the timing of land
preparation coincides with the onset of the dry season, but if
not, or if there is rain even in the dry season, which is
common, they cover their umo with twigs and debris which
they allow to degrade naturally (see Darmanto 2006, for
similar practices on the Mentawai Islands off western
Sumatra). This practice prevents erosion and maintains soil
fertility (Persoon, 1992). Third, the recognition of umo as
common property according to adat allows fallowed lands to
re-grow into secondary forests and recover soil fertility. This
practice not only ensures a sustainable cycle of shifting
Hum Ecol (2012) 40:315325
cultivation over the long term, but also holds social impli-
cations for promoting equality of land access. Finally, the
low population density of Serampas, which ranges between
1.5 and 3.8 persons per km2, also contributes to the sustain-
ability of shifting cultivation. Overall, the area of forest
cleared for shifting cultivation is estimated between 10 and
22 hectares annually, including primary forest and fallowed
forests. This constitutes about 0.13% of total forested land in
each village. Population growth in the villages is currently
approximately 1.11.4% per annum.
For the Serampas, the practice of shifting cultivation
embodies many dimensions of social and spiritual life, in-
cluding interactions between individuals and their commu-
nity, their environment, and with their creator and the spirits,
articulated in a number of rituals performed from the initial
establishment of an umo through to the storage of the rice
harvest, as well as by various taboos (see also, e.g., Conklin
1957; Dove 1985; Lahajir 2001; Darmanto 2006).
The Shift to Cinnamon Agroforestry
According to the elders, the Serampas learned about plant-
ing cinnamon as a cash crop from the neighboring district of
Lempur in the 1970s. They have developed different types
of cinnamon-based agroforests (Fig. 3) according to local
socioeconomic circumstances. In upland rice, mixed crops
and cinnamon systems (Fig. 3a), in the first year following
the establishment of umo farmers plant cinnamon seedlings,
mainly gathered from existing cinnamon agroforests, in
between the rice.2 Villagers use purely symbolic uras (nat-
ural pesticides) obtained from kenduri psko (an annual fes-
tival) and other rituals (Hariyadi 2010) rather than chemical
fertilizers or pesticides.
After growing rice and mixed crops for two consecutive
years, farmers establish a new umo and leave the cinnamon
plants to mature. Villagers initially plant a high density of
cinnamon, about 2500 to 3000 seedlings per hectare, which
they gradually thin out to about 180300 trees per hectare.
After about seven years, the cinnamon can be harvested.
Cinnamon agroforests need little maintenance. Occasionally
villagers collect fruit and other resources that grow in be-
tween the cinnamon such as petai (Parkia speciosa Haask),
jering (A. pauclorum [Benth.] I.C. Nielsen), nangko
(Artocarpus heterophylus Lam.), durian (Durio zibethinus
Murr.), surian tanam (Toona sinensis [A.Juss.] M.Roem)
and nyeman (Pandanus sp.).
Farmers plant upland rice, mixed crops, coffee and cin-
namon simultaneously in the first year and harvest just two
2
This saves significant labor, which is important in Serampas, where
labor is limited. Belcher et al. (2005) point out that agroforestry
systems are sensitive to labor supply and may cease to be competitive
when its opportunity costs increase.
Hum Ecol (2012) 40:315325 321

Fig. 3 Different types of

cinnamon agroforests
developed from shifting
cultivation in Serampas.
Diagrams represent the
progression of crops over a five
year period. a Upland Rice
Mixed CropsCinnamon. 0 1 2 3 4 5 year
b Upland RiceMixed Crop
CoffeeCinnamon. c Peanut (a) Upland Rice - Mixed Crops Cinnamon
Mixed CropsUpland Rice
CoffeeCinnamon. d Upland
RiceMixed CropsCoffee

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 year
=
(b) Upland Rice Mixed Crop Coffee Cinnamon

0 1 2 3 4 5 year

(c) Peanut Mixed Crops Upland Rice Coffee Cinnamon

0 1 2 3 4 5 year

(d) Upland Rice Mixed Crops Coffee.

Mixed Crops Upland

(mainly vegetables) Cinnamon
Rice

Coffee
Peanut

rounds of rice during the first two years (Fig. 3b). They
employ various cinnamoncoffee ratios, mostly between 6:1
and 3:2. The coffee starts to produce in the third year and
continues for the following four years. It reaches its highest
production level in the fourth year and then gradually declines
as the growing cinnamon canopy steadily covers the coffee
plants. By the seventh year, the cinnamon canopies totally
shade out most understory species, including the coffee,
which is no longer productive and gradually disappears.
Farmers developed the peanutmixed cropsupland
ricecoffeecinnamon system (Fig. 3c) in an effort to
get cash within a relatively short time. There are some
variations on this agroforest typevillagers may start by
growing upland rice first and then grow peanuts in the
second cycle or the reverse. Alternatively, they may grow both
together during the first year but in separate plots. They may
also devote all their land to peanut production, although this is
mostly done by households which have secured their rice for
322
several seasons, for example those who cultivate peanuts in
uplands and at the same time grow rice in wetlands or have
enough stored rice. In the third year and onwards, manage-
ment practices are the same as those described above.
The upland ricemixed cropscoffee system (Fig. 3d)
is mostly practiced by local elites with good resources and
knowledge of the market for cash crops, especially coffee.
They start by planting upland rice, mixed crops and coffee
simultaneously but may grow rice for only one cycle then
grow only coffee. This system is very similar to coffee
farming as widely practiced by smallholder sedentary coffee
farmers in some sub-districts in the east of Serampas such as
Lembah Masurai.
Cinnamon agroforestry provides an important source of
income for the Serampas and during the cinnamon boom in
the late 1980s and late 1990s they invested their extra
income in renovating their houses, sending their children
to school in nearby cities, buying luxury items such as
televisions and electric generators, and going on pilgrimages
to Mecca. Although they produce a large amount of cinna-
mon, they rarely use it themselves. Among the 267 plant
uses recorded for the Serampas, cinnamon bark is listed only
once, as a cure for stomach problems (Hariyadi 2010),
reflecting their recent exposure to this species.
The Serampas incorporation of a cash tree crop into their
shifting cultivation practices is consistent with adaptations
by shifting cultivators elsewhere. Potter (2001) suggests that
initiatives to advance shifting cultivation will, over long
periods of time, usually result in tree-based agroforestry
driven by the market expansion of agroforest trees (Cramb
et al. 2009) possibly alongside food crop intensification. For
example, after practicing a series of cropping systems in-
cluding rice cultivation, the Krui in Southern Sumatra de-
veloped a system that ultimately resulted in damar, a
complex Dipterocarpaceae-based agroforest (Mary and
Michon 1987). In lowland Jambi shifting cultivation
resulted in rubber jungle agroforests (Gouyon et al.
1993). The Baduy in Western Java enrich their farming with
Albizia (Paraserianthes falcataria) (Iskandar and Ellen
2000), and shifting cultivation in central Sulawesi has grad-
ually shifted toward the establishment of cacao agroforests
(Belsky and Siebert 2003).
Belcher et al. (2005) observe that there a number of
factors that likely drive the establishment of an agroforest
in certain areas, including a local customary system that
provides some level of land security, a local economy that
is in between a subsistence and cash economy, abundant
land but limited labor, and lack of a formal risk coverage
management system such as insurance. The Serampas, with
a population density of between 1.0 and 1.4 people per
square kilometer, still have enough land to allow them to
practice an extensive farming system. However, this also
provides less incentive for them to develop a sophisticated
Hum Ecol (2012) 40:315325
farming system such as a complex multi-layer agroforest
(e.g., McCarthy 2005).
The price of cinnamon was at its lowest level in 2007, at
the time of this study. Most people had abandoned active
care of their cinnamon and but left the trees in their fields as
safety nets in case of emergencies (see also Neidel 2006).
Schroth et al. (2003) recognize such practices as agroforest
style a logical consequence of a minimum investment
farming system (see Dean 1987, for a similar case of rubber
agroforests in the Tapajs River region of the Brazilian
Amazon).
In analyzing the changes in types of Serampas agrofor-
ests over time (Fig. 4), it becomes clear that Serampas have
progressively shifted to more market-oriented farming sys-
tems. The fact that mixed crops, which include a large
number of vegetables and other essential foods, are present
in all the agroforest models they have developed highlights
the economic and cultural significance of these plants.
Today the process of adaptation continues as some
Serampas farmers experiment with other crops. For exam-
ple, some have started planting nilam (Pogostemon cablin
Benth., a volatile oil plant, native to Southeast Asia (Misra
1996)) in the second cycle of their upland rice-mixed crops-
coffee farming. 3
Implications of Cinnamon Agroforests for Conservation
in the KSNP
The practice of shifting cultivation over generations has
resulted in a mosaic of old-growth forests, secondary forests
and umo fields in Serampas. However, the spread of cinna-
mon agroforestry has led to farmers leaving a young cinna-
mon agroforest before moving to another piece of land
instead of leaving the land fallowed in the third year
(Fig. 4). Theoretically, farmers can develop a parcel of
cinnamon agroforest every two years. If the price of cinna-
mon in the local market is good, farmers may harvest and
clear the cinnamon in the seventh year or later and return to
shifting cultivation crops before replanting the cinnamon.
Alternatively, they may maintain cinnamon for decades.
Biodiversity conservation is threatened as more and more
secondary forest is converted to cinnamon agroforests, es-
pecially close to villages where there has been a gradual
shift of land ownership from adat common property to
private ownership. In contrast to agroforestry systems else-
where, where long-term shifting cultivation practices can
lead to the development of complex multilayer agroforests
(Potter 2001), in Serampas an extensive and almost mono-
3
The very low price of cinnamon has also motivated villagers in
Sungai Tenang, a neighboring sub-district, to grow other crops such
as nilam (Kompas 2005).
Hum Ecol (2012) 40:315325 323

Fig. 4 Changes in Serampas

Old-growth forest/ Old-growth forest/
shifting cultivation patterns
primary forest primary forest/
over time4. (a before the
rapohen
extensive growing of
cinnamon; be after the
extensive growing of
cinnamon). 4) Following Mary Umo Umo
and Michon (1987). Dash lines
indicate that a farmer may
develop umo or re-grow the
same agroforest crops after Cinnamon
harvesting and clearing an Rapohen Agroforest
agroforest

(a) (b)

Old-growth forest/ Old-growth forest/ Old-growth forest/

primary forest/ primary forest/ primary forest/
rapohen rapohen rapohen

Umo Umo Umo

Coffee Cinnamon Peanut Cinnamon Peanut Coffee

Cinnamon Cinnamon Coffee

Agroforest Agroforest Agroforest

(c) (d) (e)

dominant cinnamon agroforest with very low levels of plant
species diversity has developed (Hariyadi 2010).
The adoption of cinnamon agroforests can be understood
as an effort by the Serampas to maximize land productivity
and obtain cash in the face of changes in their social,
economic and environmental context, including the weak-
ening of adat and especially reflects a logical strategy to
secure land tenure, given that the land is within the area of
KSNP. Thus, the establishment of the national park provided
an important incentive for the Serampas to adopt land-use
practices that actually threaten biodiversity conservation.
Conclusion
Our description of Serampas shifting agricultural practices
illustrates that, as elsewhere (Conklin 1957; Spencer 1966;
Weinstock and Sunito 1989; Sunderlin 1997; Brown and
Schreckenberg 1998; Padoch et al. 2007; Mertz et al. 2009),
they cannot be viewed as simply a means of producing food
but rather are integral to Serampas cultural life, shaping the
cultural and ecological landscape, and the local traditions,
rituals and worldviews associated with shifting cultivation
articulate a complex relationship between humanity, nature
and the creator. Park administrators, conservation biologists,
government officials, politicians and others involved in
conservation policy must recognize this much broader pic-
ture when working with the Serampas and other indigenous
groups to develop plans for sustainable resource use within
protected areas. In addition, Serampas traditional ecological
knowledge of vegetation types and species indicators, brief-
ly described here, can provide insight for forest conserva-
tion. The traditional practice of shifting cultivation appears
to have cultural and ecological components that have pro-
moted both ecological sustainability and social equality over
the long-term. However, the establishment of KSNP and the
resulting uncertainty over Serampas land-tenure has fostered
the breaking down of this system and a shift towards in-
creasing plantations of cinnamon. Secure tenure systems
and other local institutions that regulate the use of, and
access to, resources are critical components of local man-
agement systems and represent a key to ensuring sustain-
ability (Berkes 2008). Securing Serampas land tenure as
well as re-strengthening the adat system may be key strate-
gies to better promote conservation within KSNP (see von
Benda-Beckman and von Benda-Beckman 2001).
In Sumatra and elsewhere, the presence of indigenous com-
munities within a national park provides both opportunities
324
and challenges. On the one hand, misunderstanding and dis-
cord between the people and the park will encourage natural
resource management practices that harm biodiversity conser-
vation. On the other hand, a good understanding between park
managers and the residents can facilitate a collaboration that
fosters both biodiversity conservation and local peoples wel-
fare. Serampas land-use decisions are shaped by multiple
factors in addition to KNSP, and as their resource management
systems continue to adapt to changing conditions, including
new markets and roads, a better understanding of their social
and ecological underpinnings can help local communities and
park managers work better together to develop strategies that
are both ecologically and culturally appropriate.
Acknowledgments The authors would like to express their gratitude
to the Serampas community, particularly residents of the villages of
Tanjung Kasri and Renah Kemumu, for their unreserved efforts and
support in transmitting local knowledge associated with shifting culti-
vation. We also thank Dr. Jefferson Fox and Dr. Mark Merlin for
suggestions and discussion on shifting cultivation. This work was
supported by grants to B.H. from the International Fellowship Program
(IFP)Ford Foundation, International Foundation of Science (IFS),
and UNESCO Obuchi Scholarship.
References
Abdoellah, O. S., Hadikusumah, H. Y., Takeuchi, K., Okubo, S., and
Parikesit (2006). Commercialization of Homegardens in an
Indonesian Village. Vegetation Agroforestry Systems 54: 225
234.
Abdullah, T. (1966). Adat and Islam: An Examination of Conflict in
Minangkabau. Indonesia 2: 123.
Allan, W. (1965). The African Husbandman. Oliver and Boyd,
Edinburgh.
Alcorn, J. (1990). Indigenous agroforestry strategies meeting farmers
needs. In Anderson A. (ed.), Alternatives to Deforestation: Steps
toward Sustainable Use o f the Amazon Rain Forest. New York:
Columbia University Press, pp. 141151.
Angelsen, A. (1995). Shifting Cultivation and Deforestation: A
Study from Indonesia. World Development 23(10): 17131729.
Aumeeruddy, Y. (1994). Local Representation and Management of
Agroforests on the Periphery of Kerinci Seblat National Park
Sumatra, Indonesia. People and Plant Working Paper, October
1994. 46p.
Belcher, B., Michon, G., Angelsen, A., Perez, M. R., and Asbjornsen,
H. (2005). The Socio Economic Condition Determining the
Development, Persistence, and Decline of Forest Garden
System. Economic Botany 59(3): 245253.
Belsky, J. M., and Siebert, S. F. 2003. Cultivating Cacao: Implications
of Sun-grown Cacao on Local Food Security and Environmental
Sustainability. Agriculture and Human Values 20: 277285.
Berkes, F. (2008). Sacred Ecology (second edition). Routledge.
Bonatz, D., Neidel, J. D., and Tjoa-Bonatz, M. L. (2006). The
Megalithic Complex of Highland Jambi an Archaeological
Perspective. Bijdragen tot de Taal-, Land -en Volkenkunde
(BKI) 162(4): 490522.
Brown, D., and Schreckenberg, K. (1998). Shifting Cultivators as agents
of deforestation: assessing the evidence. Natural Resource
Perspectives Number 29, 14 pp.
Hum Ecol (2012) 40:315325
Burgers, P. (2004). Resource Management under Stressed Livelihood
Conditions: Changing Livelihood and Management Practices in
the Bufferzone of the Kerinci Seblat National Park, Kerinci
District, Sumatra. Faculty of Geoscience, Utrecht University, 249p.
Cholif, M. A. (1971). Monografi Adat Ketjamatan Djangkat dan
Pengaruh Islam. IAIN Sultan Thaha Sjaifuddin Jambi at Sungai
Penuh, 40p.
Colfer, C. J. P., and Dudley, R. G. (1993). Shifting Cultivators of
Indonesia: Marauders or Managers of the Forest? FAO
Community Forestry Case Study Series No. 6, FAO, Rome.
Colfer, C. J. P., Peluso, N., and Chung, C. S. (1997). Beyond Slash and
Burn: Building on Indigenous Management of Borneos Tropical
Rain Forest. The New York Botanical Garden, Bronx, NY, USA,
pp.79129.
Concklin, H. C. (1957). Hanuno Agriculture: A Report on an Integral
System of Shifting Cultivation in the Philippines. Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome.
Cox, P. A. (2000). Will tribal knowledge survive the Millennium?
Science 287: 4445.
Cramb, R. A., Colfer, C. J. P., Dressler, W., Laungaramsri, P., Le, Q. T.,
Mulyoutami, E., Peluso, N., Wadley, R. L. (2009). Swidden
Transformation and Rural Livelihoods in Southeast Asia. Hum.
Ecol. 37: 323346.
Darmanto (2006). Studi perladangan hutan tradisional masyarakat
mentawai (pumonean) di pulau siberut, sumatra barat. In
Soedjito, H. (ed.), Kearifan radisional dan Cagar biosfer di
Indonesia. Komitee Nasional MAB Indonesia, Lembaga Ilmu
Pengetahuan Indonesia. Jakarta, p. 57116.
de Jong, W. (1997). Developing swidden agriculture and the threat of
biodiversity loss. Agriculture. Ecosystems & Environment 62(2
3): 187197.
Dean, W. (1987). Brazil and the Struggle for Rubber. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, 234 p.
Dendi, A., Shivakoti, G. P., Dale, R., and Ranamukhaarachichi, L.
(2005). Evolution of the Minangkabaus Shifting Cultivation in
the West Sumatra Highland of Indonesia and its Strategic
Implications for Dynamic Farming Systems. Land Degradation
and Development 16: 1326.
Denevan, W. M., and Padoch, C. (eds.) (1988). Swidden-Fallow
Agroforestry in the Peruvian Amazon. Advances in Economic
Botany. Vol. 5. The New York Botanical Garden, NY.
Departemen Kehutanan (2010). 50 Taman Nasional Kerinci Seblat.
h t t p : / / w w w. d e p h u t . g o . i d / I N F O R M A S I / T N % 2 0 I N D O -
ENGLISH/tn_kerinciseblat.htm accessed on July 22, 2010.
Douterlungne, D., Levy-Tacher, S. I., Golicher, D. J., Daobeytia, F. R.
(2008). Applying Indigenous Knowledge To The Restoration Of
Degraded Tropical Rain Forest Clearings Dominated By Bracken
Fern. Restoration Ecology 18(3): 322329.
Dove, M. (1985). Swidden Agriculture in Indonesia: The Subsistence
Strategies of the Kalimantan Kantu. Berlin: Mouton. 515 p.
FAO (1982). National Conservation Plan for Indonesia Volume II
Sumatra, Field Report of UNDP/FAO National Park
Development Project INS/78/061 Vol. II, FAO Bogor.
Fox, J., Truong, D. M., Rambo, A. T., Tuyen, Ng. P., Cuc, L. T., and
Leisz, S. (2000). Shifting Cultivation: A New Old Paradigm for
Managing Tropical Forests. Bioscience 50(6): 521528.
Fox, J., Fujita, Y., Ngidang, D., Peluso, N., Potter, L., Sakuntaladewi,
N., Sturgeon, J., and Thomas, D. (2009). Policies, Political-
Economy, and Swidden in Southeast Asia. Human Ecology 37:
305322.
Fujimoto, T. (2009). Wild Plants as Agricultural Indicators: Linking
Ethnobotany with Traditional Ecological Knowledge. In Heckler,
S. (ed.), Landscape, process and power: a re-evaluating traditional
environmental knowledge. Berghahn Books.
Gmez-Baggethun, E., Mingorra, S., Reyes-Garca, V., Calvet, L.,
and Montes, C. (2010). Traditional Ecological Knowledge
Hum Ecol (2012) 40:315325
Trends in the Transition to a Market Economy: Empirical
Study in the Dnana Natural Areas. Conservation Biology
24(3): 721729.
Gouyon, A., De Foresta, H., and Levang, P. (1993). Does Jungle
Rubber Deserve Its Name? An analysis of Rubber Agroforestry
Systems in Southeast Sumatra. Agroforestry System 22: 181206.
Hariyadi, B. (2010). Serampas Traditional Natural Resource Management:
Encounter the Changes, VDM Verlag Dr. Mller Aktiengesellschaft
& Co. KG, Germany.
Iskandar, J. (2007). Response to environmental crisis in the Baduy
swidden system, South Banten, Java. In Ellen, R. F. (ed.), Modern
Crises and Traditional Strategies: Local Ecological Knowledge in
Island Southeast Asia. Berghahn Books, pp 112132.
Ickowitz, A. (2006). Shifting Cultivation and Deforestation in Tropical
Africa: Critical Reflections. Development and Change 37: 599
626.
Iskandar, J., and Ellen, R. F. (2000). The Contribution of
Paraserianthes (Albizia) falcataria to Sustainable Swidden
Management Practices among The Baduy of West Java. Human
Ecology 28(1): 117.
Kleinman, P. J. A., Pimentel, D., Bryant, R. B. (1995). The Ecological
Sustainability of Slash-and-burn Agriculture. Agriculture,
Ecosystems and Environment 52: 235249.
Kompas (2005). Minyak Nilam, Ekspor Baru dari Jangkat. Kompas,
August 29, 2005.
Lahajir (2001). Etnoekologi Perladangan Orang Dayak Tunjung
Linggang: Etnografi Lingkungan Hidup di Dataran Tinggi
Tunjung. Yayasan Adikarya, Yogyakarta, 556p.
Mackie, C., Jessup, T. C., Vayda, A. P., and Kartawinata, K. (1986).
Shifting Cultivation and Patch Dynamics in an Upland Forest in
East Kalimantan, Indonesia. In Hadi, Y. et al. (eds.), Proceedings
Regional Workshop on Impact of Mans Activities on Tropical
Upland Forest Ecosystems, Faculty of Forestry, Universiti
Pertanian Malaysia, Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia, pp. 465518.
Marsden, W. (1966). History of Sumatra: Containing an Account of the
Government, Laws, Customs, and Manners of the Native
Inhabitants, with a Description of the Natural Productions, and a
Relation to the Ancient Political State of that Island. Oxford
University Press, Kuala Lumpur, New York.
Mary, F., and Michon, G. (1987). When agroforests drive back natural
forests: A socio-economic analysis of a rice-agroforest system in
Sumatra. Agroforestry Systems 5(1): 27.
McCarthy, J. F. (2005). Between Adat and State: Institutional
Arrangement on Sumatras Forest Frontier. Human Ecology 33
(1): 5782.
Mertz, O., Padoch, C., Fox, J., Cramb, R. A., Leisz, S. J., Lam, Ng. T.,
Vien, T. D. (2009). Swidden Change in Southeast Asia:
Understanding Causes and Consequences. Human Ecology 37:
259264.
Misra, M. (1996). Regeneration of patchouli (Pogostemon cablin
Benth.) Plants from Leaf and Node Callus, and Evaluation after
Growth in the Field. Plant Cell Reports 15(12): 991994.
Myers, N. (1993). Tropical Forests: The Main Deforestation Fronts.
Environmental Conservation 20, pp. 916.
Neidel, J. D. (2006). The Garden of Forking Path: History, Its Erasure
and Remembrance in Sumatras Kerinci Seblat National Park.
Doctoral Dissertation. The Faculty of Graduate School of Yale
University, 469p.
Ostrom, E. (1985). Issues of Definition and Theory: Some Conclusions
and Hypotheses. In Proceedings of the Conference on Common
Property Resource Management; April 2126, 1985. National
Academy Press, Washington, DC, p. 599613.
Padoch, C., Coffey, K., Mertz, O., Leisz, S.J., Fox, J., and Wadley, R. L.
(2007). The Demise of Swidden in Southeast Asia? Local Realities
and Regional Ambiguities. Danish Journal of Geography 107(1):
2941.
325
Pelzer, K. J. (1978). Swidden Cultivation in Southeast Asia: Historical,
Ecological and Economic Perspectives. In Kunstadter, P.,
Chapman, E. C., and Sanga Sabhasri (eds.), Farmers in the
Forest: Economic Development and Marginal Agriculture in
Northern Thailand. Honolulu, 271.
Persoon, G. (1992). From sagoo to rice: change in cultivation in
Siberut, Indonesia. In Croll, E. J., and Parkin, D. J. (eds.), Bush
Base Forest Farm: Culture, Environment, and Development.
Routledge, 187199.
Picard, M. (1997). Cultural Tourism, nation-Building, and Regional
Culture: The Making of a Balinese Identity. In Picard, M.,
and Wood, R. E. (eds.), Tourism, ethnicity, and the state in
Asian and Pacific societies. University of Hawaii Press,
pp.181214.
Potter, L. (2001). Agricultural Intensification in Indonesia: Outside
Pressure and Indigenous Strategies. Asia Pacific Viewpoint 42
(2/3): 305324.
Rambo, A. T. (1996). The composite swiddening agroecosystem of the
Tay ethnic minority of the northwestern mountains of Vietnam. In
Rerkasem, B (ed.), Montane Mainland Southeast Asia in
Transition. Chiang Mai (Thailand): Chiang Mai University
Consortium.
Rerkasem, K., Lawrence, D., Padoch, C., Schmidt-Vogt, D., Ziegler, A.
D., and Bruun, T. B. (2009). Consequences of Swidden
Transitions for Crop and Fallow Biodiversity in Southeast Asia.
Human Ecology 37: 347360.
Schroth, G., Coutinho, P., Moraes, V. H. F., and Albernaz, A. L.
(2003). Rubber Agroforests at the Tapajos River, Brazilian
Amazon-Environmentally Benign Land Use Systems in an Old
Forest Frontier Region. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment
97(1): 151165.
Soedjito, H. (1985). Succession and Nutrient Dynamics Following
shifting Cultivation in Long Sungai Barang, East Kalimantan,
Indonesia. Thesis Master of Science, Rotgers University, 106 p.
Spencer, J. E. (1966). Shifting Cultivation in Southeastern Asia.
University of California Publication in Geography Vol. 19.
University of California Press, Berkley and Los Angeles,
247p.
Statistic Office of Merangin, (19962008). Merangin dalam Angka.
Statistic Office of Merangin, Bangko.
Sunderlin, W. D. (1997). Shifting Cultivation and Deforestation in
Indonesia: Steps Toward Overcoming Confusion in the
Debate. Rural Development Forestry Network Paper 21b.
ODI, London.
Tacconi, L., and Vayda, A. P. (2006). Slash and burn and fires in
Indonesia: A comment. Ecological Economics 56: 14.
Varma, A. (2003). The Economic of Slash and Burn: A Case Study of
the 19971998 Indonesian Forest Fires. Ecological Economics
46: 159171.
von Benda-Beckman, F., and von Benda-Beckman, K. (2001).
Recreating the Nagari: Decentralization in West Sumatra. Working
Paper No.31, Max Planck Institute for Social Anthropology, 45p.
Warner, K. (1991). Local technical knowledge and natural resource
management humid tropics. Community Forestry Note 8, FAO
Rome (Italy).
Watson, C. W. (1992). Kinship, Property and Inheritance in Kerinci,
Central Sumatra. CSAC Monographs 4 South-East Asia Series.
Center for Social Anthropology and Computing and the Center of
South-East Asian Studies. University of Kent at Canterbury,
254p.
Weinstock, J. A., and Sunito, S. (1989). Review of shifting cultivation
in Indonesia, Directorate General of Forest Utilization, Ministry
of Forestry, Government of Indonesia and FAO, Jakarta.
World Bank. (1996). Kerinci Seblat Integrated Conservation and
Development Project. Staff Appraisal Report. The World
Bank.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.